While the "liberal" brand name has been intensely demonized over the past few decades, liberal policies and ideas have maintained considerable appeal--even among self-identified conservatives. Here are a series of charts showing levels of support for national spending to address major problems or needs. While support drops off from left to right, the level of support among even extreme conservatives is such that only for welfare does a solid majority support cutting spending. "Welfare," too, has been demonized, as can be seen by the dramatically higher support for assistance to the poor.

All charts are based on data from the General Social Survey (GSS), 1992-2002. They run from extreme liberal on the left to ectreme conservative on the right. The dates were chosen to provide a large data set across the allegedly most conservative era since the GSS began, in 1972.

Let's start with the environment.  Not a surprise, really. But an important reminder about a hegemonic liberal value, no? And just look at the levels of support:

So, how about education? Remember when conservative wanted to abolish the Department of Education? Maybe you don't. They don't talk about that anymore. Here's why:

There's a very easy way to save Social Security--don't destroy it! If necessary (and with reasonable economic growth it won't be) we could very gradually increase the payroll tax--not least by removing the income cap.  Public support for such an approach would appear to be huge:

One way to get to a single-payer system would be "medicare for all," gradually expanding the reach of the single-payer system we already have. Support for more spending on national health is there:

Conservatives are notorious hostile to the big cities, right? So why do more extreme conservatives think we should spend more on their problems, than those who want to spend less?

Okay, let's get serious. What conservatives really don't want to do is spend money on blacks, right?  Well, relatively speaking, that's certainly true. But even here, those who want to cut spending are a minority compared to those who want to increase it or leave it the same:

Okay, Okay, Okay. No more mister nice guy.  What about spending on welfare? Aha!  I knew it! Just look:

But wait!  "Welfare" has been demonized for decades. Forever, really. It's one of the things that was used to demonize "liberalism." So what if we don't use the word "welfare?" What if we talk about helping the poor?  Why look!  The level of support jumps way up! Take a peek:

So, in conclusion, conservative support for the liberal welfare state is pretty darn solid.  It may not be a high priority for them. But it's not something they want to do away with. Only their leadership thinks that way.  

So enough of thinking that we're a tiny minority. That may be true on some subjects. That should be expected. Liberals are change agents, which means taking up unpopular causes. But over time our ideas spread and take root--even among conservatives. America was founded on liberal ideas. And so was the American welfare state. Those who attack it are not just a small minority. They are, quite arguably, anti-American.  

Support for our ideas is out there. That's why Lakoff is absolutely right--we have to speak clearly, boldly and unapolgetically about that which we believe. We have to articulate the frames that support its logic, and activate those frames in the minds of all Americans. Those frames are out there, even in the most extreme conservatives.

Update [2004-11-11 21:44:2 by Paul Rosenberg]:

In the comments, Chris argues that I'm buying the conservative frame. I counter that it's more complex, reflecting an elite/base split among conservatives. In all the above cases, the spending tilt was clearly in the liberal direction, despite the fact that conservative support for spending was far higher than you'd otherwise imagine.

For military spending, the tilt goes the other way. Yet, even extreme conservatives are more willing to spend more money on the big cities than they are on defense. There is no way I can see that Chris's point--valid in its own way--can explain this. But it clearly supports my point about the elite/base split among conservatives.

Then there's spending for space exploration, one of the most non-ideological issues you can find in terms of support. Extreme liberals (that's me!) are about 20-50-30 (more spending, less, about right), everyone else has less support--though most have less opposition, too. As a die-hard science fiction fan (Phillip K. Dick is God!), it pains me to look at such figures. But it certainly shows that we're not just talking about fiscal irresponsibility on the right. There are real preferences here. And the conservative base prefers the welfare state to a lot of other stuff--including the conservative elites' militarist fantasies.