Hiring Republicans

I put a question on Predictify.com asking how many of my new book would be in print by the end of January. The average of the predictions is over 304,000. http://www.predictify.com/AuctionView.aspx?ID=176

As the creator of the question, I get special rights to look at the demographics of the predictors to see what kind of correlations there are. I noticed there isn’t much difference in the predictions by religion or gender or level of education and so on. But two categories jumped out.

Notice the difference in average predictions by political affiliation:

Republicans:  352,000
Democrats:    286,000
Independents: 275,000

Are Republicans more optimistic than Democrats, and are they projecting that optimism on my book? That’s my hypothesis. And it tracks with the fact that independents have the lowest predictions. I think the cynics and pessimists are the people least likely to be part of an organized movement.

The other big difference in predictions was by employment:

Students:   325,000
Employed:   295,000
Unemployed: 164,000

Those predictions also track with what I imagine is the level of optimism for those demographic groups. Students are idealistic and don’t appreciate how hard the real world is going to be. They are optimists. People with jobs are likely to be far more optimistic than unemployed people.

Hypothetically, suppose researchers confirmed that Republicans are the most optimistic people by nature. Since optimism is an important contributor to success, if you were trying to fill a position in your company, would it make economic sense to favor Republicans, even if you held a different political view?

Speaking of my book, Stick to Drawing Comics, Monkey-Brain!, that I am shamelessly plugging all week, here’s a link to Amazon, or you can get it in your local bookstore. (I gave you two posts today to compensate for my inexcusable capitalism.)

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1591841852?ie=UTF8&tag=dilbertcom20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=1591841852

Comments

[SkyRyeTui]

You "ASS-U-ME" that Democrats are pessimistic by nature and Republicans are optomistic. Independents you group to be cynics- (not appreciated)
How do you figure that "cynics and pessimist" would be less likely to be part of an organized movement!? Wouldn't these be the people that demand change and are less likely to "HOPE" or just be "Paitent" for things to get better. This would make your hypothisis- "Ass-backward"

[carlos]

I think that the (R)'s are actually being pessimistic and cynical. They consider you to be bad, since you criticize their obvious shortcomings, and they believe that far too many of your books will sell.

On the other side, everybody else is also being pessimistic and cynical, thinking that not enough people are going to buy your book. And then, they're going to order a copy. :)

[Gabriel]

No matter what the numbers are, your brain always tries to find a reasonable explanation for them.
regards,
http://www.donttalkaboutlife.com

[Victor]

Saying that Republicans "let people live their lives" is almost as funny as this wonderful blog.

I also find it weird that Republicans and Students are both optimistic, because younger demographics (like students) seem to have less Republicans. Maybe all the Democrats are just unemployed after they get out of school.

[Troy Camplin, Ph.D.]

I have little doubt Republicans are more optimistic. Sometimes that optimism can get us in trouble (the optimism around the Iraq War comes to mind), but more often it is a good way to govern (optimism that if you let people live their lives and spend their moeny as they want, they will do the right thing). On the other hand, a healthy amount of pessimism keeps on from going overboard (in this respect pessimism is conservative -- how ironic that the Democrats may in fact be the conservatives!). I personally prefer the position between optimism and pessimism: hope. So I hope you sell millions!

[Joe Allen]

Unemployed independents must hate waking up each morning.

[Andy Watt]

"Republican economics in UK? BWHAHAHAHA!

...

And I get ridiculed for my economic views? My goodness, go to college outside of the US/UK and take an economics course. Things may look a lot different."

Oh dear. I don't really want to start some kind of flame war with someone who gets touchy about having views on stuff. Especially on here.

I was suggesting that the money motive doesn't mix with public services - an unashamedly "democratic" agenda - and this had bearing on the original question about who would be best in the long view to push the book - and the next, and the next.

The argument that the UK doesn't have free _enough_ markets is definitely worthy of consideration (we've had plenty of discussion on here about closed minds) but I still think modern "psuedo darwinian" capitalist thought is simply not compatible with the provision of public services.

Tell me, is the USs "freer" economy giving you guys better healthcare? I'm sure I've seen comments on this very post regarding the state of healthcare provision in the US...

So in summation...
1. Don't try to wind me up with that odd attempt at textual braying laughter, it doesn't do you any favours (is it cribbed off Dilbert?)
2. Still think the book is better off in democratic hands - not for simple reasons of pessimism or optimism but because they'll take a longer view, having broadly more social conscience.

[Steven McDaniel]

"..Republican economics in UK? BWHAHAHAHA!
What is the rate of taxation in the UK? What is the degree of free social services? UKs problems are far more in-line with Democratic core values. And what is the situation? A poor economic climate where expenditures on infrastructure are not possible. And your solution is more government involvement? BWAHAHAHAHA!
And I get ridiculed for my economic views? My goodness, go to college outside of the US/UK and take an economics course. Things may look a lot different..." Chowder Maker

Chowder Head, I think you may be referring to my post, (Oh, you're talking to Andy Watt - Hi, Andy) so here goes, anyway: I spent 25 years in England, and the infrastructure is pretty well intact, like it is over here. They have their problems, and yes a Republican economics course in a country you approve of, (say, Transylvania?) may make me think a National Health system cripples a country and is a sinister plot by commies to keep the poor alive through a 'nanny state' ("And today's lecture is entitled, 'Are there no Workhouses?'"). However, you can't put a price on extending medical care to the poor - that should be a bipartisan imperative. Still, the 'bull' has already got out of the gate in the USA, so don't worry - a National Health system is unlikely. Trust me, even Hillary wouldn't implement one once she got to power through promising it, any more than her husband did.

[Dom]

What else do Republicans have left but hope?

[Adrian D.]

Noah Vaile:

It is my observation that Republican (the party leaders, anyway) insist on absence of dissent. That is why there are claims of people being "Republican In Name Only."

[TallDave]

"Hypothetically, suppose researchers confirmed that Republicans are the most optimistic people by nature"

This isn't hypothetical, several studies have shown conservatives are generally happier and more optimistic.

Really, this only makes sense. One of the strongest predictors of voting GOP is income; the more an individual makes the more likely they are to pull the lever for the Republican. Success and optimism are mutually reinforcing, esp. for entrepeneurs.

And the Dems, of course, are the party of the safety net. If you expect to need a safety net, it only makes sense you would want more welfare and other programs that involve taking money from the rich to help you.

[Michael LaRocca]

Sure, you gave me two blog entries in one day, and a DNRC Newsletter, but that's not enough to make me buy a book from a meth-head. I guess those 80,000 orgasms turned you into one hell of an optimist.

(I would explain that this is only a joke, but you've already tagged yourself as a meth-head to all the induhviduals who comment on your posts without reading them. Might as well invent the Internet while you're at it.)

[Michael LaRocca]

Sure, you gave me two blog entries in one day, and a DNRC Newsletter, but that's not enough to make me buy a book from a meth-head. I guess those 80,000 orgasms turned you into one hell of an optimist.

(I would explain that this is only a joke, but you've already tagged yourself as a meth-head to all the induhviduals who comment on your posts without reading them. Might as well invent the Internet while you're at it.)

[ChowderMaker]

Although you apparently have no appreciation of industry in this country, it has afforded us a standard of living where you even have the opportunities that you are arguing about."
FROM ANDY WATT:

Ah, the ever present battle between good (social policies,

"cohesiveness", the public good) and evil (the idea that market forces will create good wherever they go)...

Just take a look at what's happened to the public services in the UK and you'll see what Republican economics does when it gets involved: we now have water companies who don't invest in infrastructure and charge a fortune for water when 50% of the water leaks into the ground: a new re-nationalised railway track operator after the private one (surprise surprise) didn't invest in infrastructure, resulting in some pretty

--------------------------------------------------------

Republican economics in UK? BWHAHAHAHA!

What is the rate of taxation in the UK? What is the degree of free social services? UKs problems are far more in-line with Democratic core values. And what is the situation? A poor economic climate where expenditures on infrastructure are not possible. And your solution is more government involvement? BWAHAHAHAHA!

And I get ridiculed for my economic views? My goodness, go to college outside of the US/UK and take an economics course. Things may look a lot different.

[Noah Vaile]

While the information you provided seems to tell us none of what you interpret it to mean other research HAS shown that Republicans/Conservatives tend to be happier and more optimistic than liberals/democrats. This is most likely because the first group does not watch as much TV/listen to the raavings of the mass media as much as the latter group. This is because the MM tends to be negative and presents pessimistic news as much and as often as possible. The former group gets its information from more varied and trustable sources.

It would also indicate that the vast plurality of your readers and fans are Republicans, intellectual/intelligent and have jobs or reasonable prospects for getting one.

I don't thinkt hat any of this has to do with an "organized movement" though. Certainly both conservative and liberal thopught are less movements than ways of approaching the world. There is a great range within each of those intellectual approaches. It is simply that today the "liberal movement" has been hi-jacked to the far, anti-American and socialist left, the nanny-society & victimhood politics that we are all so familiar with. They then apply their own irrational hatred to all who disagree with them effectively polarizing the two sides without any input from those who they think disagree with them. Disagree in the slightest on any issue and you are effectively drummed out of the corps. Liberalism today has become a lock-step fascist intellectual lack of exercise. Probably why they tend to be less optimistic.

Why are independents less optimistic? Most of them have no values or positions- to them independence is a wishy-washy middle of the road stance on all things. They see themselves as not having a say or control in any fashion. And they see themselves as not deserving to either. To an independent all arguments have equal merit and therefore none at all. They need guidance. Not ridicule. BWA HA HA!!!!

[Steve]

Republicans are definately not more optimistic. If anything they are more cynical. Republicans probably just like your book more and thus are more likely to inflate the figures.

[GLK]

Im my little corner of the world I've noticed that, Democrats tend to believe they're 100% right 100% of the time. Republicans tend to leave wiggle room and aren't anywhere near as myopic and single-minded as the Dems would like everyone to believe. Consequently the former would seem far more pessimistic than the latter.

[Justin Fabian]

Brain regions responsible for optimism located http://www.reuters.com/article/scienceNews/idUSN2443298420071024

Now if only you could turn their optimism into your sales...

[dsg]

I am a day late, I was traveling yesterday. But I did buy your book. I bought it at a news stand at Reagan airport. This means I paid an extra $10.00 for it, ~$26. I got the last one off the shelf so it must be selling well, also I couldn't find a copy at Logan terminal B. Do you see any extra money because I paid more? According to one of the chapters, I will probably enjoy it more than people who pay less so that makes me happy.

Anyway it made my flight better, I remember some of the topics, but not all, so it was fun to read. It does make a good book.

I do have some advice for those entering the blurb contest. The current back cover quotes seem a bit tame, so perhaps sticking closer to PG rated comments would be better.

Can you guess my political affiliation from this post?

[Steven McDaniel]

"They're less likely to demand employers pay for health insurance, and even less likely to demand universal health care. The former reduces the cost of labor, while the latter reduces the tax burden, leading us back to 1.
They are for high quality health care and not for low quality universal health care."
Chowder Maker

Well, last time I got on to someone who used this blog for a Democratic lefty party political broadcast, you know the stuff, Bush is mad, Cheney flew the planes into the World Trade Center so they could kill Iraqis for oil - it's good to lose the war so we can win the election, blare, drone. OK, so with Lowder Monkey here, we have the Republican equivalent. They both demonstrated why I am of neither party. Especially garbage like: 'We Republicans would rather have us rich jerks having 'good quality health care' than everybody having access to it.' Believe me when I say, universal health care is NOT a communist plot - unless you see the Hippocratic Oath obligating us to extend medical care to everybody, regardless of ability to pay, as a communist plot. I lived in England (NOT a socialist country) for 25 years and received excellent health care for free every time I went to the hospital, including operations, and the cost is spread to the rich and poor. Over here, medical bills are the cause of 50% of all bankruptcies, including insuperable copays for those with the best insurance like Blue Cross/Blue Shield. Even rich people with long term illnesses like cancer end up not able to afford continued chemotherapy when their insurance runs out, even after losing their houses through being unable to afford the copays (I saw all this on Fox News, by the way). It freaked me out when my son got a splinter over here and we had to go to the emergency room after trying to remove it ourselves. We ended up with bills from the hospital, the doctor that saw him, and the organisation that did his blood pressure. I'm surprised the janitor didn't invoice us. One problem fiscal conservatives have is that Christians care about the poor, (which of course is a socialist plot).

[Phred]

Scott,

I'm horribly off topic (an yes, I will add your book to my growing Scott Adams collection) but have you seen the new Wacom Cintiq 12WX.

http://www.wacom.eu/index2.asp?lang=en&pid=96

It's close a price point I'd be comfortable with, and lap portable. I remember your post on drawing techniques and use of WACOM products.

Are you considering giving this one a try (comes out in Nov/at least in Europe) and posting a review.

Thanks

[Gametheory]

Will you upload all the posts that did not made it to the book? What about people's comments to the posts that disappeared?

DO IT, MONKEY BRAIN!!!

By the way, it would have been cool to have a "country" option to verify the optimism hypotesis.

[Rachel]

HI Scotts,

Congratulations of your new book.

On the other hand, I am sad that I cannot view the history articles on this blog. I like many of the past articles and I am regretting now that I didn't save it, though I thought everything published on the blog is supposed to be free...

[Andy Watt]

"Although you apparently have no appreciation of industry in this country, it has afforded us a standard of living where you even have the opportunities that you are arguing about."

Ah, the ever present battle between good (social policies, "cohesiveness", the public good) and evil (the idea that market forces will create good wherever they go)...

Just take a look at what's happened to the public services in the UK and you'll see what Republican economics does when it gets involved: we now have water companies who don't invest in infrastructure and charge a fortune for water when 50% of the water leaks into the ground: a new re-nationalised railway track operator after the private one (surprise surprise) didn't invest in infrastructure, resulting in some pretty horrific accidents - I note that corporate manslaughter legislation once again proved to be a toothless paper tiger here - we have hostpitals with privatised cleaning services which don't clean properly as they're watching the frigging pennies and (well, duh) we get superbugs in hospital which are killing us, we have zero joined-up public transport in terms of buses, etc so we all take our cars everywhere...

the list goes on, but market forces, when introduced into these services (which give us a good chunk of the quality of life we so dearly love) have completely destroyed anything that lay good therein. The relentless need to deliver value to shareholders results in diminution of quality of service (however incrementally).

The money motive does not equal social good.

Scott, ask a democrat to look after your book (speaking in this hypothetical argument). While the Republican might get a hard-on at the thought of the cash, the Democrat will know who to pitch it to. He's got some of the same outlook (especially when it comes to the content). The Republican will just cover your book in crappy blurbs pitched at just the right level to sell it (the argument being that market forces will encourage our $-pupil'd Repub to do anything and everything to sell the book). But...

If you use the Democrat then you might sell more books later.

[AA]

A good CEO/Big Boss shouldn't be an optimist.

He should be someone with the (rare) ability to see things exactly as they are.

Republican? Uh huh. Right.

[zaki]

THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WOULD APPRECIATE IT IF YOU WOULD STEP DOWN AS CHIEF ADVISOR TO OUR CURRENT PRESIDENT TO GEOGRGE .W. BUSH OUR BRAVE , JUST AND MORAL COMMANDER IN CHIEF AND FUHRER , AMEN!

[Amit]

Scott, you got your analysis wrong. The stats just go to indicate that republicans and students have more spare time at their side as compared to others. You see the Dance Monkey Dance Saga, these are the protagonists there :)

[chuckleberry]

half way across the world ... i found a book store yesterday in India offering prices on scotts books that the first thought in my mind was that they aren't the publishers copy or in other words it must have been a fake copy.. but in any case .. got the books and compared to prices in US that is a steal(after buying i must confess they do look genuine :) )

[Marxist]

Hmm.

[Outbound]

Or maybe they just have damaged frontal lobes?

-

Scientists Point to Brain Region of 'Free Won't'
Research adds to the evidence suggesting that brain dysfunction can compromise free will

http://www.dana.org/news/features/detail.aspx?id=9534

[DanW]

These results are skewed. As the democrats have readily admitted, many Democrats are not smart enough to understand even the most simple voting process (See Florida 2002 presidential election).

[thetigress17]

The new book is available in Australia too. Try Amazon or one of the really big booksellers, its not in all their branch stores but it can be ordered online.

[Bob]

"I think the cynics and pessimists are the people least likely to be part of an organized movement."

You think that Republicans and Democrats are part of an organized movement? Bowel movement, maybe. Republicans and Democrats are the same thing, voting for the status quo. The status quo does not count as a movement. It is the opposite. I don't know how organized independents are, but they are the only ones on that short list trying to change anything. It is also worth pointing out that independents are, in general, optimistic (some say unreasonably so) that an independent will be president someday.

[Ray Kremer]

You know, that does correlate with what Rush Limbaugh says about conservatives being optimistic and liberals being pessimistic.

[ShakeAndBake]

I got news for you: people with real jobs ARE Republicans.

[Clair]

republicans may be by and large business people and lord knows that you have to have a positive attitude to survive the rigors of democratic taxation. Michigan reigns last in the nation thanks to all of ouir small minds.

[Larry]

I suspect the employment demographic had to do with other causes... Namely, students have nothing better to do than tell people what they think, while those unemployed with internet connections are working more on GETTING employed than to make predictions. Except for those, as you can see, who are eating a can of beans during a break between phone interviews.

[QwkDrw]

Can you believe it -- a huge number of otherwise thoughtful people with excellent self-preservation capacities actually identified themselves as Republicans?

Some people don't even know any ...
!!

[Loren Bell]

It's as simple as the fact that Republicans are optimistic about our economy and the monetary success an investment will bring. They are generally the ones taking the risk and raking in the rewards. Democrats are probably too busy trying to save the world from themselves to vote on the web anyway! Guilty feelings may fail to produce positive thoughts.

I wonder if those independents are the types that are so pessimistic about both sides of the isle that they have to hate both! That would explain their voting.

L

[Putin]

Probably there's a correlation between political prefferences and employment. Wouldn't there be one?

[E Blair]

I'm a Democrat and optimistic that Scott will send me a free copy of his new book!

[registerjust]

How come it is your book? I guess it has funny comments by us too. So, it is our book.
Well if it is our book. Then how come we got to pay for it.?!?!

[David MacMillan]

Maybe it's just that since Republicans are always being pushed out of their political comfort zone by the Democrats (e.g. "just a little compromise") that they are more open to finding humor in a wide range of opinions. By contrast, we Democrats tend to fly off the handle and start bouncing up and down with rage whenever you even mention evolution, much less question it.

Or maybe the more people laugh at you, the easier it is to laugh at yourself and find humor in differences - rather than being dead serious about everything. I mean, what group of politicians tells more jokes?

[Kyle]

You know, Scott, in any set of statistics, there are going to be outliers. You can't just pick the two most non-evenly distributed statistics and say, Hey! This means something! You can draw a hypothesis, then run an actual study with a control group and all that to see if you are right. I don't doubt that your predictions are plausible, but don't draw conclusions from such a limited sample. Didn't they make you take statistics in college?

[Matt]

Mr Adams,
One more link to your book on amazon, I dare you!!!

[Calgarian]

You're talking about the difference between Pepsi & Coke again ... in my own experience the most optimistic people that I've met are usually deluded.

The main advantage of having happy, optimistic employees is that you don't have to give them raises :)

[grepthis]

I'm thinking you must be a Republican, Scott. It has to be optimism driving you to the conclusion that hiring a Republican is the path to success.

Having Republicans running things for the last 7 years has really proved that premise.

Heckuva job, Optimists.

[Bri]

Well Republicans are obviously more loyal to the welfare of business.
1. They're less likely to vote for tax increases, unless the tax is to shift to the general taxpayer those costs generally assumed by the business alone.
2. They're also less likely to vote for environmental regulations that would burden businesses with having to clean up after themselves after they have polluted the air, earth and water for the future generations in the blind chase for greater present day profits.
3. They're less likely to vote for minimum wage increases that make it more difficult for employees and employers to agree upon an acceptable wage. Indeed, an average worker, if left to negotiate on his or her own behalf, would likely be able to negotiate quite a respectful salary, such as food scraps and a cardboard box to sleep in. If I understand history, when there was no minimum wage, workers were regularly highly paid. The minimum wage destroyed this, and lead to much lower wages for the workers. At least that’s what my Ayn Rand Monthly Magazine tells me and so it must be so.
5. They're less likely to have spent any time in the workforce as the workforce does all the work for them and they just collect the profits and bitch, bitch, bitch about how hard it is to get a good workforce nowadays.
6. They're less likely to support strict limits on immigration, thus increasing the supply of labor in American markets--making it easier for the business to buy that labor cheap.
7. They're more likely to support initiatives to ban personal choice in birth control, abortion, divorce and to support govt’l power to invade personal privacy so long as business privacy is protected.
8. They're less likely to form unions, thus keeping the cost of labor down. They're also less likely to support pensions, depressing the cost of labor even more, and making the business even more efficient, that is, more blood thirsty..
They are for closed market economies where monopolies rule and where established industries are allowed to snuff out new enterprises. There is no greater enemy of capitalism than a successful capitalist.
9.They are for high quality health care for those who can pay for it and for those who cannot, they can sicken and die and thereby reduce the surplus population.
10. They're more likely to cause disturbances in the workplace with their uptight attitudes about race/gender issues; their love of sexual harassment as their primary form of interpersonal relationship, etc.

[Billy Arvia]

Scott,

Republicans like it because it goes right along with their philososphy. You have taken something that was previously available for free and are now charging people for it.

http://triplebee.squarespace.com/

[James Yeamans]

Why would I want to buy your book, when I can read your posts for free? There are a million suckers born everyday i suppose. ...SUCKERS!!....

[Mr. Wampus]

Statistically speaking you left out some important information. You give us the mean ("average" for you non-stat persons out there) for each subgroup, but you did not provide us with the standard deviation (or the variance). Without that, it is impossible to determine the shape of the distribution. You also did not provide the sample size for each subgroup. Without the sample size, one cannot calculate the confidence interval for each mean. Without a confidence interval, you cannot determine whether there is a statistical difference between any of your subgroups. You may be making inferences on the data that aren't supported by the statistics. I am not saying that you are wrong, I am simply saying that with the data you provided you cannot make a statistically valid conclusion.

'DMD the third' says that unless your sample size is greater than 1,000 (actually he says less than 1,000 but I think he means greater than) then your statistics are invalid. He is incorrect. Your statistics are not invalid, you simply will have very wide confidence intervals ("margins of error") which takes me back to my original point that based on the evidence you have provided, you cannot draw any statistically valid conclusions. If the raw data is available, I can run the stats for you and tell you whether you have enough "evidence" to support your hypothesis.

[tlylect]

If my company is interested in making money and accumulating wealth... Republican

If my company is interested in a social good 80% democrat/independent and 20% republican. Somone has to run the back office and make sure we don't run out of funds...

Running a war? Neither... just outsource it to the next guy

[Kalen Hughes]

"Hypothetically, suppose researchers confirmed that Republicans are the most optimistic people by nature. Since optimism is an important contributor to success, if you were trying to fill a position in your company, would it make economic sense to favor Republicans, even if you held a different political view?"

Um, last time I checked Bush was hella optimistic about Iraq and look where that got us . . . I’m going to have to call your logic flawed.

[Avi]

Off topic, but I bought your new book today! Why did I do it? Because I'm a complete sap.

[Yuriy]

Remember, it could be pessimism if they really don't like your book....

[VJ]

"Speaking of my book, Stick to Drawing Comics, Monkey-Brain!, that I am shamelessly plugging all week, here’s a link to Amazon, or you can get it in your local bookstore. (I gave you two posts today to compensate for my inexcusable capitalism.)

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1591841852?ie=UTF8&tag=dilbertcom20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=1591841852 "

Dont apologize. IT IS YOUR BOOK AND YOUR BLOG

[rhlebd]

You cannot compare the means without knowing the standard deviation, ie the distribution. Statistically, you do not know if the means are different between the groups.

[Jay]

Republicans are pessimists. That way we're not disappointed when things go to shit. Also, we have an intelligent, sophisticated sense of humor, so we tend to like things like Dilbert. Finally, we have productive jobs that are often subject to the same type of crap that Dilbert sees on a daily basis.

BTW, thanx for the tip on "Basic Instructions".

[Todd Vance]

yes, there is a correlation between success and being a Republican. I recall, about 5 to 10 years ago, a study showing that Republicans were wealthier, better educated, less likely to commit suicide, and generally happier than Democrats.

The only question is, does being a Republican make you successful, or does being successful make you a Republican?

[LA Clay]

Politics is for people who cannot handle drugs

[~C4Chaos]

whatever. my prediction is Hillary Clinton.
http://www.predictify.com/AuctionView.aspx?ID=264

[synapticmisfires]

Wow, these comments are really pure gold. Evidently Catbert thinks that being employed is only bettering yourself if you make at least 60k a year, by that logic, I assume all janitors should quit and go back to school?

Clearly, ChowderMaker has attended exactly one economics lecture and then never went back, because all taxes are bad and minimum wage increases apparently have no effect on the wage earners but a huge effect on businesses. Besides, I always thought (and still do) that any fiscally responsible would rather have a sales tax than a capital gains tax because it would encourage saving. That's the kind of stuff we learned in the rest of an introductory economics course.

[shagbark]

Maybe it does make sense! Republicans are basically people who look at the world around them, and see nothing wrong with it. Stupidity can cause both optimism and Republicanism.

[Shawn]

This seems like exactly the sort of Dance Monkey Dance post you're so fond of. Invent a some statistics, then roll with glee as the moist robots try to rationalize the statistics.

Or maybe I'm just being paranoid.

[synapticmisfires]

I know this isn't true of all Republicans, but as a rule I would not hire anyone who thought Ann Coulter had some "really good ideas". Other than that, I'd probably not hire communists, seems like a bad idea for a business. So to summarize, communists and Klansmen would both be a no-go.

Anyway, why use political affiliation to measure optimism? Republicans may be more optimistic, but that's just an average. If you only consider political affiliation you'd be ignoring that some Democrats are more optimistic than some Republicans. Just ask prediction-type questions about the world, or ask about how they react to bad news, stuff like that. It probably wouldn't even occur to them to lie.

[George W. Lucas]

It's a shame that the publisher requested that the content be removed from your blog. Was he by any chance white, kind of short, egg-shaped, wearing thick black eyeglasses, and wagging his tail like crazy while you signed the agreement?

I don't think having the content on the internet would have made such a huge dent on the book sales, if any.

Plus, the blog posts without the comments... makes me think of a tennis match with only one player.

[HALiverpool]

I'm registered as a republican, but I usually vote libertarian. I filled out the the predictify thing, but my clueless response won't be any help.

I looked at "...Monkey Brain" on Amazon.com. I got distracted by the suggestions and decided to get something by Berkeley Breathed.

-HAL

[Tuzo]

I would say you should hire the individual who is most qualified for the job. If you think your job requires someone who is optimistic, then try to find out if they are optimistic by nature. Why take a long and circuitous path that may not even get you where you want to go? e.g. I'm looking for someone who is optimistic, friendly and customer focussed. Research indicates that red-headed Swedes are the most optimistic people so I should try to find a red-headed Swede. Also, even if there is a tendency for a certain group to have a certain characteristic that does not mean that it is possessed by all members of that group.

I wonder how Scott will promote his new book tomorrow? ;)

[shagbark]

Why do you assume that someone who thinks you'll sell a lot of books is an optimist?

Maybe Republicans are pessimists who recognize the dangerous anti-establishment nature of your cartoons.

[David]

No, I think there's probably a correlation between people with office jobs and people who are rich. And there's a correlation between people who are rich and people who vote Republican. And there's also a correlation between people with office jobs and people who enjoy Dilbert.

[ChowderMaker]

Ah, are republicans more optimistic, or do they subscribe to the All-American Theory of Consumerism and believe that your publishers are going to beat the living crap out of anyone who doesn't buy it?

I saw a (I think post-war) Disney information animation about how mass-market capitalism was good. Felt like I was being brainwashed by Goldman Sachs! Afterwards, had I not shaken my head until the crap fell out, I'd have felt optimistic about selling things as well!

Posted by: Andy Watt | October 24, 2007 at 08:56 AM

Well Republicans are obviously more loyal to the welfare of the business.

1. They're less likely to vote for tax increases that would reduce the rewards of the most important employees--the executives.

They are free market economists and don't believe in unequal taxation.

2. They're also less likely to vote for environmental regulations that would burden the business with paying for pesky externalities, increasing the cost of doing business.

They are interested in intelligent use of natural resources.

3. They're also less likely to vote for sales taxes that discourage the purchase of the business's products or services.

They understand that taxes discourage business and slow the economy. With a robust economy you gain tax revenues. You take in more tax dollars with a low tax burden and a robust economy vrs a high tax burden and a poor economy.

4. They're less likely to vote for minimum wage increases that make it more difficult for employees and employers to agree upon an acceptable wage.

Increasing the minimum wage is an illusion. If we made the minimum wage $1,000,000 per year would we all be able to retire in a year?

5. They're less likely to have spent more of their time out of the workforce preparing to defend theses instead of developing on-the-job experience.

Churchill said, if you are 20 and a conservative you don't have a heart. If you are 40 and a liberal, you don't have a brain.

6. They're more likely to support strict limits on immigration, thus increasing the supply of labor in foreign markets--making it less expensive for the business to buy that labor.

Immigration would have a ridiculously minute impact on foreign labor costs.

7. They're less likely to support initiatives to ban smoking in public places that just discouraging smokers from doing business in those places.

They are for personal freedom.

8. They're less likely to form unions, thus keeping the cost of labor down. They're also less likely to support pensions, depressing the cost of labor even more, and making the business even more efficient.

They are for free market economies. Without which the companies would never have afforded pension funds to begin with and our standard of living would be far lower.

9. They're less likely to demand employers pay for health insurance, and even less likely to demand universal health care. The former reduces the cost of labor, while the latter reduces the tax burden, leading us back to 1.

They are for high quality health care and not for low quality universal health care.

10. They're less likely to cause disturbances in the workplace with transgender issues, sexual harassment lawsuits, racial discrimination lawsuits, and other such distractions from business.

Of the last presidents, only one was repeatedly charged with sexual harrasment and sexual assault. It wasn't a Republican.

There's more but I think we've established that Republicans are certainly loyal to business. Who could be a better employee?

You have only established that Republicans desire to continue as a nation of prosperity. Although you apparently have no appreciation of industry in this country, it has afforded us a standard of living where you even have the opportunities that you are arguing about.

[Paul]

Maybe students and republicans are just more likely to visit that website. The data is meaningless if ALL polls there show similar trends.

[jC from Tn]

Republicans like it more because the title insinuates the book is about business. Republicans get hard-ons thinking about business. Plus MONKEYS!

[Arthur]

I have another suggestion about the "unemployed" category, which might help explain the result: they're all writers.

[diplomacyisdead]

hello, i live in Singapore and found copies of your new book at a large chain bookstore today (24 oct).

i've bought a copy, and am very much looking forward to the bus ride to work tomorrow.

so much for it only being available in the u.s. :P

cheers. ;)

[Noumenon]

Your logic is fine -- hire the optimist Republicans for success -- but I would suggest not hiring them to do your book projections, because you will end up with unsold books. What they need to be optimistic about is things like the possibility of getting a book printed and delivered at all which is kind of a miracle.

[james]

I can't believe you are going to charge us to read our own comments.... I can't wait until my copy arrives.

[Tim Kayes]

Has anyone else noticed that Dilbert has been extea funny the past couple of weeks.

[Simon]

I'm still waiting for my copy. Let's see... two to three working days equals ten to twelve months in postal service time. Damn.

I think it's pretty much safe to say that time is the most irritating illusion of all times. Even more so than free will.

[Jason]

It depends on the job. I don't think I'd hire an uber-republican to work at an abortion clinic or a welfare office.

However, at places like the DMV or DPS it would be good to have a mix. If you have a perky, optimistic, happy republican, he or she might actually make the people feel less crappy in their futile wait to be serviced. Then, a depressed democrat can bring the people in line back down to reality. That would be funny.

And one more: postal workers should definitely be republicans. Then, I know that if anybody tries to steal my mail from the truck, there is a good chance that the person will get shot.

[John Elliot]

> I'm a Republican, a hard worker, and highly motivated. Where can I send my resume?

What are you looking to do, peel his banana for him? Hold his pencil, maybe?

[bb]

That would explain the media's love of everything and everyone liberal.

The guy who says 'the sky is falling' is always going to get more attention than the guy saying 'everything will work out fine'.

[Monkey Joe]

Let me swing down out of the trees for a moment and do a little jig: did you consider that these figures might also correlate with disposible income? oo oo oo oo a a a aaaa

[kromagon]

I can't beleive you found this interesting! OF COURSE you want to hire Republicans! Who would you want working for you- somebody who wants to tax you into oblivion so he can provide healthcare to slackers and ne'er-do-wells, or someone who is motivated by greed?

Gordon Gecko was right- a nation that has capitalism as its state religion is the only nation that can function properly.

[David]

No need for shame and thanks for the posts mr. man

[disembodied consciousness]

Stats are hard to interpret. What makes you think Republicans are more optimistic?

What if Republicans are more cynical? What if they respond to your cynical workplace humor more? What if Republicans think they are special, and thus above the workplace stupidity of lesser mortals, when really they just have pointy hair?

The effect is the same. They think your books are great. It's just the cause that's different.

And the difference between democrats and independents could easily be explained by small sample size, as another poster already noted.

[Dwight Schrute]

[I noticed there isn’t much difference in the predictions by religion or gender or level of education and so on. But two categories jumped out.

Notice the difference in average predictions by political affiliation]

This would imply that things like religion, gender, level of education, etc. have no bearing on political affiliation. Since most people would agree that this simply isn't the case, I think the discrepancy in party line predictions is a bit of an anomaly. Also, students generally tend to be more liberal and side more with democrats.

[Adrian]

Discriminating based on statistics is silly. Yes in general a group (and here you can use different criteria: color, sex, age, political orientation, sexual orientation, height, weight, etc) can perform better than other, but there's no guarantee that a random person from that group is any better than a random person from another group.

[Rob P]

Republicans know that laughter releases seratonin, and that your books are the equivalent of 50 orgasms.

[Drew Weaver]

Ordered the book. It is on the way to my casa. Now where is my "thanks for buying my book, monkey boy"?

[Robert Hamilton]

Scott It is a bit of a turn off to see you constantly trying to increase your net worth on this blog. You don't have to post this comment, it's just for you really. I think that you may be hurting your long range interests to raise cash now. You're not doing drugs are you? Look at me, please. Are you?

[Catbert]

The correlation is that both Republicans and Students are smartest of the respective groups. Republicans use fact and logic for their reasoning, while Democrats use emotion and general talking points, facts be damned.

And being employed doesn't mean much. Could be a CEO or a janitor. While a student shows at least an attempt to be out bettering ones self.

Prediction: Democrats will ignore the facts in this post and respond with 'Bush is an idiot' posts.

[Chris]

Scott, did you consider that maybe the majority of your readers are actually Republican?

[Joshua Jacobsen]

One of the hardest working guys I know is a very passionate liberal democrat... however, he appears to be anomalous among people whose work ethic I admire.

In my experience, any kind of passion outside of the job is deleterious to a person's productivity. Republicans generally seem to be the least passionate, democrats being fairly passionate, and independents... you have to be "making a public statement" to throw in with a party that has an overly specific agenda and doesn't stand a chance at winning.

[DMD the Third]

sorry Dude: but I am going Dilbert on you...

I just checked the prediction web and after I voted you had about 274 respondents. (Now comes the statiscal part). Unless your total Sample size is less than about 1000 with that many respondents, then you are statistaically invalid... which brings me to my DMD commentary.

You cartoonists... love to take inaccurate conclusions and rationalize meanings all for the sake of DMD....

Ok, ok, ok.... not you cartoonists...maybe just you.

And so we now return you to your regularly schedule DMD program.

[Andy Watt]

Ah, are republicans more optimistic, or do they subscribe to the All-American Theory of Consumerism and believe that your publishers are going to beat the living crap out of anyone who doesn't buy it?

I saw a (I think post-war) Disney information animation about how mass-market capitalism was good. Felt like I was being brainwashed by Goldman Sachs! Afterwards, had I not shaken my head until the crap fell out, I'd have felt optimistic about selling things as well!

[John Elliot]

Well Republicans are obviously more loyal to the welfare of the business.

1. They're less likely to vote for tax increases that would reduce the rewards of the most important employees--the executives.

2. They're also less likely to vote for environmental regulations that would burden the business with paying for pesky externalities, increasing the cost of doing business.

3. They're also less likely to vote for sales taxes that discourage the purchase of the business's products or services.

4. They're less likely to vote for minimum wage increases that make it more difficult for employees and employers to agree upon an acceptable wage.

5. They're less likely to have spent more of their time out of the workforce preparing to defend theses instead of developing on-the-job experience.

6. They're more likely to support strict limits on immigration, thus increasing the supply of labor in foreign markets--making it less expensive for the business to buy that labor.

7. They're less likely to support initiatives to ban smoking in public places that just discouraging smokers from doing business in those places.

8. They're less likely to form unions, thus keeping the cost of labor down. They're also less likely to support pensions, depressing the cost of labor even more, and making the business even more efficient.

9. They're less likely to demand employers pay for health insurance, and even less likely to demand universal health care. The former reduces the cost of labor, while the latter reduces the tax burden, leading us back to 1.

10. They're less likely to cause disturbances in the workplace with transgender issues, sexual harassment lawsuits, racial discrimination lawsuits, and other such distractions from business.

There's more but I think we've established that Republicans are certainly loyal to business. Who could be a better employee?

[CLB]

I’d be curious to know how the average prediction of 304,000 for January compares to how many were just printed now for the first run in October.

Thanks for the two posts today!

[Dave]

I typically lean to the right politically, but if you always hire optimists, you'll never have that dissenting voice that says something along the lines of "We can't win this war."

[Mark Thorson]

Bear in mind that you're not
looking at the old Republican
party. After nearly 30 years,
I switched first to Green,
then to Democrat, because I
felt the Republican party has
been taken over by religious
nut-cases. Anybody left there
is either a religious nut-case
or someone who just doesn't
care.

That's not to say I believe in
the Democrat party. It's more
of a protest thing. I'll
still vote a straight GOP
ticket, but I won't belong to
their party anymore. No
party represents a secular,
conservative, pro-business
line.

I looked at the Libertarians,
but they are all way too
doctrinaire for me. If aliens
attacked Earth starting with
China, the Libertarians would
wait for them to cross the
U.S.-Canadian border before
counterattacking.

I'll reconsider becoming a
Republican when they become
a minority party again.
We've had too many years
when cynical leadership,
intoxicated with power, has
been exploiting low-IQ 700
Club watchers with issues like
gay marriage, partial birth
abortion, and stem cells.

[friskybeaver]

I don't see the unemployed as being very likely to get office humour. I think think is more taste than optimism.

[J. Clark]

Re: CarlM
"Students at younger and more likely to find your book worth what little money they may have"
That's one of the funniest things I've ever heard. The only book that I've heard any of my friends buying (they don't usually even buy all of their textbooks for the semester) is the Tucker Max book or a humorous book called something like "So you think you're an alcoholic and want to prove it to your friends". The "value in books" explanation does not make sense.

And Scott:
I'm a Republican, a hard worker, and highly motivated. Where can I send my resume?

[Matt McNamara]

I was ready to disagree but it makes sense in a number of ways. I think this optimism also helps explain the shortcomings of the Republican party: they think it will always turn out okay. Oh, sure, maybe such-and-such policy isn't doing so great, but it'll all work out in the end, just wait!

I prefer pessimists and the cynics for the pragmatic matters. It can be healthy to be prepared for failure.

[Mr.Bubbles]

I have a sneaking suspicion that the money from this new book is just going to feed the drug addiction that you professed to in your last post!

[RSaunders]

Folks have their causation backwards here. People who want to continue to benefit from how the system works now vote Republican. It's not a genetic thing. Folks start out optimistic, and hope that wishing for liberal outcomes will make them happen. They vote Democratic. Then things go into the dumpster, and they wish for some mean, conservative, old white men to guard their money and to heck with idealism. Then they vote Republican.

On the subject of the book - I loved it. It arrived yesterday from Amazon and I spent two hours reading it. I've followed the blog for a while, and I'd seen at least half the material. Even so, I'm really glad you put it in a book. I read about 4 blogs a week. Sometimes I go back and read the ones I missed, but usually not. This was a chance to catch up on scads of good posts. Even if they were still on-line I would have never taken the time to read them for free. This was well worth the money. I often find a few of the replies to your posts almost as good as the post. It was a mild disappointment to see you had not folded in a couple of choice replies to each post. I hope you don't wait as long for the next volume, and as a result have the space for some replies. That would give you a book with the real flavor of the blog. I hope you sell millions.

[Sam Thornton]

The wise slavemaster always hires those with the lowest expectations. Hiring optimists is for fools; they invariably leave after the first beating.

[SRR]

"Are Republicans more optimistic than Democrats, and are they projecting that optimism on my book? That’s my hypothesis."

My hypothesis is that Scott is projecting that a larger number of his books in print is the "optimistic" prediction. It's optimistic for Scott to predict that his book will do well, but how is the same prediction optimistic coming from other people?

[Ian Smith]

Its inverse correlated with functional intelligence. The dumber you are (eg republicans) the more likely you are to think the book will do well. Everyone knows that the further you get into a working life, the more the brain atrophies, so that deals with the students too.

Go for young, dumb and full of bullshit and you have a real winner. Just look at the best seller list.

[LeGioNofZioN]

Then again, since self identified Liberals seldom actually exhibit the qualities they espouse, such as free thinking, and dedication to assisting others,(at least in contrast to self identified Christian Conservatives) I would have to admit I would probably not hire very many. they would have to already be a friend of mine, since living in Toronto there are waaay to many Liberals here to get almost anything done properly. I might have to pay extra to import a few optimistic conservatives from the States so I can actually succeed in what I set my company out to accomplish.

[Tom Welsh]

"Are Republicans more optimistic than Democrats?"

Anyone who votes for G W Bush as President and Commander in Chief of the US armed forces and their tens of thousands of WMDs would have to be an optimist.

Wow, euphemism of the century!

[James]

Your capitalist ways are very heroic, now if only more people could follow in your foot-steps we wouldn't have to worry about the communists and the terrorists anymore.... you have every right to make money off of the many hours of invested time you have in this blog and the invaluable sharing of your thoughts. (Heheheh, I'm stealing this first chance I get!)

[JD]

Scott, just remember, that prediction is based only on the opinions of people willing to endure yet another senseless registration.

I just tried to enter my prediction, but it won't take it unless I "register", and I won't register for something as lame as this.

[Jake]

Perhaps one of the differences is:
Students are optimistic about the workplace because they think it is funny.
Employed people have had the bitch-slap of reality. Your book just isn't as entertaining. Those that insist on buying your book only do it to escape the doldrums of the 9-to-5.
Unemployed people either A) can't afford it, B) hated work too much to buy it, or C) pool their money to buy a reminder of what corporate life was once like. Ahhhh, the way things were...

[Raphael]

That's a good way of making up for being a capitalist!
You should make up for it every day with 3-4 posts.
Or it might end up not being so funny, so, I guess not...
Good posts!!

[Adrian D.]

Well, you asked how many copies would be in print, not how many would be sold. They could be guessing how overly optimistic the author and publisher are. Just a thought.

[Dean]

Hiring anyone because of their political views is just wrong, and just causes "group think".

That's one of the reasons we have such problems at universities. They're supposed to be places where people are open to ideas, but try and get a republican hired to faculty and you'll practically be burned at the stake.

Equality is about hiring the right person for the job, not hiring someone because of their political views, race, creed, or sexual orientation. You start doing that, and you're hiring the wrong people.

[Brad K.]

Republicans aren't more optimistic. They are more business oriented, the 'trickle down theory' crowd.

Dilbert, and your book, appeal to people that appreciate that employment is about fueling an economy, about income streams. You focus on glitches and problems that cause failures, hurt incomes and the economy. Thus, more people are hurt and unable to thrive.

Republicans 'get' Dilbert.

Most people think the people around them think as they do. Republicans are more aware of business aware people around them - and project their interest in your book onto their friends.

Democrats and union members see Dilbert as mocking management, signaling the weakness of allowing people to proceed without government direction and support. They think fewer of their friends will be interested in the esoteric in-jokes of the 'evil' corporations.

Independents are focused on problems - they are rebelling. Rebels are never truly happy, I have read. They don't expect people to have much interest in levity or comics or fiction when there are so many serious problems to fix. But they do recognize the popularity of Stacy's, of the Dilbert brand, and of the market strength of the Scott Adams name.

The distinction is not about optimism at all, but about whether they look out the east window or the south window in the morning, to check the day's weather.

[CarlM]

OR ...

Republicans have more disposable income than the other two political groups (whose predictions don't differ from each other by much).

AND ...

Students at younger and more likely to find your book worth what little money they may have (or they plan to put it on their holiday-request lists) so they predict a higher number. The unemployed have little disposable income for such a book so predict a lower number.

[mike abbott]

I would say anyone who runs for office has to be pretty damn optimistic by nature.
Misplaced optimism, e.g. greeted with flowers or grow our way out of debt, is pretty effing destructive.
So in the party that attracts batshit insane, self worshiping religious fanatics optimism isn't a virtue. In the party that believes government is the solution to all problems optimism about those solutions is the last thing I want.
Optimism in general is unavoidable in anyone who thinks they can get elected so it is the excess that needs to be considered.

[Real Live Girl]

Not necessarily - depends on what is driving the optimism. If it's the "I'm going to heaven and you're not" kind of optimism, I'm not sure I want to be around that Monday-Friday.

I guess it would also help if I actually knew more than 1 optimistic Republican. Not that I am around a lot of them, but the ones I do know all seem to be Eyeores in a mid-life Botox Rogain new boobs Corvette collagen lip plumping golfing frenzy right now. Some of them all at once.

I am planning on getting your book today on my lunch hour. Hopefully the bookstore will not have burned down yet. Need a good laugh after sitting in a ring of fire the last few days.

[Citrus]

I think that the (R)'s are actually being pessimistic and cynical. They consider you to be bad, since you criticize their obvious shortcomings, and they believe that far too many of your books will sell.

On the other side, everybody else is also being pessimistic and cynical, thinking that not enough people are going to buy your book. And then, they're going to order a copy. :)

[LeGioNofZioN]

I'm not sure about favouring Republicans so much as favouring modern conservatives. not the old white stuffy variety, but the brand new, diversified type, never before seen, and guaranteed to challenge your prejudiced thoughts. (wow that was fun and fluid). To answer your question honestly if I had a new company or a company with challenges that required optimistic, positive thought then yes I would favour optimists (whether Repub or Ind). My company would be in Canada since this is where I live, so I doubt many Republicans would be comfortable enough to move to Canada to work for me. So if in the position you state, I would discriminate against pessimists but not necessarily Democrats or Liberals. If its my company then its a part of my life and I have a vested interest in it being the most successful one it can be.

[Jesse Raub]

That logic is flawed, however, because we all know that Republicans are all secretly gay sex maniacs who get their kinks off by hating themselves and then getting caught in national scandals, and that's not exactly what you want out of a middle manager.

However, if we're looking at generalizations, a lot of Republicans speak highly of their work ethic and integrity, which are two very hirable qualities. Unless, of course, that's just part of the ruse to throw us off the sex maniac trail, thus making the ending scandal even more superfluous and exciting.

[Rich T.]

I must be missing something. What does optimism have to do with buying your new book?

[rita mae]

Scott writes: [The other big difference in predictions was by employment: Students: 325,000, Employed: 295,000, Unemployed: 164,000]

Hmmm. Students love your humor, and a lot of them get their money from their employed parent(s). Employed will buy your humor. Unemployed? They are maybe just a LITTLE broke and not laughing? Buy Scott's book or eat? Let's see, Honey. What'll it be? The book or food for the kids? Let's talk about it.

I posted earlier, but had to add this for what it's worth.

Rita Mae

[Brad]

Scott, Here is political reality. Republicans buy books, so when they add up the number of people they know who will read your book, they count that number as sales. Democrats on the other hand, go to the library. So they figure the same number of people will read your book, but they figure one copy will be fine for the whole city. Independents, of course, can't read, so they are looking at the nutritional value of remainder copies of your book, and you being a vegetarian and all, aren't finding much meat there.

Also, let me get a plug in for your book:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1591841852?ie=UTF8&tag=dilbertcom20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=1591841852

[DanW]

So you have coined the phrase 'philosentertainment' and others, do you have a word for blogging/posting/etc on the web for free advertisement to generate business for your book?

I would suggest 'adwebbing'.

[Diana Wales]

I'm registered as Independent, and I don't think I'm pessimistic so much as skeptical and cautious. I hope for the best, but prepare for the worst. Personally, I think that makes me a good Project Manager. Customers don't want their PM's making unrealistic promises or being surprised by problems any more than voters want their politicians doing the same. Go ahead and put the optimists in the grunt positions, but I want realists in the jobs involving important decisions.

[rita mae]

Geez! If I wrote a book I would plug the hell out of it! Seems right to me. Since I have been reading about the book everyday, I have this subliminal urge to order the book.

Must...have...book. WTF? There I shook it off. I'm going to ask my kids to get it for me for Christmas. Surely one of them will come through. But, then, my surgery will hopefully be done before Christmas. What if I die waiting? Maybe I better buy it now.

Must...have...book. I try to rationalize. You are a good hypnotist, Scott. Will...buy...book...today.

Rita Mae

[Enough Wealth]

Then again, perhaps republicans and students aren't any more optimistic - they just like your type of book more than the other groups, and project their own tastes when extrapolating what 'other people' will do.

Regards
http://enoughwealth.com

a shameless plug for my blog ;)

[Chris]

Don't rule out that Republicans and students might just like you more than Democrats and the unemployed..

[Paul C]

Surely their degree of optimism is of lower importance than the kind of things they're optimistic about?

Members of the Republican Party are likely to have optimism about any or all of the following:-

i) George W. Bush is right;
ii) GWB is God's anointed president;
iii) And speaking of religion, God created the world in seven days flat and anyone believing other than this is doomed to roast in Hell;
iv) Pat Robertson is a kind and caring pastor and a true prophet of the lord;

All manner of other crazy stuff which you, as a native north American, are in a far better position to fill in gthe blanks about...