  We consider the problem of finding a compromise between the opinions of a
group of individuals on a number of mutually independent, binary topics. In
this paper, we quantify the loss in representativeness that results from
requiring the outcome to have majority support, in other words, the "price of
majority support". Each individual is assumed to support an outcome if they
agree with the outcome on at least as many topics as they disagree on. Our
results can also be seen as quantifying Anscombes paradox which states that
topic-wise majority outcome may not be supported by a majority. To measure the
representativeness of an outcome, we consider two metrics. First, we look for
an outcome that agrees with a majority on as many topics as possible. We prove
that the maximum number such that there is guaranteed to exist an outcome that
agrees with a majority on this number of topics and has majority support,
equals $\ceil{(t+1)/2}$ where $t$ is the total number of topics. Second, we
count the number of times a voter opinion on a topic matches the outcome on
that topic. The goal is to find the outcome with majority support with the
largest number of matches. We consider the ratio between this number and the
number of matches of the overall best outcome which may not have majority
support. We try to find the maximum ratio such that an outcome with majority
support and this ratio of matches compared to the overall best is guaranteed to
exist. For 3 topics, we show this ratio to be $5/6\approx 0.83$. In general, we
prove an upper bound that comes arbitrarily close to $2\sqrt{6}-4\approx 0.90$
as $t$ tends to infinity. Furthermore, we numerically compute a better upper
and a non-matching lower bound in the relevant range for $t$.
