The aim of this paper is two-fold: firstly, we analyze factors that are potentially linked to the political feasibility of an unconditional basic income. One of our main findings is that its public visibility is, surprisingly, negatively associated with its presence on the political agenda. Secondly, we focus on a crucial methodological pitfall with QCA that is very seldom addressed, although it can lead to erroneous conclusions, namely the problem of contradictory simplifying assumptions. We suggest means of addressing this problem, and we conclude by emphasizing the importance of a dialogue between case studies, theory, and methodological insights.