Join 3,517 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)


Rich state, poor state, red state, blue state
March 15, 2006 5:22 PM   Subscribe

Rich state, poor state, red state, blue state: a November 2005 statistical analysis [PDF] and presentation [PDF] on the the relationship between income and voting. Republicans are richer than Democrats, "blue states" are richer than "red states," and income matters more in "red states." Recent writeup by E.J. Dionne, with a response by the paper's authors. Discussed earlier at the Washington Monthly.
posted by kirkaracha (11 comments total)

 
Obvious?
posted by p3on at 5:40 PM on March 15, 2006


Republicans are richer than Democrats, "blue states" are richer than "red states"

I'm having a hard time reconciling those two statements.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 5:45 PM on March 15, 2006


I did as well. No insult to you kirkaracha, but I had a hard time following the text of your post. I found this quote from the Post to be much more clear:

"In poor states," Gelman and his colleagues write, "rich people are much more likely than poor people to vote for the Republican presidential candidate, but in rich states (such as Connecticut), income has almost no correlation with vote preference. . . . In poor states, rich people are very different from poor people in their political preferences. But in rich states, they are not."
posted by mr_roboto at 5:47 PM on March 15, 2006


We've known about this dynamic for some time...
posted by darkstar at 5:52 PM on March 15, 2006


Let me break out the key points here.

Very rich people tend to be conservative, because they're greedy. self-serving sods.

Smart people tend to be reasonably well off because they're smart, but non-conservative because they're smart.

Poor people are often duped by the outrageous bullshit of rich right-wing arseholes, so they vote conservative.

Colour me shocked, what a revelation, etc. Next.
posted by Decani at 6:02 PM on March 15, 2006


I'm having a hard time reconciling those two statements

If everybody voted, I'd agree. The shocking electoral turnout in the US removes any contradiction though, doesn't it?
posted by pompomtom at 6:26 PM on March 15, 2006


Decani: If anything this research implies that the poor are the most left-leaning group, followed by the middle class and lastly the self-serving sods.
That said there seems to be no statistical significance tests for the paper's main results. Interesting stuff though.
posted by thrako at 6:49 PM on March 15, 2006


thrako: I was just commenting on the fact that "poor state" is often "red state". The phenomenon of the working-class conservative is a very widely observed one. In my case I see it every time I visit my parents, for example.
posted by Decani at 7:32 PM on March 15, 2006


Just point me to the conclusive proof that Republicanism is the party of rich, venal, amoral, heartlessly selfish old men and confirm my suspicions.

Oh. Wait. I found the proof myself.
posted by Astro Zombie at 7:35 PM on March 15, 2006


Saw some study that said Republicans tend to be happier than Democrats.

I'm sure those of us outside those spheres are less happy.
posted by Smedleyman at 9:33 AM on March 16, 2006


Interesting stuff thanks kiracha
posted by stratastar at 9:51 AM on March 16, 2006


« Older Last Man, Las Vegas....  |  Who wants to be a superhero?... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments