Saturday, September 28, 2013
Republicans, champions of the poor?
We tend to think that the Republicans are the party of the wealthy, while Democrats are the champions of the working class. However, there seems to be a strong inverse correlation when we look at wealthy states v. poor states (based on median income)... rich states went for Obama in 2012, while poor states went to Romney. What's up with that?
I'm especially surprised by two things. First, how strong this correlation is-- with only one exception each way, wealthy states went for Obama, and poor states went for Romney. Second, I was struck by how much difference in income there is between top-earning and low-earning states:
Richest states:
1) Maryland (median income of $71,122) Obama
2) New Jersey ($69,662) Obama
3) Alaska ($67,712) Romney
4) Connecticut ($67,276) Obama
5) Hawaii ($66,259) Obama
6) Massachusetts ($65,339) Obama
7) New Hampshire ($63,280) Obama
8) Virginia ($61,741) Obama
9) Minnesota ($58,906) Obama
10) Delaware ($58,418) Obama
Poorest states:
41) Oklahoma ($44,312) Romney
42) South Carolina ($43,107) Romney
43) Louisiana ($42,944) Romney
44) Tennessee ($42,764) Romney
45) New Mexico ($42,558) Obama
46) Kentucky ($41,724) Romney
47) Alabama ($41,574) Romney
48) West Virginia ($40,194) Romney
49) Arkansas ($40,112) Romney
50) Mississippi ($37,095) Romney
Comments:
<< Home
New Mexico has an unusually high Latino population while Alaska, like Texas, has an energy-based economy.
Christine and Alan, that might explain the outliers, but why the strange correlation?
Wasn't Napolitano from Arizona? I guess that is next door...
Wasn't Napolitano from Arizona? I guess that is next door...
I think it is because the bulk numbers in those top wealthy states come not from the super rich but mostly from middle class earners. And middle class seems to be voting more for progressive politics and less for the nowadays Republican weirdo politics...leading to the weird red map which effectively makes them champions of the poor. And I would call that super weird!
Consider if the states with the largest poverty rates got there by structuring their society to favor income and wealth disparity, so that there are lots of wealthy people and lots of poor people. Taxes, spending on things like education, etc., that can favor the high income and disfavor the low income people. Rich and poor school districts due to skewed per pupil funding, etc. Poor health care system for the poor.
Then the wealthy can protect their position by electing those from a party who favor the wealthy. Those who have money can donate to fund campaigns that those without cannot.
Texas is a perfect example!
Then the wealthy can protect their position by electing those from a party who favor the wealthy. Those who have money can donate to fund campaigns that those without cannot.
Texas is a perfect example!
# posted by 
: 8:01 PM
: 8:01 PM
I wonder if this demographic slice might be so big that it provides an unsatisfactory set of facts for your question. For example, 43 percent of Mississippian voters voted for President Obama. Were they rich or poor? Were they rural or urban? Were they business people or academics or government employees? Do any of those things matter?
Thirty-six percent of Maryland voters voted for Mitt Romney. Same questions.
One of the many other questions that springs to mind: could you get as far on $ 37.5K in Cottonalia, Mississippi, as you could on $71K in Silver Spring, Maryland?
When the geniuses who broke new ground demographically in 2012 expertly sliced and diced the electorate, they dug a lot deeper. I suspect that there are cohorts in Oxford, Mississippi, and Waco, Texas, and College Park, Maryland, that look a lot more like one another than lots of communities within their own respective states.
Back to your question (sort of): in general, I suspect that the truly impoverished voted for President Obama in most places.
Post a Comment
Thirty-six percent of Maryland voters voted for Mitt Romney. Same questions.
One of the many other questions that springs to mind: could you get as far on $ 37.5K in Cottonalia, Mississippi, as you could on $71K in Silver Spring, Maryland?
When the geniuses who broke new ground demographically in 2012 expertly sliced and diced the electorate, they dug a lot deeper. I suspect that there are cohorts in Oxford, Mississippi, and Waco, Texas, and College Park, Maryland, that look a lot more like one another than lots of communities within their own respective states.
Back to your question (sort of): in general, I suspect that the truly impoverished voted for President Obama in most places.
<< Home
