According to this article by the Washington Post, the following is true.
1 ) Democrats trail Republicans in that have some college, or advanced college degrees. You’d hardly guess that by reading the press, yet the data says so
2 ) The percentage of people who label themselves middle class is 63% Republican, 45% Democrat.
3 ) Democrats are more likely to have no religion.
Okay
That’s nice.
What else you got?
I checked, Trump won the " somecollege " segmentby a 53-42% margin with 5% not giving an answer in a large USA today poll. Odd, you hardly see this reported. Instead, the focus is on high school level whites.
Neato!
Anything else?
A theory of mine is the Democrats at losing the middle class. Those who identify themselves as middle class, who the Democrats like to fancy themselves for, are more likely to be Republican.
I never knew that!
And?
1 - 2) More oppressed minorities are Democrats than are Republican.
3) More christian evangelicals are Republican
News at 11:00.
I’d also point out that Class was self described. It may be that more working class Republicans are more ashamed about calling themselves that than are working class Democrats.
Hey, do yourself a favor- While you’re there reading The Washington Post, keep on reading. Read the whole fucking thing, and do it again tomorrow and the next day until it becomes a habit.
Thank you so much, Silver lining. Very interesting and informative. Please tell us more about Education, Middle-class identification, and those who claimno religion in Politics. This might sur
You do realize that’s from 2012, yes?
Not only that, all the data only goes up to 2008.
Yeah, after our last election, I’ll bet that the 1) numbers are quite different than 2012.
IOW, while Duhbya was still in office. :smack:
We’ve gone from a frat boy to a man-child. Who are the Republicans going to run next? Linus van Pelt?
Just to be pedantic - you are confused as to what those 2012 figures report. They are OF each self-identified party the fraction that self-identify as each class up. The precise figure you are looking at went as far as '08. In '08 there were, per Pew, about 36% more who identified as Democrats than as Republicans. (38 to 28%.) Crunching just a bit we find that in '08, given a person who identified as middle class, there was about equal odds of them identifying as D as R.
If you want more recent and detailed numbers here’s Pew’s 2016 detailed tables btw.
Family income $30,000-$74,999 goes 31% R, 31% D, and 34% I. Include leaners and it tips GOPward.
All college grad or more tilts D solidly both including and not including leaners. “Some college” is tied by strict party ID and 46 to 45 R advantage including leaners.
Men with both “some college” and “college grad” favor R identification modestly. Men with “postgrad” education switch to favoring D identification slightly. Women with some college, college grad, and postgrad education favor D identification by more.
The religiously unaffiliated (atheist, agnostic, or nothing in particular) are most likely to ID as Independent and least likely as R. Although of course most Independents profess a religious identification.
You can also click to see sliced and diced other ways too! No question that the D side has not done well with ID of whites in that $30,000-$74,999 family income group. Finding the inclusive message that they can sign on to more consistently would be a big deal.
Have fun.
Democrats are losing whites w/o a college diploma.
Look at the education gap between whites with a college degree vs whites without and their voting patterns.
In the 90s, the democrats did better among whites w/o a college degree (vs whites with). Then around the time of Bush the GOP started doing better among whites w/o a degree but it was only about a 10 point margin.
Then in 2016, the GOP did 35 points better among whites w/o a college degree because in 2016 whites w/o college jumped on the GOP bandwagon while whites with a college degree started leaving the GOP.
So considering that people with college degrees are more financially stable on average, what you say isn’t really true.
Also the GOP doesn’t win any racial demographic other than whites. So all the latino middle class, asian middle class, black middle class, indian middle class, etc are democrats.
Basically I don’t agree with your premise. The dems are not losing the middle class. They are losing whites who don’t have a college degree.
Also the GOP tend to be the party of in-groups and the democrats are the party of out-groups. In groups are men, whites, christians, native born Americans, heterosexuals, etc. The out-groups are everyone else.
So yes the democrats are the party of secularists and atheists. Those are outgroups. Democrats are also the party of muslims, hindus, new agers, sikhs, and pretty much any faith (or lack of faith) other than christianity.
Although the kind of christianity matters a little bit. Catholics are a little less republican than protestants. I wonder if that is because up until recently, catholics were also an out group (the KKK used to target catholics and the KKK was a protestant group for example).
Number 7 will shcokyou
Good thing the white male population is exploding in the United States. In 2008, we comprised what, about 33% of the population? Judging by the 2016 elections, we must be what, like 70% by now? Maybe more?
Whites, especially white males, who don’t have a college degree (including “some college”) previously were often middle class, blue collar middle class. Now not so much so. Maybe barely hanging in on the edge of the demographic and little hope of climbing much higher.
The GOP sells the “blame the others” package, appealing to resentment and to a sense that others have taken what was once theirs. Does the D side have an alternative sales pitch to make? It doesn’t need to succeed in getting all of them to sign on to it but just ceding that demographic, the dropping out of the middle class undereducated whites, without offering a more positive vision forward seems less than ideal.