The "how I will be watching the election results" thread

nomadthethird

more issues than Time mag
In the Midwest, better educated/rich voters tend to vote Republican, on the coast, better educated/rich voters tend to vote Democrat.

This is simply untrue.

The best educated mid-Western states (and the ones with the biggest, the most, and the most well-respected universities), i.e. Wisconsin, Ohio, Michigan, Illinois, and Iowa, all voted DEMOCRAT (liberal) this time, and Wisconsin, Michigan, and Illinois (richer ones) usually do.

Also, even when these well-educated Midwestern states go red, the college towns and city districts (the better educated areas) within these states go blue. In fact, college towns and cities tend to go blue *everywhere*.

This is why Karl Rove and his ilk are terrified of the idea of young college students voting, or inner-city professionals.
 
Last edited:

Grievous Angel

Beast of Burden
Nomad - I think vim's got you! Not in terms of your argument, but in terms of the need for data.

Just invent a graph in excel to shut him up :)

I have a theory about the economic interests of people voting democrat or republican based on wealth but I just want to sense-check it... if I'm not distracted by this arpeggiator... (SO THIS is how coki does it!)
 

nomadthethird

more issues than Time mag
Nomad - I think vim's got you! Not in terms of your argument, but in terms of the need for data.

Just invent a graph in excel to shut him up :)

I have a theory about the economic interests of people voting democrat or republican based on wealth but I just want to sense-check it... if I'm not distracted by this arpeggiator... (SO THIS is how coki does it!)

:rolleyes:

He can look the data up just as easily as I can, if he's not convinced. Since I know for sure I'm right, I really don't care.
 

vimothy

yurp
This is what you said.

Yes -- I didn't say that rich people don't vote liberal, I asked you to prove that better educated people vote Democrat. I asked for data.

Gelman's data shows that although rich voters vote Republican and poor voters vote Democrat, rich states vote Democrat and poor states vote Republican. This is because rich voters in rich states are 'switching sides' and voting Democrat.

I don't know how that interacts with education, which is why I asked you for sources. However, it's easy to hypothesise that richer votes are generally better educated, and since richer voters tend to vote Republican, better educated voters tend to vote Republican, except in rich states, where they are voting Democrat.
 

nomadthethird

more issues than Time mag
Yes -- I didn't say that rich people don't vote liberal, I asked you to prove that better educated people vote Democrat. I asked for data.

Gelman's data shows that although rich voters vote Republican and poor voters vote Democrat, rich states vote Democrat and poor states vote Republican. This is because rich voters in rich states are 'switching sides' and voting Democrat.

I don't know how that interacts with education, which is why I asked you for sources. However, it's easy to hypothesise that richer votes are generally better educated, and since richer voters tend to vote Republican, better educated voters tend to vote Republican, except in rich states, where they are voting Democrat.

Who is Gelman, btw? Who funded his research? Do we know?

The "richest" Americans vote republican. I would guess that these are the top .10% of the richest. The upper middle class, however, as a group, votes democratic. There's more of an upper middle class income level population in the coastal states, and these happen to be the richest and best educated states.

I'm not saying you're entirely wrong, but I think your argument lacks nuance entirely. And nuance is important. Especially because states are not monolithic voting bodies, except when they have to turn in their votes to the electoral college authorities--within states, there are districts that vote differently according to such factors as education level and income.

Republicans as a voting block tend to be made up of: blue collar or lower middle class social conservatives and superrich corporation owners and other business people. Democrats tend to be made up of: the upper middle class, the inner-city or urban impoverished, professionals of all types including academics. ;)
 

nomadthethird

more issues than Time mag
Here's another Gelman publication that is interesting:

http://www.stat.columbia.edu/~gelman/research/published/rb_qjps.pdf

Looks like this is where you got some of your graphs. But you have to read the whole thing.

Our varying-intercept, varying-slope model has thus redefined the puzzle: in asking why the patterns within states differ from those between states, we are specifically interested in why slopes have become so shallow in rich states — that is, what’s the matter with Connecticut? We have found that the differences between rich and poor states have become much more prominent in the past 10 years, that they cannot simply be explained by race, and that they cannot be explained by the set of demographic variables that are typically used in adjusting survey respondents.

This is not to say that income is causing support for Republicans (or that such a causal relation is stronger in Mississippi than in Connecticut), but rather that richer voters within any state are more likely to support the Republicans, even after controlling for basic demographic variables—and this pattern is strong in poor states but weak in rich states.

It would be interesting if he added education as a variable and tried to fit it in somehow...
 
Last edited:

vimothy

yurp
Yeah, that's him.

Here are some graphs of Gelman's two trends (rich voters vote Republican, rich states vote Democrat) for recent years, including the 2008 election.

Rich individuals vote Republican:

outcome1.png


But rich states vote Democrat:

scatterplot_income_2004-20086.png
 

craner

Beast of Burden
I love the way this thread has descended from drunken ramblings about international cuisine to polling analysis with detailed graphs.
 

nomadthethird

more issues than Time mag
Kind of a strange pick in Emanuel, I don't know what to make of it except that he's kind of cute.:D I've heard Obama wants no Washington repeats, and he's going to even out the cabinet with equal parts liberal and conservative.

So that's obviously at least partially false.
 
Last edited:

luka

Well-known member
this has turned into the dirtiest nerd orgy in dissensus history, and thats saying something.
 

crackerjack

Well-known member
Kind of a strange pick in Emanuel, I don't know what to make of it except that he's kind of cute.:D I've heard Obama wants no Washington repeats, and he's going to even out the cabinet with equal parts liberal and conservative.

I don't get this bipartisan thing. Give Powell a job for that brilliant u-boating he did on McCain, but for the rest of them, fuck it.

Noses meet dust. Come on.

edit: the above is my considered intellectual opinion, not the words of someone who overslept and is playing catch-up with too much coffee.
 
Top