3 ms·

This trend has been changing over time, though. Democrats are losing poorer voters and gaining among highly educated, and higher earning voters.

jeffbee 5y ago
Data? Pew poll says that trump won non-college-educated white men 4:1 in 2016 and only 3:1 in 2020. Isn’t that going the opposite direction of your claim?
- LordDragonfang 5y ago
  I think that's more an effect of the gender of the opposing candidate than anything else. You can't deny that sexism played a huge role in the public opposition to Hillary Clinton's campaign. It was plain to see if you followed any of the discussion online, often becoming openly misogynistic. Edit: also, this source seems to disagree with you: https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2020/11/11/once-again-less-educated-whites-spurned-americas-democratic-nominee https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2020/11/11/once-aga...
  - jeffbee 5y ago
    That source seems to agree with me. The graph shows less-educated white voters with a 10% swing to democrats between 2016 and 2020. Also I completely agree that irrational animus towards HRC was a big cause in 2016.
    - LordDragonfang 5y ago
      I understand how you came to that conclusion, since those graphs are extremely confusingly designed*, but the 10% change is the predicted change in margin of victory (which the article is examining because said prediction was wrong), and the actual change is more or less negligible, trending slightly towards more Republican. Behind the paywall, the article text confirms this: >However, there was scant evidence that white voters without degrees preferred Mr Biden to Mrs Clinton. Mr Trump’s margins of victory in white working-class counties this year were just as large on average, and in some places even bigger, than in 2016. * Honestly, they're astoundingly bad, to the point of being actively misleading if you're not looking carefully. I highly suspect they were thrown together by someone without statistics training using bad autofit at the last minute.

jeffbee 5y ago

Data? Pew poll says that trump won non-college-educated white men 4:1 in 2016 and only 3:1 in 2020. Isn’t that going the opposite direction of your claim?

LordDragonfang 5y ago
I think that's more an effect of the gender of the opposing candidate than anything else. You can't deny that sexism played a huge role in the public opposition to Hillary Clinton's campaign. It was plain to see if you followed any of the discussion online, often becoming openly misogynistic. Edit: also, this source seems to disagree with you: https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2020/11/11/once-again-less-educated-whites-spurned-americas-democratic-nominee https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2020/11/11/once-aga...
- jeffbee 5y ago
  That source seems to agree with me. The graph shows less-educated white voters with a 10% swing to democrats between 2016 and 2020. Also I completely agree that irrational animus towards HRC was a big cause in 2016.
  - LordDragonfang 5y ago
    I understand how you came to that conclusion, since those graphs are extremely confusingly designed*, but the 10% change is the predicted change in margin of victory (which the article is examining because said prediction was wrong), and the actual change is more or less negligible, trending slightly towards more Republican. Behind the paywall, the article text confirms this: >However, there was scant evidence that white voters without degrees preferred Mr Biden to Mrs Clinton. Mr Trump’s margins of victory in white working-class counties this year were just as large on average, and in some places even bigger, than in 2016. * Honestly, they're astoundingly bad, to the point of being actively misleading if you're not looking carefully. I highly suspect they were thrown together by someone without statistics training using bad autofit at the last minute.