Voting patterns of America’s whites, from the masses to the elites

by Andrew Gelman on November 29, 2012 · 8 comments

in Campaigns and elections

I am resurrecting this old post (sorry, no clean 2012 data yet, I’ll update when I have the numbers) because some people were asking about education and voting in a recent comment thread.

Within any education category, richer people vote more Republican. In contrast, the pattern of education and voting is nonlinear. High school graduates are more Republican than non-HS grads, but after that, the groups with more education tend to vote more Democratic. At the very highest education level tabulated in the survey, voters with post-graduate degrees lean toward the Democrats. Except for the rich post-graduates; they are split 50-50 between the parties.

People were asking about this because they were interested in high-education Asians. I don’t have enough data on Asians to look directly at that question, hence the above graph for whites.

What does this say about America’s elites? If you define elites as high-income non-Hispanic whites, the elites vote strongly Republican. If you define elites as college-educated high-income whites, they vote moderately Republican.

There is no plausible way based on these data in which elites can be considered a Democratic voting bloc. To create a group of strongly Democratic-leaning elite whites using these graphs, you would need to consider only postgraduates (no simple college grads included, even if they have achieved social and financial success), and you have to go down to the below-$75,000 level of family income, which hardly seems like the American elites to me.

The patterns are consistent for all three presidential elections shown above. (The differences in the higher-income low-education category should not be taken seriously, as the estimates are based on small samples, as can be seen from the large standard errors for those subgroups.)

Notes: These graphs show just (non-Hispanic) white voters because (a) most voters are white, (b) minorities tend to vote consistently for Democrats, so there’s less variation in their voting patterns, and (c ) sample sizes are smaller for nonwhite groups so it’s hard to see clear patterns amid the noise. Data come from Annenberg pre-election polls for 2000 and 2004 and Pew pre-election polls for 2008; total number of non-Hispanic white respondents: 26161, 36476, and 15212. Graphs show intended vote in presidential election, including only those who expressed a preference for the Democratic or Republican candidate. Income categories are defined as family income less than $20K, $20-40K, $40-75K, $75-150K, 150K+. This work was done in collaboration with Yair Ghitza.

{ 8 comments }

MikeM November 30, 2012 at 12:52 am

Have you considered using line thickness to show the size of the different subpopulations?

Mark November 30, 2012 at 10:29 am

Are there any temporal trends within these groups over the course of the three elections?
I note that the high income category starts at 150K. Are there any further breakdowns of the data at levels above that?
Thanks

Mark November 30, 2012 at 4:55 pm

Just realized from a closer look at the chart that it answers my first question.

Luis November 30, 2012 at 11:30 am

Excellent and compelling post. One interesting move would be to disaggregate income more precisely. Perhaps there are subgroups (for example the lower brackets of the “high” category) of the “rich” for which the relationship reverts. This would not amount to a refutation or even moderation of your claims because as a general matter income would still be associated with more Republican vote intention. But it would be interesting to see if there are some local interactions.

Mercer November 30, 2012 at 2:42 pm

Is the low share of post-grads because of teachers with masters degrees?

Alfred G. Cuzan November 30, 2012 at 8:03 pm

Does this set of variables constitute the best measures of elites? Aren’t elites those that actually run the country, those who occupy the highest tiers of corporations, big foundations, media organizations, universities, and the federal and state bureaucracies? Also, it might be good to compare these graphs with voting patterns in the highest-income zip codes analyzed by Charles Murray in his recent book.

Andrew Gelman November 30, 2012 at 10:55 pm

Mike:

I haven’t tried line thickness but I have at times used circles to show group sizes, as in these graphs of voting by income, age, and ethnicity.

Mark, Luis, Alfred:

It would be good to further break down the high-income category but we don’t have enough survey respondents (or detailed enough income questions) to do that from these surveys. Thomas Ferguson and others have looked at the campaign contributions of the super-rich and find a general Republican lean, but with variation by industry.

Kevin Hill December 1, 2012 at 5:38 pm

“To create a group of strongly Democratic-leaning elite whites using these graphs, you would need to consider only postgraduates (no simple college grads included, even if they have achieved social and financial success), and you have to go down to the below-$75,000 level of family income, which hardly seems like the American elites to me.”

You know… like high school teachers and adjunct college professors.

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: