Wham Rocks Posted November 10, 2004 Share Posted November 10, 2004 A study conducted by the Plebius Press has determined that the more educated and affluent a state is, the more likely it was to vote in favor of John Kerry on Tuesday's United States Presidential election. In states where Kerry won, 30 percent of the population had completed a Bachelors Degree, compared to 24 percent in states where Bush was victorious. [chart]. It is not clear whether these findings extend to intelligence or IQ as some blogs have suggested. The percent of population with a Bachelors Degree was a significant predictor of the outcome, accounting for 25% of the overall results. [chart] The median household income of a state was also a good predictor of how the state voted. States with a higher median income tended to favor Kerry, whereas states with a lower income favored Bush. [chart] Median income remains a good predictor even when you control for education level, as shown in this chart: Plebius Press I would have guessed median income slightly favored Republicans and education was virtually a tie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted November 10, 2004 Share Posted November 10, 2004 Yeah, expect that is absolutely meaningless without information about the demographics and income distributions within each of those states. Also, the fact that many states were statistical toss ups renders that study worthless. A much more telling analysis can be obtained from looking at the raw votes, regardless of state. According to the NY Times, Kerry won an significant majority of total voters who were high school drop outs. He also had more votes among those holding a Masters degree or higher. Now, considering the number of high school dropouts (almost 10% of the people) v. the number of Masters degree holders in this country, that tells us plenty about the "intelligence" of Democratic voters. The majority of people who were High school grads, classified as having 'some' college, and those with bacholar degrees voted more often for Bush. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IBTG81 Posted November 10, 2004 Share Posted November 10, 2004 Yeah, expect that is absolutely meaningless without information about the demographics and income distributions within each of those states. Also, the fact that many states were statistical toss ups renders that study worthless. A much more telling analysis can be obtained from looking at the raw votes, regardless of state. According to the NY Times, Kerry won an significant majority of total voters who were high school drop outs. He also had more votes among those holding a Masters degree or higher. Now, considering the number of high school dropouts (almost 10% of the people) v. the number of Masters degree holders in this country, that tells us plenty about the "intelligence" of Democratic voters. The majority of people who were High school grads, classified as having 'some' college, and those with bacholar degrees voted more often for Bush. 111899[/snapback] Facts suck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Adams Posted November 10, 2004 Share Posted November 10, 2004 Facts suck. 111904[/snapback] Your avatar is creepy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRC Posted November 10, 2004 Share Posted November 10, 2004 Yeah, expect that is absolutely meaningless without information about the demographics and income distributions within each of those states. Also, the fact that many states were statistical toss ups renders that study worthless. A much more telling analysis can be obtained from looking at the raw votes, regardless of state. According to the NY Times, Kerry won an significant majority of total voters who were high school drop outs. He also had more votes among those holding a Masters degree or higher. Now, considering the number of high school dropouts (almost 10% of the people) v. the number of Masters degree holders in this country, that tells us plenty about the "intelligence" of Democratic voters. The majority of people who were High school grads, classified as having 'some' college, and those with bacholar degrees voted more often for Bush. 111899[/snapback] I think it was DC Tom who pointed out (when this was posted previously) that it is obvious that the income would favor blue states, since income is tied to cost of living for that area and that area has the highest cost of living. This would negate any meaningful analysis of income as it relates to the hypothesis of voting patterns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted November 10, 2004 Share Posted November 10, 2004 I think it was DC Tom who pointed out (when this was posted previously) that it is obvious that the income would favor blue states, since income is tied to cost of living for that area and that area has the highest cost of living. This would negate any meaningful analysis of income as it relates to the hypothesis of voting patterns. 111915[/snapback] Income flows to the major cities, which tend to have huge income disparities and accumulations of wealth, as well as large populations of poor, uneducated voters (and hence, they are blue states). Connecticut has one of the highest income levels in the country, because of its proximity to NYC. The fact that all the old guard Democrats in Waterbury, Hartford and Bridgeport voted Kerry by huge margins doesn't make them more intelligent just because there are millionaires by the bushel in Greenwich and New Canaan. Thus, Wham's Pleb study is bull stevestojan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted November 10, 2004 Share Posted November 10, 2004 I think studies like this are pretty useless. It is not as if there were no New Yorkers voting for Bush or no North Carolina voters voting for Kerry. For example, 2.7 million New Yorkers voted for Bush while only .9 million Oklahomans voted for Bush. I can accurately say then that Bush has 3 times the support in NY that he has in Oklahoma. Since NY is an "eastern elitist" state with a huge cost of living, can I then conclude that Bush appealed to more wealthy eastern elitists than salt of the earth types in Oklahoma? Details matter and you have to look at those pretty closely. States are somewhat arbitrary categories. I don't know many people who voted for a candidate and did so chiefly because they were a New Yorker or an Oklahoman. They voted because of issues, general perceptions, personal preferences, biases, prejudices and many, many other variables. You could use these kinds of numbers to support all sorts of strange positions. I heard Stewart on the Daily Show, in jest, point out that most of the 9/11 victims were from Manhattan where Kerry got like 97% of the vote or some such outrageous percentage. He used that to opine that the people with the most to fear from terrorists all voted for Kerry and that the people least likely to be victimized by terrorists, Kansans for example, all voted for Bush. Lies, damn lies and statistics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SJ Bills backer Posted November 10, 2004 Share Posted November 10, 2004 studies like these are NOT useless, ESPECAILLY when they happen to validate a point of view I've already adopted... as per the Daily Mirror headline "How can 59,054,087 people be so dumb?" Hey - at least I'm honest. And no one ever said that democracy always yields the correct decision. I'm sure in the ancient days, stonings were considered to be democratic too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spidey Posted November 11, 2004 Share Posted November 11, 2004 A study conducted by the Plebius Press has determined that the more educated and affluent a state is, the more likely it was to vote in favor of John Kerry on Tuesday's United States Presidential election. In states where Kerry won, 30 percent of the population had completed a Bachelors Degree, compared to 24 percent in states where Bush was victorious. [chart]. It is not clear whether these findings extend to intelligence or IQ as some blogs have suggested. The percent of population with a Bachelors Degree was a significant predictor of the outcome, accounting for 25% of the overall results. [chart] The median household income of a state was also a good predictor of how the state voted. States with a higher median income tended to favor Kerry, whereas states with a lower income favored Bush. [chart] Median income remains a good predictor even when you control for education level, as shown in this chart: Plebius Press I would have guessed median income slightly favored Republicans and education was virtually a tie. 111872[/snapback] Whan you need to understand the bikini theory of statistics. Statistics is like a bikinin what it reveals to you is interesting however what it hides is vital. Even with the large influx of high tech workers into states like NC only the urban and suburban areas vote democratic the rural areas are locked republican and nothing will shift these folks back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Typical TBD Guy Posted November 11, 2004 Share Posted November 11, 2004 I think it was DC Tom who pointed out (when this was posted previously) that it is obvious that the income would favor blue states, since income is tied to cost of living for that area and that area has the highest cost of living. This would negate any meaningful analysis of income as it relates to the hypothesis of voting patterns. 111915[/snapback] EXCELLENT point. Yet another failed attempt in the blue state liberals' eternal quest to claim intellectual superiority over the red state conservatives.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts