Red/Blue/Rich/Poor
I've finished "Red State, Blue State, Rich State, Poor State" by Gelman, Shor & Co. The subject is voting patterns of Americans. The thesis is that Blue states vs. Red states has nothing to do with haves vs. have-nots; the confrontation is limited to the affluent. The interests of the poor do not seem to be the real concern, despite the lip service to the opposite. The value of the poor is in that they vote reliably selfishly, and this reliability makes them useful for political gain. Seldom have I read a book so cynical in its outlook, but it is well argued and it relies on field studies rather than wishful thinking, which is unusual in this kind of analyses.
Myth: The rich vote based on economics, the poor vote "God, guns, and gays."
Fact: Church attendance predicts Republican voting much more among rich than poor.
Myth: A political divide exists between working-class "red America" and rich "blue America."
Fact: Within any state, more rich people vote Republican. The real divide is between higher-income voters in red and blue states.
Myth: Rich people vote for the Democrats.
Fact: George W. Bush won more than 60% of high-income voters.
Myth: Kansas votes Republican because its low-income voters can't stand the Democrats' 1960s-style values.
Fact: Kansas has been a Republican state for over 50 years, and rich Kansans vote much more Republican than middle-income and poor voters in the state.
Myth: Class divisions in voting are less in America than in European countries, which are sharply divided between left and right.
Fact: Rich and poor differ more strongly in their voting pattern in the United States than in most European countries.
Myth: Religion is particularly divisive in American politics.
Fact: Religious and secular voters differ no more in America than in France, Germany, and Sweden. http://www.redbluerichpoor.com
...Two explanations are shown to be invalid: namely that Democrats are picking up a greater share of rich votes (not true); or that rich states are growing more socially liberal (also not true). Taking class into account: at the lower end of the income spectrum Gelman doesn’t find significant differences in voting between the states - in red and blue states, the poor vote similarly. At the higher end of the income spectrum, however, the differences are more stark. The rich who live in red states have grown much more conservative on social issues (than their counterparts in blue states). Elsewhere, Gelman writes that "our results stand in contradiction to the commonly held idea that social issues detract lower income voters from their natural economic concerns." http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/07/01/the-myths-of-red-and-blue-states
...White voters in the bottom third of the income distribution have actually become more reliably Democratic in presidential elections over the past half-century, while middle- and upper-income white voters have trended Republican. Low-income whites have become less Democratic in their partisan identifications, but at a slower rate than more affluent whites - and that trend is entirely confined to the South, where Democratic identification was artificially inflated by the one-party system of the Jim Crow era.
...Has the white working class become more conservative? No. The average views of low-income whites have remained virtually unchanged over the past 30 years. (A pro-choice shift on abortion in the 1970s and ‘80s has been partially reversed since the early 1990s.) Their positions relative to more affluent white voters - generally less liberal on social issues and less conservative on economic issues - have also remained virtually unchanged.
http://www.princeton.edu/~bartels/kansas.pdf
Myth: The rich vote based on economics, the poor vote "God, guns, and gays."
Fact: Church attendance predicts Republican voting much more among rich than poor.
Myth: A political divide exists between working-class "red America" and rich "blue America."
Fact: Within any state, more rich people vote Republican. The real divide is between higher-income voters in red and blue states.
Myth: Rich people vote for the Democrats.
Fact: George W. Bush won more than 60% of high-income voters.
Myth: Kansas votes Republican because its low-income voters can't stand the Democrats' 1960s-style values.
Fact: Kansas has been a Republican state for over 50 years, and rich Kansans vote much more Republican than middle-income and poor voters in the state.
Myth: Class divisions in voting are less in America than in European countries, which are sharply divided between left and right.
Fact: Rich and poor differ more strongly in their voting pattern in the United States than in most European countries.
Myth: Religion is particularly divisive in American politics.
Fact: Religious and secular voters differ no more in America than in France, Germany, and Sweden. http://www.redbluerichpoor.com
...Two explanations are shown to be invalid: namely that Democrats are picking up a greater share of rich votes (not true); or that rich states are growing more socially liberal (also not true). Taking class into account: at the lower end of the income spectrum Gelman doesn’t find significant differences in voting between the states - in red and blue states, the poor vote similarly. At the higher end of the income spectrum, however, the differences are more stark. The rich who live in red states have grown much more conservative on social issues (than their counterparts in blue states). Elsewhere, Gelman writes that "our results stand in contradiction to the commonly held idea that social issues detract lower income voters from their natural economic concerns." http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/07/01/the-myths-of-red-and-blue-states
...White voters in the bottom third of the income distribution have actually become more reliably Democratic in presidential elections over the past half-century, while middle- and upper-income white voters have trended Republican. Low-income whites have become less Democratic in their partisan identifications, but at a slower rate than more affluent whites - and that trend is entirely confined to the South, where Democratic identification was artificially inflated by the one-party system of the Jim Crow era.
...Has the white working class become more conservative? No. The average views of low-income whites have remained virtually unchanged over the past 30 years. (A pro-choice shift on abortion in the 1970s and ‘80s has been partially reversed since the early 1990s.) Their positions relative to more affluent white voters - generally less liberal on social issues and less conservative on economic issues - have also remained virtually unchanged.
http://www.princeton.edu/~bartels/kansas.pdf