Reddit mentions of Red State, Blue State, Rich State, Poor State: Why Americans Vote the Way They Do - Expanded Edition

Poor Americans are more liberal than rich Americans in general. But there are distinct patterns of political preferences by income among racial groups and geography. Poor Blacks vote overwhelmingly Democratic, as do poor Whites, except in the South where poor White's preferences are a little murkier. Andrew Gelman does a good job of explaining this in Red State, Blue State, Rich State, Poor State.

The book's paradoxical conclusion is this: Rich states and poor people vote Democratic, while poor states and rich people vote Republican. The way to reconcile the contradiction is that in red states income is a much more robust predictor of your voting habits than in blue states. So, in Connecticut, a rich blue state, income does a less good job of predicting the voting habits of wealthy and middle class voters, many of whom vote Democratic despite their wealth. In Alabama, a poor red state, the votes of people who have above-average incomes are very well predicted by their incomes. And rich, white, Southerners are the most conservative people in the United States. In Mississippi in 2012, Obama only got 10% of whites in the state to vote for him. If you went to a polling station in a rich, white suburb of Atlanta, or Tallahassee, or Jackson, I'd guess that well over 95% of people would be voting Republican. Why? Gelman goes into the nuances in his book, but it has a lot to do with religion and values which are more important to rich Republicans than any other group.

Another interesting finding that comes out of people researching voting habits by demographic characteristics is the existence of two kinds of whites. White people's voting habits basically differ based on what side of the Mason-Dixon they live on. Southern Whites are extremely conservative, whereas Northerners basically split the vote between Democrats and Republicans. That's why Republicans handily win southern states with the country's largest minority populations.


TL;DR The poorest 10% of Americans are more liberal than the richest in general as measured by preference for the Democratic Party. This relationship is less strong outside the South

Source:
Red State, Blue State, Rich State, Poor State

Gelman's research

Crooked Timber

> Furthemore, why did the South shift from being a Democratic stronghold to a Republican one?

There have been plenty of threads here about the Southern Strategy and the partisan realignment. The tl;dr is that the Republican Party appealed to racism against blacks and opposition to civil rights among southern white voters. Those voters, previously strongly Democratic voters, switched to supporting the Republican Party, where they remain to this day. (For an academic look, you can see here.)

> Why is it that after '92 the Northeast and West coast became consistently Democratic, and the South and midwest become consistently Republican?

It's largely a function of population demographics. Another tl;dr is that the coasts are far more urbanized than the South and midwest. Highly urban areas tend to be more Democratic-leaning. Essentially, blue states are blue because they're disproportionately urban, while red states are red because they're disproportionately rural. Even in states like California, you see large swaths of Republican counties because they're heavily rural areas.

As for the central thrust of your question, Andrew Gelman would likely argue that, even though rich people tend to vote Republican quite overwhelmingly, 1) there are far more poor people in those blue states, and poor people tend to vote Democratic, and 2) rich people on the coasts care more about social issues that Democrats favor. In general, I think it's just a function of population demographics.

To supplement and expand, this book is a great read, with very clearly presented data, that describes and explores this phenomenon.

Entire books have been written on this subject--here is a good place to start

1. I was in a school like that. I didn't join. No one hassled me. No one ever said anything to me. The really pro-union people kept to themselves and the vast majority did whatever and could actually care less.
   
   
2. Probably not, coming from a perspective of Power. Because it is so large and controls all of CPS, I doubt it would ever want to be split up -- even if those smaller unions are basically CPS lite.
   
   
3. I know. Tell me about it. It did all across the state (WI). Most of the old teachers that were stuck in their ways were either asked not to come back by the district; felt like they had to retire or else they would lose all of their benefits (I'm still unclear where this hysteria came from); and, more district flexibility allowed districts to better craft budgets reflective of their priorities. It was a good 5-year window to get hired here.
   
   
4. There are many possible answers for this. One answer I've seen is that more conservative-minded people are in professions that typically pay more (accounting, business (management), etc.). Another answer is that that conservative ethos of conserving your wealth (being thrifty) is something harped on if you grow up in a conservative household and it is, therefore, something carried one through one's life. And there are other reasons but you should avoid blanket statements because, actually, if you (taking Republican and Democrat to be proxies for conservative-liberal, respectively) measure it, you'd see that Democrats have slightly, on average, a higher income. Believe it or not, wealth at the top quintile isn't a really good predictor of political ideology. It's actually pretty even split between R and D. In the lower quintile, you'd find a stronger correlation between income and D or R: the poorer one is, the more likely they are to vote D. Yet, a better way to examine that would be racial. There you'd see a clear split between black low income (D) and white low income (R). This whole idea of wealth impacting voting habits and ideology is something political scientists are trying to still better understand. One of the better books, written for the general public, on this subject is (still) (Red State, Blue State, Rich State, Poor State)[https://www.amazon.com/Red-State-Blue-Rich-Poor/dp/0691143935].

> 1) I was in a school like that. I didn't join. No one hassled me. No one ever said anything to me. The really pro-union people kept to themselves and the vast majority did whatever and could actually care less.

That's good they didn't hassle you. Olof I decided to join a union I would lay back in the shadows and not be adamantly going on tangents why people should join. Glad you weren't harassed. During student teaching there was a teacher without fail that every Friday would wear her union shirt.

>2) Probably not, coming from a perspective of Power. Because it is so large and controls all of CPS, I doubt it would ever want to be split up -- even if those smaller unions are basically CPS lite.

Great point, probably.

>3) I know. Tell me about it. It did all across the state (WI). Most of the old teachers that were stuck in their ways were either asked not to come back by the district; felt like they had to retire or else they would lose all of their benefits (I'm still unclear where this hysteria came from); and, more district flexibility allowed districts to better craft budgets reflective of their priorities. It was a good 5-year window to get hired here.

I remember several years ago it had made news. Is hiring better now? I know you got a lot of flack as a state about the education stuff.

>4) There are many possible answers for this. One answer I've seen is that more conservative-minded people are in professions that typically pay more (accounting, business (management), etc.). Another answer is that that conservative ethos of conserving your wealth (being thrifty) is something harped on if you grow up in a conservative household and it is, therefore, something carried one through one's life. And there are other reasons but you should avoid blanket statements because, actually, if you (taking Republican and Democrat to be proxies for conservative-liberal, respectively) measure it, you'd see that Democrats have slightly, on average, a higher income. Believe it or not, wealth at the top quintile isn't a really good predictor of political ideology. It's actually pretty even split between R and D. In the lower quintile, you'd find a stronger correlation between income and D or R: the poorer one is, the more likely they are to vote D. Yet, a better way to examine that would be racial. There you'd see a clear split between black low income (D) and white low income (R). This whole idea of wealth impacting voting habits and ideology is something political scientists are trying to still better understand. One of the better books, written for the general public, on this subject is (still) (Red State, Blue State, Rich State, Poor State)[https://www.amazon.com/Red-State-Blue-Rich-Poor/dp/0691143935].

Thanks for that in depth answer, I'll be sure to look into that more.