The Audacious Epigone has a long critique of Red State, Blue State, Rich State, Poor State. The main criticism is that Andrew Gelman did not emphasize the affect that race has on voting patterns enough; a criticism brought to sharper focus by the 2008 election.
- Log in to post comments
More like this
If there is one "politics" book you should read this year, it is Red State, Blue State, Rich State, Poor State: Why Americans Vote the Way They Do. Now, this sort of acclamation does need to be tempered by the fact that I myself don't really read "political" books very often. But despite the…
Since I posted on a really bad study that's outside of my area of expertise the other day, I thought I should make it up to you by posting on what I think is a good study by Gelman et al. that's also outside of my area of expertise today. Plus, with a title like "Rich state, poor state, red state,…
One of the argument from Andrew Gelman's Red State, Blue State, Rich State, Poor State which has percolated into the punditocracy is that the Culture Wars are to a large extent a feature of the upper socioeconomic brackets. Gelman presents data which strongly contradicts Thomas Frank's argument…
I'm still chewing through the exit polls, though Steve is right that there are no big surprises. I think I'll put up a few charts which display questions where responses can be thought of in an ordinal manner just to make clear the trend lines. But of course Andrew Gelman has already crunched the…
We need 2004 exit polling data on whites by income to see if there really was a seismic shift not only in where white support was most concentrated for the GOP, but also a shift across the country of poorer whites being more likely to vote McCain than they were to vote Bush, and wealthier whites being less likely to vote McCain than they were to vote Bush.