So says the data according to Andrew Gelman. I think there is some serious issues with self-reports of whether someone is a conservative or liberal which don't occur with political parties. People know whether they are Republican or Democrat in a more concrete manner because they have often realized their preferences through voting.
- Log in to post comments
More like this
Today is a big day for American Presidential politics, the so-called Super Tuesday when citizens in 24 states vote or caucus with their fellows to help select the candidates of the two main political parties. I live in one of those 24 states and Mrs. R. and I vote regular as clockwork. We never…
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,…
I recently reviewed Bryan Caplan's book, The Myth of the Rational Voter, for the journal Political Psychology. I wish I thought this book was all wrong, because then I could've titled my review, "The Myth of the Myth of the Rational Voter." But, no, I saw a lot of truth in Caplan's arguments.…
Over at Economics of Contempt, there is an argument that liberal media bias has to exist because there is evidence that partisanship changes the way that our brains process information. (This is not his only evidence, but it is part of it.)
Now, I don't want to get into a discussion about the…
I'd guess that it's due to people voting their pocket books rather than their ideology. At high enough incomes to get in the heavy tax brackets, that means voting Republican and if you're poor enough to qualify for public assistance, it means voting Democratic.
At the extremes, I suspect the pocket books determine the ideology. Social ideology is really a luxury neither the rich nor poor can afford.
Caledonian, according to Gelman social policy is the preserve of the rich.
It is just the genius of the Republican party to get people who are actually hurt by their economic and other policies to vote for them by (often falsely) claiming respect for "traditional values," independence, hard work, and disguised appeals to racism and xenophobia.
We can see it in the health care debate.
In the long past, conservatives were concerned with conserving something (beyond inherited privilege).
It is just the genius of the Republican party to get people who are actually hurt by their economic and other policies to vote for them by (often falsely) claimin
the lower the income of a white person the more likely they're to vote democrat. so the premise is false.
Yeah, TGGP, but rich people who institute social policies incompatible with their remaining rich stop controlling social policy.
Even if they might prefer policies that don't involve their retaining a stranglehold on power, they must institute them or be replaced and dominated.
It's all a giant game of "King of the Mountain".
"It is just the genius of the Republican party to get people who are actually hurt by their economic and other policies to vote for them by (often falsely) claiming respect for "traditional values," independence, hard work, and disguised appeals to racism and xenophobia. We can see it in the health care debate. In the long past, conservatives were concerned with conserving something (beyond inherited privilege)."
The Western world is running out of its carrying capacity for people like this.