The values are money
There's lots of wailing and grinding of teeth already on blogs abou how the Democrats are losing the battle of values. As far as I can work it out what this means is that the Republicans have broken through compared with say 2000 by appealing to voters' morals, not their wallets, and thus the Democrats are losing a large chunk of lower-income voters.It's sadly not true. From the CNN exit polls for 2000 and 2004 (which were accurate in their vote share, note)
Of those earning under $15,000, Gore took 57%, Kerry took 63%, of those $15-$30k, Gore took 54%, Kerry took 57%, of those earning $30k to $50k, Gore took 49% and Kerry 50%.
So Kerry took a higher share than Gore of anyone earning under $50,000 p.a.
On higher earners it reverses. Of those on $50k to $75k, Gore 46%, Kerry 45%. On those on $100k a year or more, Gore took 43%, Kerry took 41%.
The figures for Bush are the exact opposite. So the lower income you are in America the more you prefer the Democrats, and the more you prefer John Kerry over Al Gore.
There are obviously some important caveats. Some of this (but not all) reflects Ralph Nader's failed candidature. Assuming his votes were 3 to 1 Gore's, then Gore would only have been 2-3% behind Kerry among lower income voers. Also there are issues that would need further discussion, such as is income a proxy for a more important determinant such as age. It doesn't really seem very obvious why it should change though between 2000 and 2004, and the % in each income group is very similar between the two dates, suggesting similar age profiles.
ps Oh look. Kerry took a higher share of white males than Gore too! 37% to 36%. Bush seems to have picked up Nader's share. Perhaps a lurch to the left is in order?
posted by Matthew @ 11/04/2004 04:42:00 PM
Comments: 0
