Last week, we looked at the relationship between class and happy states. This week we look at the effects of class on the 2008 Obama-McCain presidential election. Since states are key units in the U.S. electoral college system, we took states as the units of analysis as opposed to individuals. So under the watchful analytical eye of Charlotta Mellander, we looked at how the class composition of states (as opposed to say the class membership of individuals) effected votes for Obama versus McCain. To make this a little bit more interesting and more fun, we also looked at the effects of factors like income, housing prices, and human capital, as well as the gay index and personality on state voting patterns. Basically, we wanted to identify the kinds of states that voted for Obama or McCain.
CLASS AND THE ELECTION: First things first. There was undeniable class pattern to state voting in the 2008 election. States with large concentrations of two classes – the creative class and the service class were strongly associated with Obama, while states with large working class concentrations went for McCain.
The Creative Class: The correlation between creative class states and Obama was positive and significant (.425), while it was negative and significant for McCain (-.442).
The Service Class: The same basic pattern was true of the service class, the largest class and also the class with the lowest average level of wages and salaries. Service class states were positively associated with Obama (.390) and negative for McCain (-.415).
The Working Class: Now check out the pattern with the working class. Hasn’t the conventional wisdom long been that working class voters tilt heavily toward the Democrats? When it comes to the concentration of working class jobs in a state, not so much. Working class states were even more strongly associated with McCain (.658) than creative class states for Obama; and working class states were quite negatively correlated (-.623) with Obama. This state level pattern contrasts with individual voting. While Obama won lots of working class voters, working class states went strongly for McCain.
Income and Economic Output: We also looked at the association between state voting and income and economic output (measured as GDP per person). Obama states were those with higher levels of GDP per capita (.375 Obama vs. -.388 McCain) and higher incomes (.516 Obama vs. -527 McCain). These are in line with earlier findings of Columbia University political scientist and Rich State, Poor State author, Andrew Gelman.
Housing Prices: States with high housing prices also were in the Obama camp. Housing prices were strong correlated with Obama states (.672) and negatively associated with McCain states (-.725).
Human Capital: Human capital – that is the percentage of adults with a college degree – was strongly positively associated with Obama states (.458) and negatively associated with McCain states (-.492). These patterns contrast somewhat with more nuanced data for individual voters. Gelman pointed out in an e-mail that: “At the individual level, Obama did best among people without h.s. degrees and people with postgraduate degrees. McCain did best among people with some college and people with college degrees (but no postgrad degrees).”
The Gay Index: Obama states were also those with greater concentrations of gays and lesbians. The Gay Index was positively associated with Obama states (.532) and negatively associated with McCain states (-.544).
Personality Factors: Psychologists have long been interested in the connection between personality and individual voting and ideology. So, once again using data originally collected by Cambridge University psychologist Jason Rentfrow and his collaborators, we compared state voting patterns to the concentration of the five major personality types – extroversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, openness-to-experience, and neuroticism. While three of the types had little relation to state voting patterns, two were significantly associated with Obama vs. McCain votes.
Open-to-Experience: Obama states were associated with high concentrations of open-to-experience (.409) – that is highly creative and innovative people; openness was negatively associated with McCain states (-.371).
Conscientiousness: McCain states were associated with high concentrations of conscientious (or dutiful) personalities (.311).
In an e-mail, Rentfrow says these findings are in line with his own: “The links with class, openness and voting is consistent with what we found in the 1996, 2000, and 2004 presidential elections. Although we didn’t look at the class groupings you looked at, each is related to openness, and we found that openness was strongly related to voting patterns after controlling for income, education, race, and sex. I ran the same analyses for the 2008 election and the results are very similar…”
March 24th, 2009 at 10:28 am
You have numerically reinforced what one might have predicted for the voting patterns. However, I think, in values and aspirations the working class and service class are fairly close. The working class, with more money, may have realized more of their aspirations and as such become more complacent and conservative.
However, the unmentioned 800-pound gorilla in the room may be colour. Is the service class composed of more people of colour than the working class? If so, that may be a better descriptor than this class dichotomy.
Did people of colour turn out in greater numbers than in previous elections? Did some traditional conservative voters stay home thinking the race was lost? alex
March 24th, 2009 at 4:08 pm
This is also interesting if you overlay it with the geography of the final results. The McCain states were the Deep South, (losing the margins like Virginia & N. Carolina), the Mississippi River bordering Midwest and some of the Mountain states (losing Colorado and N Mexico). And all of the Red states except Alaska are one bloc, the blue ones are 3 distinct blocs plus Hawaii and Florida.
So I guess the McCain regions are more working class. They’re also lower income and lower housing prices. If we think the creative class economy are the future, then these regions seem to cling to the past or old economy. Allowing for the fact that many of the Western McCain states are pretty unpopulated, it still says that the South and lower Midwest are working class. I wonder what the industries are?
March 25th, 2009 at 10:40 am
Essentially what you’re trying to say is that since I voted for McCain, I’m most likely lower income and live in a lower priced house? That I’m clinging to the past?
No, not really – wrong on all of the above. I am a part of the creative class, I live in an expensive home, and have an upper income. I just couldn’t find anything in obama that I agreed with. I knew his economic policies would be a disaster (just didn’t know that fast), and I don’t have euro-envy.
I agree that the creative industries are the future, but I don’t believe that translates automatically into a liberal viewpoint. My area is heavy in medical technology and pharmaceuticals. My unscientific (personal) poll found that most of the people I talked to (dr’s,techies,business owners) all voted Republican; hardly the bitter, poor, working class people you are trying so hard to label us as.
March 25th, 2009 at 12:39 pm
No, just that those were the demographics of the states that went for McCain. Obviously lots of people in California and Massachusetts voted for him, as did lots of upper class and creative class. And lots of working class people in the Midwest voted for Obama. We’re talking percentages and certainly not trying to label individuals. Most elections are won by +/- 5%.
What’s more interesting to me is that the Dr’s, techies and business owners I know voted Democratic. We tend to live in self-reinforcing feedback loops, as described in The Big Sort. Blogs are one of the few places we interact with people different from ourselves.
March 25th, 2009 at 1:07 pm
Michael,
I agree with you in that we are sorting into like groups. The strength of this nation is our diversity, but we are going to lose it at an accelerating rate. To me diversity is more than just race, it’s the sum of your perspective – who you are in beliefs and actions.
For my purposes, I’ll never move to San Fran/New York/Oregon because I value low-taxes and less government. So we agree to stay in our own feedback loops? Michael I was hoping you would join us at the Chicago Tea Party on July 4th
I would love to see some research into the differences between parents and their children’s voting habits. Most democrats I know also came from households of parents who also were democrat. I think that could make for interesting reading on both sides. If anyone reading this knows of any, please let me know.
I also think the numbers for this past election aren’t nearly as useful as the 2012 will be. I believe the next election will cement whether a state really is red, or really is blue. Will California’s liberal bent go by the wayside as bankruptcy pounds it? It should be interesting.
March 25th, 2009 at 7:07 pm
Jim and Michael – Great question. Great response. I’m not saying you’re lower income or live in a lower priced house. Like Michael said, I’m saying nothing about individuals. That’s all been said better by others. What I looked at is the charactertistics of states that voted for Obama or McCain. That seems important because states are the units that count in our electoral college system. So what our analysis finds is that lower output, lower income, lower human capital, less gay, lower housing price, more working class and more conscientious states voted for McCain. Of course lots of high income, highly educated people did too, but not enough to carry those kinds of states. Hope this helps.
March 25th, 2009 at 7:15 pm
Jim H,
“To me diversity is more than just race, it’s the sum of your perspective – who you are in beliefs and actions.”
Absolutely. Every one of us is a package of contradictions. Liberal Democrat is the furthest Right my politics have ever gone, but of the other parties my sympathies are probably closest to Libertarian. To this day I have no idea of my parents’ politics, we didn’t talk about that sort of thing. I was raised working class in a poor semi-rural neighborhood, but was drawn to cities. I hung out with intellectuals but didn’t get my BA until I was over 40. My wife & I have a good income because we’re at the tops of our fields in Portland, but the fields are nonprofit consulting and yoga.
And I’d say most of the people I know are liberals, but they’re a wide range of income groups, races, orientations, beliefs and professions. Trying to pigeonhole individuals by their occupations or income is as misguided as pigeonholing them by race.
One of the points of The Big Sort is that America is losing a lot because of living in enclaves and talking in feedback loops. At first I was annoyed by the number of conservatives on this blog, but I’ve come to value it.