Why do negroes and poor whites vote Democrat an middle & upper class vote Republican?

[Odd_ball]

The entire premise of this thread is beyond moronic.

Anyone who thinks all typically Democrat states are "poor whites", and "negroes" deserves to be deported for lowering the overall IQ of the entire nation.

How ironic that the "poor white and negro" states pay in more taxes than they recieve in federal benefits.

While the "wealthy and middle class" Republican states actually take in more WELFARE and government AID than the Democrat states.

Infant mortality rates, anyone? The Republican states have the highest rates, and the lowest average lifespans. Not to mention the highest OBESITY rates from all the PORK they love to shovel in.

Sad, really.

 

[loverboy1967]

The entire premise of this thread is beyond moronic.

Anyone who thinks all typically Democrat states are "poor whites", and "negroes" deserves to be deported for lowering the overall IQ of the entire nation.

How ironic that the "poor white and negro" states pay in more taxes than they recieve in federal benefits.

While the "wealthy and middle class" Republican states actually take in more WELFARE and government AID than the Democrat states.

Infant mortality rates, anyone? The Republican states have the highest rates, and the lowest average lifespans. Not to mention the highest OBESITY rates from all the PORK they love to shovel in.

Sad, really.

I disagree, sure some upper class people vote democrat, usually movie stars, aged hippies and rich college kids. The other 80% are actually lower class blacks and whites. I have seen the surveys on income based voters so it is truth to the post. I disagree on the negro comments though.

 

[Odd_ball]

I disagree, sure some upper class people vote democrat, usually movie stars, aged hippies and rich college kids. The other 80% are actually lower class blacks and whites. I have seen the surveys on income based voters so it is truth to the post. I disagree on the negro comments though.

You're absolutely wrong.

The typically Democratic states on average have higher incomes than the Republican states. Why do you think the Democrat states pay in more taxes which go to the "needy" poor Republican states?

The Democrat states also have more education, less obesity, lower birth defects and infant mortality rates, etc.

It's because the Democrat states are "socialist", don't ya know. Only "socialists" like things such as education, healthy babies, and good paying jobs resulting in higher overall standards of living.

 

[loverboy1967]

You're absolutely wrong.

The typically Democratic states on average have higher incomes than the Republican states. Why do you think the Democrat states pay in more taxes which go to the "needy" poor Republican states?

The Democrat states also have more education, less obesity, lower birth defects and infant mortality rates, etc.

It's because the Democrat states are "socialist", don't ya know. Only "socialists" like things such as education, healthy babies, and good paying jobs resulting in higher overall standards of living.

I respect your view and thanks, but I have read and seen different.

 

[Odd_ball]

I respect your view and thanks, but I have read and seen different.

What you have read and seen is wrong. Probably out-of-date material.

You really think the Northeast , California, and every other predominantly "Democratic" state is "mostly poor and black"?

These states on average made the highest incomes in the Nation. Yet they still vote Dem. How is that? According to you, the states with the highest incomes and standards of living should be voting predominantly Rep. But they do not.

Proof:

"For decades, the Democrats have been viewed as the party of the poor with the Republicans representing the rich. In recent years, however, a reverse pattern has been seen, with Democrats showing strength in the richer “blue” states in the Northeast and West, and Republicans dominating in the “red” states in the middle of the country. "

http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/0/8/5/1/7/p85171_index.html

 

[loverboy1967]

What you have read and seen is wrong. Probably out-of-date material.

You really think the Northeast , California, and every other predominantly "Democratic" state is "mostly poor and black"?

These states on average made the highest incomes in the Nation. Yet they still vote Dem. How is that? According to you, the states with the highest incomes and standards of living should be voting predominantly Rep. But they do not.

Proof:

"For decades, the Democrats have been viewed as the party of the poor with the Republicans representing the rich. In recent years, however, a reverse pattern has been seen, with Democrats showing strength in the richer “blue” states in the Northeast and West, and Republicans dominating in the “red” states in the middle of the country. "

http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/0/8/5/1/7/p85171_index.html

If you do your research you will find more millionaires in the southern states and midwest than upper east and far west.
Ronald Reagan was the reason for the major growth in wealth, each time a democrat is in office the wealth becomes a moss filled cess pool.

The facts is the poor are in every state and they commonly vote democrat.

In 1982 there were 13 billionaires; in 1983....15; in 1984....12; in 1985....13; in 1986....26; in 1987....49. Note carefully that prior to 1986 the number of American billionaires had averaged around 13. Then the Reagan administration drastically altered the wealth distribution patterns by introducing new tax legislation favoring the top 1%. In 1986 the number of billionaires DOUBLED, and by 1987 the number of billionaires had virtually QUADRUPLED to 49!! By 1988, there were 68 individuals or families that each had net wealth in excess of $1,000,000,000. By 1989, the number had risen precipitously to 82. And by 1990, the Forbes survey reported the staggering total of 99!!

 

[loverboy1967]

 

[Odd_ball]

What does that have to do with anything I said?

I was talking about National Averages.

Democratic states ON AVERAGE pay more in Federal Taxes. Fact.

This means they MUST make more income on average. Period.


Higher incomes = higher standards of living, which equals lower birth defects, infant mortality rates, longer lifespans, etc.

All evidence points to greater overall wealth in the predominantly Democrat states, sorry.

This is why the traditionally Republican states are so needy and love to suck up all the financial aid they can get from the government.

 

[DarlingVivacia]

Loverboy1967, Oddball has the facts on his side on this one:

"The emerging political reversals of the two Virginias are part of a national shift that has been underway for at least a decade and is expected to reveal itself more clearly than ever this November. As the gap grows between places that are prospering and those that are not, Democrats are strengthening their hold in major metropolitan areas, particularly in places faring well in the technology-driven economy." WashPo 6/29/08 "A New Political Geography"

You may also want to check out Richard Florida's work on the "Creative Class". It gives an interesting perspective on the urban socio-cultural trends as they relate to the "new economy" which may have a relevant impact on the topic at hand regarding trends in voting.

 

[Odd_ball]

Loverboy1967, Oddball has the facts on his side on this one:

"The emerging political reversals of the two Virginias are part of a national shift that has been underway for at least a decade and is expected to reveal itself more clearly than ever this November. As the gap grows between places that are prospering and those that are not, Democrats are strengthening their hold in major metropolitan areas, particularly in places faring well in the technology-driven economy." WashPo 6/29/08 "A New Political Geography"

You may also want to check out Richard Florida's work on the "Creative Class". It gives an interesting perspective on the urban socio-cultural trends as they relate to the "new economy" which may have a relevant impact on the topic at hand regarding trends in voting.

He is probably right that more Millionaires vote Republican than Dem, on average.

BUT, the ultra-wealthy make up a very small part of the whole voting public.

Statistically, a few ultra-wealthy in Southern states voting republican is insignificant when looking at the droves of average higher-income (but not "wealthy") democratic voters.

 

[DarlingVivacia]

He is probably right that more Millionaires vote Republican than Dem, on average.

BUT, the ultra-wealthy make up a very small part of the whole voting public.

Statistically, a few ultra-wealthy in Southern states voting republican is insignificant when looking at the droves of average higher-income (but not "wealthy") democratic voters.

When I think wealthy, I am referring to the top 1% of earners in this country, which includes the "average higher-income earners" that you refer to as "not wealthy". I think the differential would not be at the million dollar mark but *perhaps* at the multi-million dollar mark and then we are talking about .25% of the population, roughly. But, it is a valid point. I do think that there is a bigger point in understanding what said multi-millionaires do to earn their living. Socio-cultural trends of this group could speak volumes about their voting history and preferences. Certainly, in my unscientific polling, I see that to be the case.

 

[loverboy1967]

What does that have to do with anything I said?

I was talking about National Averages.

Democratic states ON AVERAGE pay more in Federal Taxes. Fact.

This means they MUST make more income on average. Period.


Higher incomes = higher standards of living, which equals lower birth defects, infant mortality rates, longer lifespans, etc.

All evidence points to greater overall wealth in the predominantly Democrat states, sorry.

This is why the traditionally Republican states are so needy and love to suck up all the financial aid they can get from the government.

Your first post made me feel as if you think California is way richer than the rest of the country which is not true at all, you described the southern states as pork eating poor people.

The only thing California has going for it is population and electoral votes which is very important to the democrats. If the democrats could not win California they would never have a chance.

The population of California is around 37% Hispanic and the infant mortality rate and people below poverty is just as high as anywhere else in the country.

Persons below poverty is around 14% or higher compared to around 12% for the rest of the country.

 

[Odd_ball]

When I think wealthy, I am referring to the top 1% of earners in this country, which includes the "average higher-income earners" that you refer to as "not wealthy". I think the differential would not be at the million dollar mark but *perhaps* at the multi-million dollar mark and then we are talking about .25% of the population, roughly. But, it is a valid point. I do think that there is a bigger point in understanding what said multi-millionaires do to earn their living. Socio-cultural trends of this group could speak volumes about their voting history and preferences. Certainly, in my unscientific polling, I see that to be the case.

Regardless, the point is that the predominantly Democratic states make more income on average than the others. No matter what anyone deems "wealthy" income levels.

 

[loverboy1967]

When I think wealthy, I am referring to the top 1% of earners in this country, which includes the "average higher-income earners" that you refer to as "not wealthy". I think the differential would not be at the million dollar mark but *perhaps* at the multi-million dollar mark and then we are talking about .25% of the population, roughly. But, it is a valid point. I do think that there is a bigger point in understanding what said multi-millionaires do to earn their living. Socio-cultural trends of this group could speak volumes about their voting history and preferences. Certainly, in my unscientific polling, I see that to be the case.

The national average family income is around $42,000 which is considered middle class I guess to some. I live in a community where the average family income is over $100,000 and the average home is over $500,000. Communities like this are common place in the south now but we still have trailer park communities across the tracks. It's that way in most smaller cities in the Southern states.

I took a recent trip to Detroit then later the Chicago area and was amazed at the poverty.

 

[DarlingVivacia]

Your first post made me feel as if you think California is way richer than the rest of the country which is not true at all, you described the southern states as pork eating poor people.

The only thing California has going for it is population and electoral votes which is very important to the democrats. If the democrats could not win California they would never have a chance.

The population of California is around 37% Hispanic and the infant mortality rate and people below poverty is just as high as anywhere else in the country.

Persons below poverty is around 14% or higher compared to around 12% for the rest of the country.

California 's economy accounts for roughly 13% of the US's GDP. If it was a free standing nation, it would rank arguably somewhere between 7th and 10th amongst other nations. That is a lot to have going for itself.

 

[Odd_ball]

Your first post made me feel as if you think California is way richer than the rest of the country which is not true at all, you described the southern states as pork eating poor people.

The only thing California has going for it is population and electoral votes which is very important to the democrats. If the democrats could not win California they would never have a chance.

The population of California is around 37% Hispanic and the infant mortality rate and people below poverty is just as high as anywhere else in the country.

Persons below poverty is around 14% or higher compared to around 12% for the rest of the country.

The fact is that the states who usually vote republican have higher infant mortality rates, on average, higher poverty, less education, and less average lifespans. These facts just seem to go against the original idea of this thread that "blacks and poor whites" vote democrat, and more affulent people vote Republican. It just is not true, at all.

When I said southern (red) states eat "pork", I was referring to the fact that these states pay in less federal taxes (because they make less income), and also take in the most federal subsidies and aid money. These are just statistical truths.

Getting into the "why's", like what Vavacia was alluding to, is a whole other issue, which I also did mention however. "Socialism".

 

[loverboy1967]

California 's economy accounts for roughly 13% of the US's GDP. If it was a free standing nation, it would rank arguably somewhere between 7th and 10th amongst other nations. That is a lot to have going for itself.

It has a population of around 37 million so that's obvious.

 

[Odd_ball]

The national average family income is around $42,000 which is considered middle class I guess to some. I live in a community where the average family income is over $100,000 and the average home is over $500,000. Communities like this are common place in the south now but we still have trailer park communities across the tracks. It's that way in most smaller cities in the Southern states.

I took a recent trip to Detroit then later the Chicago area and was amazed at the poverty.

Once again you point out some local conditions (with zero proof, just your own "observations"), and completely fail to look at the factual average statistics.

If the southern states are so much more "wealthy", why do the Blue states on average pay in more federal income tax? Sorry, but whoever pays in more income tax obviously is making more income.

 

[loverboy1967]

The fact is that the states who usually vote republican have higher infant mortality rates, on average, higher poverty, less education, and less average lifespans. These facts just seem to go against the original idea of this thread that "blacks and poor whites" vote democrat, and more affulent people vote Republican. It just is not true, at all.

When I said "southern (red) states eat "pork", I was referring to the fact that these states pay in less federal taxes (because they make less income), and also take in the most federal subsidies and aid money. These are just statistical truths.

Getting into the "why's", like what Vavacia was alluding to, is a whole other issue, which I also did mention however. "Socialism".

The original thread starter should have mentioned the Hispanic population, I think it has grown higher than the black population but I'm not sure.

I'm not sure how all whites vote but the African American vote for Obama is expected to be around 90% or more.

 

[loverboy1967]

Once again you point out some local conditions (with zero proof, just your own "observations"), and completely fail to look at the factual average statistics.

If the southern states are so much more "wealthy", why do the Blue states on average pay in more federal income tax? Sorry, but whoever pays in more income tax obviously is making more income.

It's a population issue.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_income_tax

 

[Odd_ball]

The original thread starter should have mentioned the Hispanic population, I think it has grown higher than the black population but I'm not sure.

I'm not sure how all whites vote but the African American vote for Obama is expected to be around 90% or more.

Still, the fact remains that the Blue states pay in more income taxes than the red states, while the red states take in more federal welfare than the blue states.

Also, if Obama was a Republican, 90% of blacks would still vote for him.

 

[Odd_ball]

It's a population issue.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_income_tax

I specifically stated Federal income tax. Not all states even have income taxes, red and blue both.

Blue states still pay in more federal income tax PER CAPITA than red states.

 

[LMT]

Another measure that shows high correlation to voter preference is population density. Areas with higher population density consistently vote democratic even in southern states. See here

 

[Odd_ball]

"Blue States are those whose median income for a family of four exceeds the U.S. median of $65,093, while Red States are those whose median income is less than the U.S. median:"

http://www.lawprofessorblogs.com/taxprof/linkimages/redblueincome.gif

The red states are pretty much the same on this map as red states meaning Repuiblican states.

Coincidence? Probably not.

More proof the Dem. states make higher average incomes.

http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2005/05/median_income_d.html

 

[Odd_ball]

Another measure that shows high correlation to voter preference is population density. Areas with higher population density consistently vote democratic even in southern states. See here

That is interesting. Higher density means greater social values?

Makes sense, people get tired of seeing bums in front of their high-rises, etc.