Tuesday, April 14, 2015

a deep dive into party affiliation

people-press |  Democrats hold advantages in party identification among blacks, Asians, Hispanics, well-educated adults and Millennials. Republicans have leads among whites – particularly white men, those with less education and evangelical Protestants – as well as members of the Silent Generation.

 A new analysis of long-term trends in party affiliation among the public provides a detailed portrait of where the parties stand among various groups in the population. It draws on more than 25,000 interviews conducted by the Pew Research Center in 2014, which allows examination of partisan affiliation across even relatively small racial, ethnic, educational and income subgroups.  (Explore detailed tables for 2014 here.)
 
The share of independents in the public, which long ago surpassed the percentages of either Democrats or Republicans, continues to increase. Based on 2014 data, 39% identify as independents, 32% as Democrats and 23% as Republicans. This is the highest percentage of independents in more than 75 years of public opinion polling. (For a timeline of party affiliation among the public since 1939, see this interactive feature.)

When the partisan leanings of independents are taken into account, 48% either identify as Democrats or lean Democratic; 39% identify as Republicans or lean Republican. The gap in leaned party affiliation has held fairly steady since 2009, when Democrats held a 13-point advantage (50% to 37%).

A closer look at …
Race and ethnicity. Republicans hold a 49%-40% lead over the Democrats in leaned party identification among whites. The GOP’s advantage widens to 21 points among white men who have not completed college (54%-33%) and white southerners (55%-34%). The Democrats hold an 80%-11% advantage among blacks, lead by close to three-to-one among Asian Americans (65%-23%) and by more than two-to-one among Hispanics (56%-26%).

Gender. Women lean Democratic by 52%-36%; men are evenly divided (44% identify as Democrats or lean Democratic; 43% affiliate with or lean toward the GOP). Gender differences are evident in nearly all subgroups: For instance, Republicans lead among married men (51%-38%), while married women are evenly divided (44% Republican, 44% Democratic). Democrats hold a substantial advantage among all unmarried adults, but their lead in leaned partisan identification is greater among unmarried women (57%-29%) than among unmarried men (51%-34%).

Education. Democrats lead by 22 points (57%-35%) in leaned party identification among adults with post-graduate degrees. The Democrats’ edge is narrower among those with college degrees or some post-graduate experience (49%-42%), and those with less education (47%-39%).  Across all educational categories, women are more likely than men to affiliate with the Democratic Party or lean Democratic. The Democrats’ advantage is 35 points (64%-29%) among women with post-graduate degrees, but only eight points (50%-42%) among post-grad men.

Generations. Millennials continue to be the most Democratic age cohort; 51% identify as Democrats or lean Democratic, compared with 35% who identify with the GOP or lean Republican. There are only slight differences in partisan affiliation between older and younger millennials. Republicans have a four-point lead among the Silent Generation (47%-43%), the most Republican age cohort.

Religion. Republicans lead in leaned party identification by 48 points among Mormons and 46 points among white evangelical Protestants. Younger white evangelicals (those under age 35) are about as likely older white evangelicals to identify as Republicans or lean Republican. Adults who have no religious affiliation lean Democratic by a wide margins (36 points). Jews lean Democratic by roughly two-to-one (61% to 31%). The balance of leaned partisan affiliation among white Catholics and white mainline Protestants closely resembles that of all whites.

11 comments:

BigDonOne said...

It appears, from the above post, there is nothing wrong with stereotyping if the facts back it up, right...??
Would anyone dare post a similar chart for Various Crimes, OOW breeding%, SAT scorz, ObamaFone ownership, Seect8 occupancy, EeBeTee swipership, etc, with cute little bar graphs for each ethnicity...??

CNu said...

Dave Chappelle was spot on back in the day with his stereotyping of you, your kit and kin, and your funky furtiveness about your politics

https://youtu.be/_ZHrSK0l3dY

Constructive_Feedback said...

[quote]Republicans hold a 49%-40% lead over the Democrats in leaned party identification among whites.


The GOP’s advantage widens to 21 points among white men who have not completed college (54%-33%) and white southerners (55%-34%).


The Democrats hold an 80%-11% advantage among blacks, lead by close to three-to-one among Asian Americans (65%-23%) and by more than two-to-one among Hispanics (56%-26%).[/quote]

Brother CNu:

After our conversations from yesterday I need for you to reaffirm my hope in you, convincing me that you are different than "Lil Pookie N' Dem" at the Washington Post, et al.


In looking at the statistics in bold above - I am come to the conclusion that the AMERICANIZED NEGRO is more pleased that the authors related "Republican Voting INTENSITY" to LACK OF EDUCATION AND SOUTHERNNESS amount WHITE FOLKS...............but when it came to the Negro In America, whose INTENSITY of Democratic Party support trumps the most "RACIST" collection of White folks (The Southern Uneducated White Male at 55%) WHY DO YOU THINK that this "Big Data Analyst" DID NOT dig deeper into the data set of the Negro?

NOT looking at EDUCATION LEVEL, INCOME or CHURCH ATTENDANCE, but instead, choosing to walk down the hall to his fellow FINANCIAL MARKETS ANALYST and asking him: "WHEN YOU SEE A GROUP OF INVESTORS WHO PILE THEIR VALUABLES INTO A FINANCIAL PRODUCT MARKETED BY PARTICULAR FIRM, THROUGH A COMMISSIONED INVESTMENT BROKER and watch as the INVESTORS react when their RETURNS come back and you can't rationalize WHY THEY KEEP INVESTING?

Well In This Case There Is NO ROLE For The "S.E.C.', "FBI", "Federal Open Markets Committee". This is because each time in the past we tried to regulate NEGRO VOTING INVESTMENT PRACTICES, by showing them the conditions of their communities - THEY SAID we were RACISTS and that WE were responsible for the erosion and aborted uplift.

I need your help in isolating THE FORCE that is POSSESSING THEM and how to eradicate it, while retaining your Scientific decorum since "Witch Craft" is not credible in this realm'"

CNu said...

Rev.Fr.Uncle Ruckus!!! PLEASE COME AND HELP ME!!!!!!

Seriously Feed, it never occurred to you to level the same interrogatory at secular, educated, female, asian and mexican voting demographies? Only mentholated American Negroes lack the common sense to vote their interests, the rest of those folks share in common and respond to a wholly different dog-whistle?

BigDonOne said...

BD will see yoour Dave Chappelle and raise you Hillary...

Constructive_Feedback said...

*Uncle Ruckus is ANTI-BLACK PEOPLE (at the Genetic Level)AND Unpopular Among Americanized Blacks
*Various Black Elected Officials Are PRO-Progressive w/ A "Black Front" AND Popular Among Americanized Blacks

Constructive Feedback Is PRO-BLACK INSTITUTIONAL STRENGTH And Hated By Negroes Who Don't Want To Let Loose Of Their PROGRESSIVE FUNDAMENTALISM


Constructive Feedback University is recording and analyzing all of this.


THE ASIAN FEMALE is not looking past the dysfunction of their communities and HANDING MORE VALUABLES to the people who are stealing them.

WHY did you rebut my "Black Question" by pointing to these other population sets?

What debilitates you from explaining the actions of the 'Americanized Negro' as such?

Constructive_Feedback said...

Again I ask:

Why is "Where WHITE PEOPLE Live" more important to you than the fact that the "BLACK FLIGHT PROGRESSIVES" who have voted lock step in support of the new establishment power - DEPARTS these "Mission Accomplished zones" because their BLACK INTERESTS appear to be more assured by the CIVIL RIGHTS LAWS that protect them against their NEW WHITE NEIGHBORS than they appear to have an impact upon the behavior of Street Pirates in the areas they are departing.

ken said...

Its interesting how individuals try to shape the news. This article goes into deep conversation about party affiliation how certain categories of citizens the author chooses to define lean. But doesn't bother to look take his definitions of categories and apply it to the group that has grown the largest in the last 75 years. He has the data of the parties where he puts all his efforts to analyze while leaves the biggest group, the independents without any analysis. Perhaps it was a handbook to let everybody who is independent know what party they should call home.

If one were to analyze this link since 1/2009 it appears the dems contributed 8 points to the independents and the republicans contribute 3 points. Meanwhile the dems back then held a 15 point lead in the leaners, have now lost it all and trail by 2 points.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/15370/party-affiliation.aspx

CNu said...

lol, you sincerely believe that Mentholated Americanized Negroes fail to vote their jnterests - when in fact what is taking place outside of National Elections is that Mentholated Americanized Negroes have become so worn down and apathetic wrt the political process, that by and large they fail to vote at all.

The minority of Mentholated Americanized Negroes who do vote - refuse and resist voting for conservatard candidates who actively dislike them. This leaves a gaggle of long-term, purely political lawyers and preachers who need never demostrate competence or deliver the political pork, when instead they need only deliver the un-Conservatard. A tiny minority of "responsible negroes" has been exploiting the political system now for generations pursuant to its very own personal interests and the modest network of patronage extended to kith and kin.

There. Is that explanation enough f'ya?

CNu said...

If you read the article you'd see that nearly three times the level of Federal and municipal largesse flows into those affluent areas as flows into the perennially impoverished areas. I'm always interested in knowing and understanding where core resources and maximum yield of the public good are concentrated.

ken said...

"In racially concentrated areas of affluence, federal dollars come in the form of the mortgage-interest deduction. In areas of poverty, they come through vouchers and subsidized housing units. In the Twin Cities, the total federal investment in the form of housing dollars in RCAAs was three times larger than the investment in RCAPs. On a per capita basis, it was about equal."


I think in the Twin Cities this is because the goal is to try and create affordable housing for people who really couldn't afford to live in that area of affluence the author talks about. The affluent will already have the low interest rates through a good credit rating and would be over the income threshold to qualify for the federally backed low interest loan. I believe the federal dollars are still aimed for the same low income population.


As for moving on from the RCAP it shouldn't be too hard for people to figure the equation out. I was one who lived in one of those RCAP's for 15 years. It was the only place I could afford if I wanted to own rather than rent. I had generators stolen, came out to find my truck on blocks with the wheels stolen, had my tools stolen, always had to lock up, had my car parked in front of my house crashed into without anybody bothering to come forward and make it right and say they ran into the car, even had used rubbers left in a van the locks didn't work on. I can only imagine this was just a classy free hotel for a street worker. This of course was over some time, but still it was a nuisance.


When I started making more money, it seemed great to have a low mortgage with a high income, and I might have put up with the other crap for the cheap mortgage trade off, but then I realized it wasn't a great trade off when taxes came around. Living in the cheap mortgage home ended up costing $450 a month in taxes compared with buying a higher priced home and deducting more mortgage interest. It was an easy decision to figure which is the better investment, giving an extra 450 bucks a month to the government and putting up with the crap, or buying a home away from all the crap, and spending the 450 bucks into a better house and land that I will give me more equity later. If you want to keep people with more resources in the RCAP, it won't happen with the equation I experienced, which I have to believe is pretty universal.