Difference between Democratic margin of the vote among under $30,000 voters and the national popular vote (Election margin/under $30,000 margin)
2004 | +23% (-03%/+20%)
2008 | +26% (+07%/+33%)
2012 | +24% (+04%/+28%)
2016 | +10% (+02%/+12%)
Takeaway: Clinton experienced a significant drop in support among the traditionally Democratic under $30,000 income category in 2016.
Difference between Democratic margin of the vote among $30,000-49,999 and the national popular vote (Election margin/$30,000-49,999 margin)
2004 | +04% (-03%/+01%)
2008 | +05% (+07%/+12%)
2012 | +11% (+04%/+15%)
2016 | +07% (+02%/+09%)
Takeaway: Obama seems to have surged among this group in 2012, both his margin and his deviation, despite having decreased in overall support from 2008. Clinton did not entirely hold these gains, but still did better than Obama in 2008 in deviation and Kerry in 2004 in margin.
Difference between Democratic margin of the vote among $50,000-99,999 voters and the national popular vote (Election margin/$50,000-99,999 margin)
2004 | -09% (-03%/-12%)
2008 | -07% (+07%/00%)
2012 | -10% (+04%/-06%)
2016 | -06% (+02%/-04%)
Takeaway: Clinton improved upon Obama's 2012 margin with this group and still performed better than Kerry. In terms of deviation, Clinton did better than Obama and Kerry.
Difference between Democratic margin of the vote among $100,000-199,999 voters and the national popular vote (Election margin/$100,000-199,999 margin)
2004 | -12% (-03%/-15%)
2008 | -10% (+07%/-03%)
2012 | -14% (+04%/-10%)
2016 | -03% (+02%/-01%)
Takeaway: Clinton made substantial inroads among this high income category while simultaneously plummeting among the lowest income category.
Difference between Democratic margin of the vote among $200,000+ voters and the national popular vote (Election margin/$200,000+ margin)
2004 | -25% (-03%/-28%)
2008 | -01% (+07%/+06%)
2012 | -14% (+04%/-10%)
2016 | -04% (+02%/-02%)
Takeaway: Obama (2008) and Clinton (2016) made significant inroads among this income category, but it shows itself to be incredibly elastic and very favorable to a Republican candidate who is seen as pro-business/tax cuts/deregulation.
New York TimesIs there anything in this data that stands out to you? Or that you came to a different conclusion than me?