Voting by Income

[nclib]

55% of voters nationwide made more than $50,000. In 47 states, voters making over 50K were more Republican. In Wash. and N.D., wealthier voters (over 50K) were slightly more Democratic and in Neb. the result was the same.

This is the state-by-state map of voters making over 50K...



Map of those making under 50K...



LA and SC were toss-ups. DC should be 90%.

[nclib]

These maps are interesting since the wealthier states are more likely to vote Democratic.

[nclib]

I think PA (over 100K) should be blue.

[nclib]

Whoever the next DNC chair is better work on registering low income voters.  So many people dont vote its ridiculous.

It would be interesting to see these results broken down by race. Clearly the fact that Kerry won Mississippians under 50K is because that demographic in Miss. is predominantly black.

[nclib]

Here are some other maps that may be of interest.  They compare, state by state, people earning under the two thresholds and people earning over the two thresholds:

Threshold of $50,000:



Key:

Percentages are calculated as follows:

(% on map) = (% under threshold) - (% over threshold).

  > 10% Bush
  < 10% (either)
  > 10% Kerry
  > 20% Kerry
  > 30% Kerry

Percentages of 50% for either candidates were considered to be equivalent.

How exactly are you calculating this?

Take Alabama...


            Kerry      Bush
<50K      50          48
>50K      78          22


Would the number on the map be...

26 (48-22)

or

54 (78-22-(50-48))

[nclib]

How exactly are you calculating this?

Take Alabama...


 Kerry Bush
<50K 50 48
>50K 78 22


Would the number on the map be...

26 (48-22)

or

54 (78-22-(50-48))

I basically consider 50% to be 0 (neither candidate has any significant advantage), and any tilt to Bush to be a negative number and any tilt to Kerry to be a positive number (this is purely arbitrary; you could do it either way).  I went purely off of the maps given, so some roundoff error is probably in effect.

For example, let's take Alabama, as it's the state that you considered:

Over $50,000:

In Alabama, these people went 70% Bush, so that's -20.


Under $50,000:

In Alabama, these people went 50% Kerry, so that's 0.

The difference between the second and the first is

d = 0 - (-20) = 20

20 is positive, so that's a 20% difference in favor of Kerry between low income people and higher income people.

I think this methodology makes sense, though I'm not 100% sure.  Tell me if something seems off.

Your methodology is not completely accurate, though I'm not sure if it would change any of the shadings on your map.

Let's say State X went for Bush with 72% in the over 50K map. But it went Bush with 58K in the under 50K map.

Your map would show it as >20, when the difference actually is 14 (>10).

Nice maps, though. How are you making them?

[nclib]

Here are some other maps that may be of interest.  They compare, state by state, people earning under the two thresholds and people earning over the two thresholds:

Threshold of $50,000:



Threshold of $100,000:



Key:

Percentages are calculated as follows:

(% on map) = (% under threshold) - (% over threshold).

  > 10% Bush
  < 10% (either)
  > 10% Kerry
  > 20% Kerry
  > 30% Kerry

Percentages of 50% for either candidates were considered to be equivalent.

Note: No, the color of Maine in the second map is not an error.  For whatever reason, richer people voted more Democratic than poorer people did in that state with the $100,000 threshold applied.  Nowhere else in any state did that happen.

Gabu, how are you making these maps?