Are wealthy white suburbanites generally socially liberal or conservative?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 10:02:37 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Political Geography & Demographics (Moderators: muon2, 15 Down, 35 To Go)
  Are wealthy white suburbanites generally socially liberal or conservative?
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2
Author Topic: Are wealthy white suburbanites generally socially liberal or conservative?  (Read 3358 times)
Frozen Sky Ever Why
ShadowOfTheWave
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,612
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: February 15, 2019, 11:12:59 AM »

In some cases like the Pacific Northwest they seem to be socially liberal, but I've read that wealthy whites in Orange County have historically been extremely socially conservative.
Logged
15 Down, 35 To Go
ExtremeRepublican
Moderator
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,669


Political Matrix
E: 7.35, S: 5.57


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: February 15, 2019, 12:05:37 PM »

Depends on where in the country.  But they mostly run the gamut on social issues (i.e. abortion, religious liberty) but are left of center on cultural issues (i.e. immigration). That's why these voters reacted worse to culturally conservative Trump than they did to socially conservative Bush 43.

Also, contrary to popular belief, evangelical conservatism tends to find its base in the suburbs and among the middle and upper middle classes.
Logged
Ban my account ffs!
snowguy716
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,632
Austria


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: February 15, 2019, 12:19:13 PM »

They’ve shifted leftward almost everywhere since the 90s.
Logged
Insomnian
Rookie
**
Posts: 211


Political Matrix
E: -3.10, S: -1.40

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: February 15, 2019, 02:12:45 PM »

Both. Most Americans with very liberal or conservative social/culture views are wealthy white suburbanites.

In contrast, working-class people and ethnic minorities form a disproportionate percentage of people with moderate, more nuanced views on cultural and social issues.

Which is why I suspect democratic socialism would fix a lot of our vicious cultural/racial wars in the long-run (though not in the short-term, because we'd be bickering about disparate impact).
Logged
RINO Tom
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,002
United States


Political Matrix
E: 2.45, S: -0.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: February 15, 2019, 02:43:00 PM »

Both. Most Americans with very liberal or conservative social/culture views are wealthy white suburbanites.

In contrast, working-class people and ethnic minorities form a disproportionate percentage of people with moderate, more nuanced views on cultural and social issues.


Which is why I suspect democratic socialism would fix a lot of our vicious cultural/racial wars in the long-run (though not in the short-term, because we'd be bickering about disparate impact).

Yep.  Political partisans tend to be more affluent, on average.
Logged
Indy Texas
independentTX
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,258
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.52, S: -3.48

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: February 15, 2019, 04:37:24 PM »

I don't think there's a way to meaningfully generalize them just based on being high-income white people living in suburbs.

There's going to be a lot of cleavage along what their education level is and how often they attend (Christian) religious services.
Logged
Del Tachi
Republican95
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,711
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.52, S: 1.46

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: February 15, 2019, 04:41:19 PM »

They run the gambit.
Logged
ملكة كرينجيتوك
khuzifenq
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,314
United States


P P
WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: February 16, 2019, 04:01:52 AM »

Both. Most Americans with very liberal or conservative social/culture views are wealthy white suburbanites.

In contrast, working-class people and ethnic minorities form a disproportionate percentage of people with moderate, more nuanced views on cultural and social issues.

This is why the term "SJW" has a connotation of whiteness, even though archetypal "social justice warrior" views are commonly held among young educated people of all races.
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderators
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: February 16, 2019, 04:03:16 AM »

Religion is the primary determinant and the tendency for religiosity among societal elites tends to wane over time, that includes the Middle Class suburbs. As religion has shifted more down market so too has the GOP.


Depends on where in the country.  But they mostly run the gamut on social issues (i.e. abortion, religious liberty) but are left of center on cultural issues (i.e. immigration). That's why these voters reacted worse to culturally conservative Trump than they did to socially conservative Bush 43.

Also, contrary to popular belief, evangelical conservatism tends to find its base in the suburbs and among the middle and upper middle classes.

Suburbs were Republican for so long because of cultural issues. Busing and crime were the social issues par none that motivated lily white suburbia to turn out for people like Nixon and Reagan. The threat of "those people" moving in and causing crime was an omnipresent reality that motivated GOP voting habits.

The immigration issue played as a crime issue in a lot of these suburbs. Remember if you go back 12 years, the biggest border hawks and anti-pathway legislators, were those in the suburbs of SoCal (Duncan Hunter Sr, Elton Gallegly and Brian Bilbray), Texas (Lamar Smith, Tom Delay and others), Denver (Tom Tancredo), Charlotte (Sue Myrick), and Pheonix (JD Hayworth).

Pat McCrory and Mitt Romney, both found their bases in high end, high educated suburbs ran as business Republicans generally, but used immigration to get to the right of their primary opponents. McCrory ran adds in 2008 about cracking down on "Crime, Gangs and Illegal Aliens". Romney attacked McCain and Rudy for supporting amnesty in the Comprehensive Immigration Reform disaster of 2007. He used the issue again in 2012 against Rick Perry and Newt Gingrich.

This is not by accident either, the rising demographic, pushed the traditional power dynamic to the extreme since it feared losing power. You don't see it now as much, because that has come and gone and most of these districts are represented by Democrats now and maybe had a an immigration moderate serves as a transitional prelude to the rising Democratic majority. A historical parallel to the same dynamic is the UES side of New York which went from 1930s: Anti-New Deal Establishment Conservative> late 50's: Liberal Republican > late 60's: Liberal Democrat.

Call it the three stages of transitioning districts/states: Reaction to Rising Democratic>Moderation with Rising Demographic>Consumed by Rising Demographic
Logged
Cassandra
Situationist
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,673


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: February 16, 2019, 07:57:46 AM »

That depends on whether they are religious.

EDIT:

This, though I'm not convinced that the GOP is really significantly less middle class now than it was ten years ago.

Religion is the primary determinant and the tendency for religiosity among societal elites tends to wane over time, that includes the Middle Class suburbs. As religion has shifted more down market so too has the GOP.
Logged
Intell
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,817
Nepal


Political Matrix
E: -6.71, S: -1.24

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: February 16, 2019, 09:03:38 AM »

Religion is the primary determinant and the tendency for religiosity among societal elites tends to wane over time, that includes the Middle Class suburbs. As religion has shifted more down market so too has the GOP.


Depends on where in the country.  But they mostly run the gamut on social issues (i.e. abortion, religious liberty) but are left of center on cultural issues (i.e. immigration). That's why these voters reacted worse to culturally conservative Trump than they did to socially conservative Bush 43.

Also, contrary to popular belief, evangelical conservatism tends to find its base in the suburbs and among the middle and upper middle classes.

Suburbs were Republican for so long because of cultural issues. Busing and crime were the social issues par none that motivated lily white suburbia to turn out for people like Nixon and Reagan. The threat of "those people" moving in and causing crime was an omnipresent reality that motivated GOP voting habits.

The immigration issue played as a crime issue in a lot of these suburbs. Remember if you go back 12 years, the biggest border hawks and anti-pathway legislators, were those in the suburbs of SoCal (Duncan Hunter Sr, Elton Gallegly and Brian Bilbray), Texas (Lamar Smith, Tom Delay and others), Denver (Tom Tancredo), Charlotte (Sue Myrick), and Pheonix (JD Hayworth).

Pat McCrory and Mitt Romney, both found their bases in high end, high educated suburbs ran as business Republicans generally, but used immigration to get to the right of their primary opponents. McCrory ran adds in 2008 about cracking down on "Crime, Gangs and Illegal Aliens". Romney attacked McCain and Rudy for supporting amnesty in the Comprehensive Immigration Reform disaster of 2007. He used the issue again in 2012 against Rick Perry and Newt Gingrich.

This is not by accident either, the rising demographic, pushed the traditional power dynamic to the extreme since it feared losing power. You don't see it now as much, because that has come and gone and most of these districts are represented by Democrats now and maybe had a an immigration moderate serves as a transitional prelude to the rising Democratic majority. A historical parallel to the same dynamic is the UES side of New York which went from 1930s: Anti-New Deal Establishment Conservative> late 50's: Liberal Republican > late 60's: Liberal Democrat.

Call it the three stages of transitioning districts/states: Reaction to Rising Democratic>Moderation with Rising Demographic>Consumed by Rising Demographic

The UES/wealthy parts anyway is still very much establishment moderate Republicans.
Logged
Oryxslayer
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,726


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: February 16, 2019, 10:02:11 AM »
« Edited: February 17, 2019, 04:37:26 PM by Oryxslayer »

I mean, we can just look at Texas to see just how much these types of voters can differ depending on their views, the economic environment, polarization, and the candidates offered. \

First you have the Houston suburbs which are blood red. Characterized best by Montgomery county, you got the racial and religious factors at play here like in other Southern Suburbs.

 Heading North to Dallas, we find wealthy regions more in line with the Sun-Belt style trends of 2016. The Uber-Wealthy regions like Highland Park are still red, but 2018 showed that the dems are now winning all of north Dallas and pushing North and west into places like Arlington and Plano. This trend seems to be more anti-trump and a rejection of the modern republican party, rather then true policy concerns.

Heading South we hit the Liberal Mecca of Austin. As we saw in 2018, Austin is expanding and those blue migrants are converting her suburbs. Migration of Democrats is the main driver here, and these people already have prescribed views. Wealth is therefore not the main demographic variable.

I'm skipping San Antonia, because its hard to get a read from a birds eye view on the wealthy whites in a region where most towns and precincts have significant minority population.
Logged
Associate Justice PiT
PiT (The Physicist)
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,135
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: February 16, 2019, 04:37:17 PM »

     Ten degrees to the left of center in good times. Ten degrees to the right of center if it affects them personally. I wonder if anyone knows the song I am referencing here.
Logged
Mr. Illini
liberty142
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,838
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.26, S: -3.30

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: February 17, 2019, 02:31:13 PM »

    Ten degrees to the left of center in good times. Ten degrees to the right of center if it affects them personally. I wonder if anyone knows the song I am referencing here.

Phil Ochs!
Logged
Indy Texas
independentTX
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,258
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.52, S: -3.48

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: February 17, 2019, 03:17:02 PM »

I mean, we can just look at Texas to see just how much these types of voters can differ depending on their views, the economic environment, polarization, and the candidates offered. \

First you have the Houston suburbs which are blood red. Characterized best by Montgomery county, you got the racial and religious factors at play here like in other Southern Suburbs. Heading North to Dallas, we find wealthy regions more in line with the Sun-Belt style trends of 2016.

The Uber-Wealthy regions like Highland Park are still red, but 2018 showed that the dems are now winning all of north Dallas and pushing North and west into places like Arlington and Plano. This trend seems to be more anti-trump and a rejection of the modern republican party, rather then true policy concerns.

Heading South we hit the Liberal Mecca of Austin. As we saw in 2018, Austin is expanding and those blue migrants are converting her suburbs. Migration of Democrats is the main driver here, and these people already have prescribed views. Wealth is therefore not the main demographic variable.

I'm skipping San Antonia, because its hard to get a read from a birds eye view on the wealthy whites in a region where most towns and precincts have significant minority population.

Whites in San Antonio have historically been very Republican. There's the effect of many of them being active/retired military, and the fact that the San Antonio area is the only part of Texas where there was a significant Republican tradition prior to the late 20th century. San Antonio doesn't have any major universities or other institutions that would serve as a "draw" for white liberals.
Logged
Indy Texas
independentTX
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,258
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.52, S: -3.48

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: February 17, 2019, 03:19:41 PM »

Both. Most Americans with very liberal or conservative social/culture views are wealthy white suburbanites.

In contrast, working-class people and ethnic minorities form a disproportionate percentage of people with moderate, more nuanced views on cultural and social issues.


Which is why I suspect democratic socialism would fix a lot of our vicious cultural/racial wars in the long-run (though not in the short-term, because we'd be bickering about disparate impact).

Yep.  Political partisans tend to be more affluent, on average.

Hence the quote about how the reason American politics is so off the rails is because one party is run by people who don't need anything from the government and the other is run by people who don't expect anything from the government.
Logged
Tekken_Guy
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,767
United States


P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: February 17, 2019, 06:30:12 PM »

They tend to be more liberal than the country overall. They’re culturally cosmopolitan and open to things like feminism, immigration, and LGBT rights. I think some southern rich conservatives may still be iffy on abortion, though.
Logged
OSR stands with Israel
Computer89
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,357


Political Matrix
E: 3.42, S: 2.61

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: February 17, 2019, 06:54:47 PM »

Depends on how you define Social Issues,


If it is about the religious right than no they are socially liberal but if you include cultural issues than many are culturally conservative. Orange County pre 2008 is one of the biggest example of this along with many others suburbs
Logged
15 Down, 35 To Go
ExtremeRepublican
Moderator
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,669


Political Matrix
E: 7.35, S: 5.57


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: February 17, 2019, 08:41:47 PM »

They tend to be more liberal than the country overall. They’re culturally cosmopolitan and open to things like feminism, immigration, and LGBT rights. I think some southern rich conservatives may still be iffy on abortion, though.

Iffy on abortion?  Southern rich conservatives are overwhelmingly vehemently pro-life.  In fact, I would call that group the base/leader of pro-life movements.
Logged
Indy Texas
independentTX
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,258
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.52, S: -3.48

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: February 18, 2019, 12:48:55 AM »

They tend to be more liberal than the country overall. They’re culturally cosmopolitan and open to things like feminism, immigration, and LGBT rights. I think some southern rich conservatives may still be iffy on abortion, though.

Iffy on abortion?  Southern rich conservatives are overwhelmingly vehemently pro-life.  In fact, I would call that group the base/leader of pro-life movements.

It depends on their religious beliefs.

There are Episcopalian "country club Republicans" in the suburbs of Atlanta and Dallas who are personally indifferent to abortion and are fine with letting the pro-lifers have what they want as long as they get their tax cuts and deregulation.
Logged
HagridOfTheDeep
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,720
Canada


Political Matrix
E: -6.19, S: -4.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: February 18, 2019, 01:14:05 AM »

I suspect they are "pluralistic" in a shallow sense that lets them accept diversity so long as it does not require them to question their own privilege or the ways they have benefited from the historic and ongoing systematic marginalization of others.

So, for example, they are socially liberal up to the point where someone challenges them on their uncritical use of "cotton-pickin'" as an adjective. They are accepting until they talk about the "poor white boys" who have "less of a chance" at getting accepted into police training programs because of the push to have the police force be more representative of the communities they serve. They value diversity until someone challenges their understanding of gender by asking them to "please refer to me with another pronoun." They are socially liberal until a friend pipes up and says that immigrants should have to speak English.

In other words, they are lazy. They're socially liberal when it requires no work but instinctively inclined towards reproducing the sameness that they're most used to in their relatively homogenous and comfortable social circles. They may not be racists, but they're nowhere near ready or willing to do the difficult work of antiracism, either.
Logged
Associate Justice PiT
PiT (The Physicist)
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,135
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: February 18, 2019, 01:20:06 AM »

    Ten degrees to the left of center in good times. Ten degrees to the right of center if it affects them personally. I wonder if anyone knows the song I am referencing here.

Phil Ochs!

     Good taste. Smiley
Logged
courts
Ghost_white
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,466
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: February 18, 2019, 08:18:28 AM »

Depends on where in the country.  But they mostly run the gamut on social issues (i.e. abortion, religious liberty) but are left of center on cultural issues (i.e. immigration). That's why these voters reacted worse to culturally conservative Trump than they did to socially conservative Bush 43.

Also, contrary to popular belief, evangelical conservatism tends to find its base in the suburbs and among the middle and upper middle classes.
i wonder why there's such a widespread misunderstanding on this?
Logged
Goldwater
Republitarian
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,064
United States


Political Matrix
E: 1.55, S: -4.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: February 18, 2019, 12:25:51 PM »

Depends on where in the country.  But they mostly run the gamut on social issues (i.e. abortion, religious liberty) but are left of center on cultural issues (i.e. immigration). That's why these voters reacted worse to culturally conservative Trump than they did to socially conservative Bush 43.

Also, contrary to popular belief, evangelical conservatism tends to find its base in the suburbs and among the middle and upper middle classes.
i wonder why there's such a widespread misunderstanding on this?

Probably because of the idea that being a religious fundamentalist equals being stupid, and the idea that being stupid equals being backwoods and poor.
Logged
DC Al Fine
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,085
Canada


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: February 19, 2019, 01:00:22 PM »

Depends on where in the country.  But they mostly run the gamut on social issues (i.e. abortion, religious liberty) but are left of center on cultural issues (i.e. immigration). That's why these voters reacted worse to culturally conservative Trump than they did to socially conservative Bush 43.

Also, contrary to popular belief, evangelical conservatism tends to find its base in the suburbs and among the middle and upper middle classes.
i wonder why there's such a widespread misunderstanding on this?

Probably because of the idea that being a religious fundamentalist equals being stupid, and the idea that being stupid equals being backwoods and poor.

Related:

Fewer people identify as Evangelical as education increases,  but those that do are much more likely to attend church, and presumably participate in religious right politics than the typical Evangelical. This anomaly means that you'll find few Evangelicals in a typical professional workplace (like say a newsroom Tongue), but you will find plenty of educated people in an Evangelical church service.

This phenomenon has a name in statistics but I'm blanking on what it's called. I suspect it has a lot to do with the stereotype.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.058 seconds with 12 queries.