The Myth Of Trump’s ‘Working Class’ Support

Recent Forum Topics Forums The Public House The Myth Of Trump’s ‘Working Class’ Support

Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #49675
    zn
    Moderator

    The Mythology Of Trump’s ‘Working Class’ Support
    His voters are better off economically compared with most Americans.

    http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-mythology-of-trumps-working-class-support/

    It’s been extremely common for news accounts to portray Donald Trump’s candidacy as a “working-class” rebellion against Republican elites. There are elements of truth in this perspective: Republican voters, especially Trump supporters, are unhappy about the direction of the economy. Trump voters have lower incomes than supporters of John Kasich or Marco Rubio. And things have gone so badly for the Republican “establishment” that the party may be facing an existential crisis.

    But the definition of “working class” and similar terms is fuzzy, and narratives like these risk obscuring an important and perhaps counterintuitive fact about Trump’s voters: As compared with most Americans, Trump’s voters are better off. The median household income of a Trump voter so far in the primaries is about $72,000, based on estimates derived from exit polls and Census Bureau data. That’s lower than the $91,000 median for Kasich voters. But it’s well above the national median household income of about $56,000. It’s also higher than the median income for Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders supporters, which is around $61,000 for both.

    These figures, as I mentioned, are derived from exit polls, which so far have been conducted in 23 primary states.1 The exit polls have asked voters to describe their 2015 family income by using one of five broad categories, ranging from “under $30,000” to “$200,000 or more.” It’s fairly straightforward to interpolate a median income for voters of each candidate from this data; for instance, we can infer that the median Clinton voter in Wisconsin made about $63,000.2 You can find my estimates for each candidate in each state in the following table, along with each state’s overall household median income in 2015.3

    MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOME
    STATE STATEWIDE* CLINTON SANDERS CRUZ KASICH TRUMP
    Maryland $79k $92k $77k $92k $119k $95k
    New Hampshire 76 84 69 77 99 78
    Connecticut 73 102 75 101 119 99
    Virginia 69 83 71 79 114 82
    Massachusetts 65 87 68 84 107 93
    Vermont 63 80 61 62 85 70
    Wisconsin 60 63 63 80 76 69
    Missouri 59 58 53 64 80 62
    Illinois 57 61 66 74 99 79
    Pennsylvania 57 59 57 64 83 71
    New York 56 64 65 56 83 85
    Texas 56 63 62 82 98 78
    Michigan 54 56 51 62 75 61
    Georgia 51 59 55 88 89 70
    Ohio 51 59 62 62 92 64
    Oklahoma 49 57 54 71 102 69
    Florida 48 51 50 64 87 70
    North Carolina 48 59 56 74 92 62
    Arkansas 47 47 49 67 67 63
    South Carolina 47 39 47 64 108 72
    Tennessee 45 61 52 73 82 64
    Alabama 44 44 53 63 75 58
    Mississippi 37 38 39 64 97 62
    All states** 56 61 61 73 91 72
    Trump voters, like others in the GOP, have relatively high incomes
    * The state median includes all households, not just those that voted in the primaries.
    ** The aggregate estimate is weighted based on the number of votes a candidate received in each state.

    SOURCE: EDISON RESEARCH EXIT POLLS, CENSUS BUREAU

    Trump voters’ median income exceeded the overall statewide median in all 23 states, sometimes narrowly (as in New Hampshire or Missouri) but sometimes substantially. In Florida, for instance, the median household income for Trump voters was about $70,000, compared with $48,000 for the state as a whole. The differences are usually larger in states with substantial non-white populations, as black and Hispanic voters are overwhelmingly Democratic and tend to have lower incomes. In South Carolina, for example, the median Trump supporter had a household income of $72,000, while the median for Clinton supporters was $39,000.

    Ted Cruz voters have a similar median income to Trump supporters — about $73,000. Kasich’s supporters have a very high median income, $91,000, and it has exceeded $100,000 in several states. Rubio’s voters, not displayed in the table above, followed a similar pattern to Kasich voters, with a median income of $88,000.

    Many of the differences reflect that Republican voters are wealthier overall than Democratic ones, and also that wealthier Americans are more likely to turn out to vote, especially in the primaries. However, while Republican turnout has considerably increased overall from four years ago, there’s no sign of a particularly heavy turnout among “working-class” or lower-income Republicans. On average in states where exit polls were conducted both this year and in the Republican campaign four years ago, 29 percent of GOP voters have had household incomes below $50,000 this year, compared with 31 percent in 2012.

    STATE 2012 2016
    Alabama 37% 41%
    Florida 34 33
    Georgia 24 26
    Illinois 28 23
    Maryland 19 19
    Massachusetts 24 20
    Michigan 35 37
    Mississippi 36 37
    New Hampshire 26 27
    Ohio 32 30
    Oklahoma 41 30
    South Carolina 36 27
    Tennessee 35 33
    Vermont 37 30
    Virginia 25 19
    Wisconsin 32 28
    Average 31 29
    Share of Republican electorate with household income below $50,000
    SOURCE: EDISON RESEARCH EXIT POLLS

    The median income for Clinton and Sanders voters — $61,000 for each candidate — is generally much closer to the overall median income in each state. But even Democratic turnout tends to skew slightly toward a wealthier electorate, somewhat validating Sanders’s claim that “poor people don’t vote.” I estimate that 27 percent of American households had incomes under $30,000 last year. By comparison, 20 percent of Clinton voters did, as did 18 percent of Sanders supporters. (Those figures imply Clinton might have a bigger edge on Sanders if more poor people voted, although it would depend on whether they were black, white or Hispanic.) Both Democratic candidates do better than the Republicans in this category, however. Only 12 percent of Trump voters have incomes below $30,000; when you also consider that Clinton has more votes than Trump overall, that means about twice as many low-income voters have cast a ballot for Clinton than for Trump so far this year.

    SHARE OF VOTERS
    HOUSEHOLD INCOME SHARE OF ALL U.S. H’HOLDS CLINTON SANDERS CRUZ KASICH TRUMP
    <$30,000 27% 20% 18% 11% 9% 12%
    $30,000-$49,999 18 21 23 17 14 20
    $50,000-$99,999 29 30 34 41 31 34
    $100,000-$199,999 20 22 21 25 32 25
    ≥$200,000 6 7 5 6 14 9
    Low-income voters are underrepresented, especially in the GOP
    SOURCE: EDISON RESEARCH EXIT POLLS

    Class in America is a complicated concept, and it may be that Trump supporters see themselves as having been left behind in other respects. Since almost all of Trump’s voters so far in the primaries have been non-Hispanic whites, we can ask whether they make lower incomes than other white Americans, for instance. The answer is “no.” The median household income for non-Hispanic whites is about $62,000,4 still a fair bit lower than the $72,000 median for Trump voters.

    Likewise, although about 44 percent of Trump supporters have college degrees, according to exit polls — lower than the 50 percent for Cruz supporters or 64 percent for Kasich supporters — that’s still higher than the 33 percent of non-Hispanic white adults, or the 29 percent of American adults overall, who have at least a bachelor’s degree.

    This is not to say that Trump voters are happy about the condition of the economy. Substantial majorities of Republicans in every state so far have said they’re “very worried” about the condition of the U.S. economy, according to exit polls, and these voters have been more likely to vote for Trump. But that anxiety doesn’t necessarily reflect their personal economic circumstances, which for many Trump voters, at least in a relative sense, are reasonably good.

    #49684
    Billy_T
    Participant

    Side note:

    I get the point of the article. And it accords with what I’ve seen elsewhere. But on a side note, I wish they’d stop using “household income.” I think this tends to downplay the rotten wages Americans actually make as individuals. It basically doubles them, and helps hide the truly obscene differences between the haves and the have nots, even between the true “working class” and the middle.

    The median income for individuals is less than 30K a year. “Households” can include several income earners at the same time, and most include at least two. And since the topic of the article was a comparison between voters based on income, it seems especially strange to talk about household income. The relevant figure for one voter would be one income, not a household’s.

    #49686
    wv
    Participant

    What is ‘median income’ ?

    I mean is that one of those deals where
    one family can earn a billion dollars a year
    and a bunch of other families can earn 15K a year,
    but the ‘median income’ will then be a hundred million dollars, er somethin ?

    w
    v

    #49688
    Billy_T
    Participant

    What is ‘median income’ ?

    I mean is that one of those deals where
    one family can earn a billion dollars a year
    and a bunch of other families can earn 15K a year,
    but the ‘median income’ will then be a hundred million dollars, er somethin ?

    w
    v

    WV,

    Half above, half below. Two equal halves. At least that’s the theoretical meaning of the term.

    #49711
    InvaderRam
    Moderator

    yes it prevents outliers from skewing the results.

    • This reply was modified 8 years, 2 months ago by InvaderRam.
Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Comments are closed.