<http://www.princeton.edu/~bartels/kansas.pdf>
What’s the Matter with What’s the Matter with Kansas?
Larry M. Bartels
Department of Politics and Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, Princeton University
● Has the white working class abandoned the Democratic Party?
^^^^ CB: How about over the last 40 years ?
^^^^ No. White voters in the bottom third of the income distribution have actually become more reliably Democratic in presidential elections over the past half-century, while middle- and upper-income white voters have trended Republican.
^^^^^ CB: If the top two-thirds incomed working class have become more Republican, then the answer above should be "Yes", not "No".
^^^^
Low-income whites have become less Democratic in their partisan identifications, but at a slower rate than more affluent whites – and
that trend is entirely confined to the South, where Democratic identification was artificially inflated by the one-party system of the Jim Crow era.
^^^^^ CB: That's what should be measured here - since Jime Crow. Since Jim Crow was substantially defeated with LBJ leading the way, the Republicans with Nixon, Buchannan and then Reagan have perpetrated the racist "Southern Strategy" based on white working class people voting Republican against the Democrat Party for leading the passage of anti-Jim Crow federal legislation.
^^^^
^^^^^
● Has the white working class become more conservative? No. The average views of low- income whites have remained virtually unchanged over the past 30 years.
^^^^^ CB: But before 30 years ago they were _voting_ Democratic Party, until Nixon and then Reagan awakened the racist , white backlash and targetted it against the DP.
^^^^
^^^^ (A pro-choice shift on abortion in the 1970s and ‘80s has been partially reversed since the
early 1990s.) Their positions relative to more affluent white voters – generally less liberal on social issues and less conservative on economic issues – have also remained virtually unchanged.
● Do working class “moral values” trump economics? No. Social issues (including abortion) are less strongly related to party identification and presidential votes than economic issues are, and that is even more true for whites in the bottom third of the income distribution than for more affluent whites. Moreover, while social issue preferences have become
more strongly related to presidential votes among middle- and high-income whites, there is no evidence of a corresponding trend among low-income whites.
^^^^^ CB: How about "cultural" , i.e. code word for race issues ?
^^^^
● Are religious voters distracted from economic issues? No. The partisan attachments and presidential votes of frequent church-goers and people who say religion provides “a great deal” of guidance in their lives are much more strongly related to their views about economic issues than to their views about social issues. For church-goers as for non-
church-goers, partisanship and voting behavior are primarily shaped by economic issues, not cultural issues.
^^^^^ CB: This seems to imply that working class people from the upper two-thirds of income have an economic interest best served by the Republican Party . Isn't that what _is_ wrong with "Kansas" ?
>From this summary , Bartels seems to willfully give nonsensical
interpretations to his "own" data.
___________________________________ http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
This message has been scanned for malware by SurfControl plc. www.surfcontrol.com