But it uses median household income, which is not the best measurement IMO in defining "working poor". Doesn't mean it's wrong or even off; even "average household income" would be similarly skewed. Separating presidential preference by specific income bracket, and those by percentage of state electorate (not national: we all know Hillary won the popular vote, which is not how we elect presidents, unfortunately) might give me a better grasp on agreement with your original premise.
But for all I know this is the best way this can be measured.
The link is most interesting -- relative to me, anyway -- in its blaming Bernie Sanders for "the most dishonest liberal saying". I would have expected nothing less from a writer from Jezebel.
"working poor" does not = "poorly educated" most certainly does not = "hillbilly"
"Blue collar whites" may correlate to "working poor" depending on how the terms are are defined and then how they are polled/surveyed, and there may some overlap of the demographic circles. But I am dubious there is enough to stretch to the assertion made (of which I will patiently wait for some verification nevertheless).
the "Democrat" as old, white, male, and fatigued, while the "Republican" is the same except for the exhausted part? Passivity replaced with high aggression and agitation?
The message we all get, the one the GOP regularly sends to women who dare speak up on their own behalf -- or for a better world -- is clear but I'm not sure the poor lady trembling back over to the slouchy, condescending Dem is the outreach effort the party would wish to have shown. Even in satire.
Course it's just a toon; maybe shouldn't read too much into it.