When does your income determine the way you vote?

[Swede]

snip

Historically, Republicans stand with business, while Democrats side with labor. It's a pretty coarse division - most political classifications are - but it should mean that, in general, richer people will tend to vote Republican, while poorer people will vote Democratic. And that pattern has more or less held true since the times of Franklin D. Roosevelt and the New Deal.

Except that seems to create a paradox - Democrats tend to do much better in richer states along the coasts, while Republicans clean up in the poorer states of the South and Midwest. So how do you square that with the income pattern I just described? According to research led by Columbia's Andrew Gelman, it's all a matter of geography.

In Democratic states, there's practically no difference between how the rich and poor vote, which tilts the scales back towards the left. In right-leaning states, the rich almost completely vote Republican. On a national level, the overall pattern doesn't look any different from how it did in the 1930s or 1940s, but that's just because two opposing, extreme regions happen to average together to the same basic trend.

http://io9.com/5678987/when-does-your-income-determine-the-way-you-vote

[JoePhilly]

1. Just tell the poor whites that they are the most patriotic ...

and you win.

[CBR]

3. +1 nt

[NotThisTime]

5. Exactly, it's not just income it's education and fear.... or lack thereof....

put any combination together and people will vote against their interests as they have done for years

[brewens]

10. How rich would you have to be for it to really be in your best

interest to vote Republican? I know people in the $70k range that think they are there. I say they aren't even close. I like to call it "house N-word" syndrome. The same thing plantation owners used against the slaves. Let the ones that have things just a little better, feel superior and make them afraid of going back to the fields.
They want middle class people to hate poor people. That keeps them from looking at the real crooks at the top.

[Naturyl]

2. Always. At my income level, there's only one sane way to vote

And that's Green.

But since that's not a viable option, Democratic.

[Xipe Totec]

4. I do not begrudge anybody pulling a cool quarter million a year voting republican

They would be voting their interests and I respect that.

Anybody else voting republican is a fucking idiot.

[leftstreet]

6. How can Dems "side with labor" when there are no fucking jobs?

At least the author said 'historically'

[Brickbat]

7. Oh, there are jobs, and union jobs...

...but those of us in labor have been feeling a little under-the-bussish the last couple years.

[NoNothing]

8. Another wrinkle

Is that increasingly "siding with labor" = "bigger government." This is an uncomfortable box to be in.

[county worker]

9. Here in Santa Barbara County we re-elected Barbara Boxer and Lois Capps

Santa Barbara the city is pretty wealthy but the Dems out number the Repubs. The split is north and south. The south county has mostly Dems and they are for land preservation and coastal preservation. The northern Repubs are all about development and cheap farm labor. We have a large immigrant population but the only time that comes into play is with the issue of gangs in the north county. I most also add that the wealthy don't mind the cheap domestic labor and the cheap service industry labor.