The Democrat outpaced President-elect Donald Trump by almost 2.9 million votes, with 65,844,954 (48.2%) to his 62,979,879 (46.1%), according to revised and certified final election results from all 50 states and the District of Columbia.
So it’s a bit off.
It’s possible Trump’s voter tend to be higher income than Clinton’s, but this poll is still just one poll and not official count. Also I won’t say lower income automatically implies “uneducated and dumb”. Grad students are often poor but most likely not dumb and definitely pretty well educated.
Hong Kong and Singapore are always at the top spots of Heritage Foundation’s most free economies list, and both have heavily government-subsidized health care systems. So the talk of Obamacare as some sort of socialist scheme always amuses me.
How about this? Later this year all Singaporeans aged 40 and above can get tested for common conditions for $5 at most.
Grad students didn’t vote along with most Millenials. .If Hillary and Bernie supporters had only just bothered to show up at the polls , then they wouldn’t have to now go to street ralllies…But lets face it rioting on the street is more fun…lol
Is it surprising that people that went to college but have low income are democrats? That’s Bernie’s core group. They feel entitled to everything while they pick a “career” based on their passion not earning potential. Liberal arts degrees are basically an indoctrination to socialist beliefs.
What’s the obesity rate in Singapore? How do their chronic disease rates compare to ours?
Using a selected collection of regional data to deduce overall data is less accurate. If you’re aware of the Simpson’s Paradox, in some cases, the global statistics is opposite of most of the regional data appear to be. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simpson’s_paradox.
Trump won because his supporters were passionate. .Hillaries supporters were neither passionate nor committed. …As far as studies. .There lies, damned lies and statistics
True. I am aware of that. That’s why I said it’s only one pass thru the data. It’s not definitive proof. But to me it’s better than jumping from income data in one single poll to conclude on something completely different: education level.
I didn’t infer education level. I just pointed out the voting trend by income level. It does go against the common statement that Trump supporters are uneducated and low-income people from the midwest. People love to point to rich and high education areas like NYC and SF as being liberal. They seem to imply that the elites are democrats with an aura of moral authority. The fact is those areas have some of the worst income inequality. It’s the low income people that are overwhelmingly liberal based on their belief they are entitled to income redistribution from the rich. I also love the irony that the most liberal areas have the biggest increase in income inequality. All the liberal polices are supposes to prevent income inequality.
How do you explain Hillary winning the popular votes? IMHO, the outcome is the result of the Electoral Vote system. Only need to capture the swing states to win. I feel Bernie and Comey damage Hillary in the swing states.
Right. When people say the “uneducated” put trump in the White House they are talking about the 60k or so voters in the rust belt who tilted the election. The traditional divide is still in place. The rich tend to vote R and the poor D.
That’s where the big tension lies. The R congress is still very much looking after the rich and only the rich. Witness the health care bill Ryan put out. But trump owed a lot of his success to the poor who will suffer greatly.
No, it won’t. We are already near full employment. Unless you are talking about passing laws to force small employers to buy insurance for their workers, both full time or part time.
I was referring to the 538 research which found the top educated cities favored Clinton, while most of the least educated cities favored Trump. Simpson’s Paradox says that doesn’t necessarily mean nationwide most of the Trump supporters are uneducated.