Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock


Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict


Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links


Regional News


News Publications

A Tale of Two American parties
Posted by: McQ on Friday, November 23, 2007

Can't wait to see what John Edwards has to say about this:
Democrats like to define themselves as the party of poor and middle-income Americans, but a new study says they now represent the majority of the nation's wealthiest congressional districts.
"Democrats: Party of the Rich". Great bumpersticker, no?
Return to Main Blog Page

Previous Comments to this Post 

This is news how? LOL.

Some very poor inner-city areas are strongly Democrat but the urban areas in general are far richer than non-urban areas and tend strongly Democrat. Democratic politicians, for all the hubbub about King George being so well off, are usually rich and quite often inherited it.

In fly over land where a whole lot of people are poor some are Democrat and some are Republican and often enough ever so slightly more of them are Republican.

The idea that one party represents or is made up of more poor people and one is made up of more rich people is silly.

The Democrats supposedly *also* represent Women, Gays, Blacks, Hispanics,... who else? But words aside, none of those groups is exclusive to or even, really, completely dominated by Democrats. Why do we let them get away with pretending they are?
Written By: Synova
Democrats like to define themselves as the party of poor and middle-income Americans, but a new study says they now represent the majority of the nation’s wealthiest congressional districts.
This is hardly surprising. The more wealthy tend to better educated. Generally speaking, the better educated tend to vote Democratic. Hence, the more wealthy tend to be Democratic.

It’s the same reason that the "welfare" States - i.e., those that get more in Federal benefits than they contribute - tend to be red States.

That said, the Democrats tend to define themselves as being more concerned about poor and middle income Americans. (The Moonie Times, of course, doesn’t understand the distinction.) Of course, one can be in any income range and share this concern.
Written By: mkultra
URL: http://
Generally speaking, the better educated tend to vote Democratic
So, the fact that you do is merely a statistical fluke then.
Written By: looker
URL: http://
Generally speaking, the better educated tend to vote Democratic.
Seemingly lending credence to Heraclitus’ saying,
The learning of many things teacheth not understanding...
Written By: tom scott
URL: http://
"Democrats: Party of Marc Rich" would be I think more accurate and, at least for those who know the name, more effective. The Heritage Foundation found that among the top third of House districts by number of high-income households, 58% were represented by Democrats — versus a mere 54% of all districts. Color me not so impressed by the magnitude of this finding.

I don’t see how Michael Franc could honestly think that "the likelihood of electing a Democrat to the House is very closely correlated with how many wealthy households are in that district" (emphasis added to show the part I think is a particular stretch). Because the analysis was done based on absolute number of high-income households, rather than their per capita distribution, I suspect that the income relationship would disappear if you controlled for the tendency of large cities to vote Democratic. Notice how the graphic highlights Phoenix, Miami, San Francisco, Kansas City, DC suburbs in Maryland, and Philadelphia as examples?

In short, this looks like an application of "How to Lie with Statistics". While there may be a weak correlation there, it hardly looks like the most useful correlation that could be find.
Written By: Michael
URL: http://
I just spent the past two days with some very nice folks, all affluent, all well educated and primarily from Boulder, CO. It was by and large a wonderful Thanksgiving, and yet...

They absolutely detested Bush, the GOP, and anything not "progressive." We rarely ventured into political conversations, yet the seething bubbled through - stupid asides, disparaging comments they assumed all agreed with, and outright visceral hatred.

What I found most interesting though, was how little these folks really knew. The have been spoon feed a tale the way they wanted to hear it, and irrespective of countervailing and incontrovertible fact available from hosts of legitimate sources, they stuck to the story they wanted to hear.

Funny (in the tightrope walker falling to his death sense) that after I was the only one able to name the President of Iran as Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the blank stares I received when wondering what Ali Hoseini-Khamenei was really up to.

Anecdotal I know, but it still surprises me how such seemingly learned leftie folks know nothing.

Written By: bains
URL: http://
I feel compelled to add that out of the ten of us, four (myself included) are in the design side of the construction industry. When talking about fickle and quite often onerous building codes, implementation of "green" construction, and the proper balance between no growth and all growth, we all agreed. They are much more libertarian than they would admit if put into an overall political context. They just hate all things "non-progressive" because they are too lazy (or perhaps too comfortable within their normal social circles) to honestly investigate what their supposed ’real enemies’ think.

Sad, but representitive, I think, of the learned left.
Written By: bains
URL: http://
"Those stupid poor people just don’t know whats good for them." I think that’s what our conceited leftist posters are trying to tell us.
Written By: jows
URL: http://
Going back to what mkultra said about the wealthy and better educated centers of America being democratic strongholds.
It’s my unlearned observation that the more populous you become the greater your reliance on others. The least populous your region the more self-sufficient you are.
I live in the Tri-cities of Washington state-a pretty conservative area. It’s the fastest growing region in Washington. Franklin country (Pasco) is the fastest growing country in Washington. Benton county (Richland and Kennewick) is the 3rd fastest growing county. The satellite campus of WSU just went from graduate study to a four year campus. I fully expect that as the region grows so will dependence on government resources. There is something about population centers that screams "take care of me." I think it’s less about education and wealth than it is about self-sufficiency and independence. But hey, some of those farmers are pretty much hooked on government hand-outs too.
Written By: tom scott
URL: http://
The more wealthy tend to feel more guilty about it. Generally speaking, those who feel guilty tend to vote Democratic. Hence, the more wealthy tend to be Democratic.
Fixed that for ya MK
Written By: shark
URL: http://
Generally speaking, the better educated tend to vote Democratic.
As a certain professor demonstrates on this blog almost daily, that’s not much to brag about.
Written By: McQ
Democrats: the party that raises taxes on everyone, including the rich. Remember this when they pass "tobacco taxes" to fund their health care initiatives.
Written By: James Marsden
URL: http://
One, it’s not clear that the Heritage report is even true. Read Michael’s comments.

Two, true or not, to what end? It sounds as if Heritage is gearing up for some kind of populist class warfare angle, where the enemy is actually those stealth rich folks. Are rich folks somehow betraying their class? Voting against their own interests? Or secretly out to screw the poor dupes who make up the Democratic rank and file?
Written By: shecky
URL: http://

Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Vicious Capitalism


Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks