America is an increasingly conservative nation, by ideology and by political affiliation, according to polling results from the Gallup Organization. While conservatives have long outnumbered liberals and moderates across the U.S., the study sheds new light on state-by-state patterns. The map below shows the pattern for the 50 states and the District of Columbia.
Source: Map via Gallup.
Mississippi is the first state with more than 50% conservative identification, with Idaho, Alabama, Wyoming, and Utah approaching that level, and Arkansas, South Carolina, North Dakota, Louisiana, and South Dakota (the rest of the top-ten conservative states) 45% or higher. Conservatives outnumber liberals in even the most liberal-leaning states (excluding the District of Columbia): Vermont, (30.7% conservative to 30.5% liberal), Rhode Island (29.9% to 29.3%), and Massachusetts (29.9% to 28.0%).
Political commentators have long pointed to underlying social and economic sorting that underpins this growing conservative/ liberal divide. But what factors account for the growing conservatism of Americans and American states?
With the help of my colleague Charlotta Mellander, I decided to take a look. We ran a simple correlation analysis on the Gallup poll numbers, comparing conservative identification to a variety of key economic, demographic, and cultural factors by state. As always, our analysis only points to associations between variables; we do not make any claims about causation and note that other factors that we have not looked at might come into play. Still, a number of intriguing findings cropped up.
we do not make any claims about causation and note that other factors that we have not looked at might come into play. Still, a number of intriguing findings cropped up.
Here's our stupid idea, and here's what we wanted it to show. Can't make any intellectual argument for any of our conclusions but....... NOT SAYING....just saying though...
Way to spin it Pesh, I read that as: Correlation != Causation which is true. Your quote also shows that they understand that not ALL factors were included or even considered.
Translation: here's some interesting correlations, that we can neither 100% confirm or deny.
So, if not to push a hackish political agenda, what is the point of this "study", with self-admission that the actual conclusions have almost nothing to support the implied conclusion? I guarantee that I could find a similar data set to make it look like the more liberal a state is, the more likely you are to be murdered by an agnostic... but what the fuck does that mean?
So, if not to push a hackish political agenda, what is the point of this "study", with self-admission that the actual conclusions have almost nothing to support the implied conclusion? I guarantee that I could find a similar data set to make it look like the more liberal a state is, the more likely you are to be murdered by an agnostic... but what the fuck does that mean?
There is no implied conclusion. They flat out state they aren't claiming causation. You don't have to prove causation to have valid correlation.
The "what the fuck does that mean" is that the two variables are related to each other.
As ice cream sales increase, the rate of drowning deaths increases sharply.
Therefore, ice cream causes drowning.
The Party of Intellectualism never fails to please.
Nor falsely implies it!!!Again, Correlation DOES NOT equal Causation
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/03/the-conservative-states-of-america/71827/
You'll have to click the link to get to the meat. There are too many graphs to add to quote the whole thing. I'm not posting this to bash conservatives, but these trends are clear and worth looking at.
Nor falsely implies it!!!
I can make one link, Mississippi the first state to go 50% conservative also has this legacy...
http://eideard.wordpress.com/2011/0...i-republicans-would-ban-interracial-marriage/
Nor falsely implies it!!!
They could have just as easily graphed ice cream sales with drownings and explicitly stated correlation doesn't imply causation...don't be an idiot.Wow, these authors are SUPER sneaky then, finding a way to falsely imply that correlation = causation even while explicitly stating the contrary!
They could have just as easily graphed ice cream sales with drownings and explicitly stated correlation doesn't imply causation...don't be an idiot.
There was a study that showed that the higher sales of ice cream are, the more murders occur. Without explaining that both are related to a third variable, namely weather, would you have a valid correlation?
Almost any two variables can be shown to have some sort of correlation if you try hard enough.
Fact is, this study is presented as to get the reader to infer the conclusion that poor, dumb, working class people are conservative, and smart, rich, intellectuals are liberals. Don't pretend that isn't the case.
Again, ice cream correlates with murder rates. The two may correlate, but to say they are related in this way is idiotic.
smart, rich, intellectuals are liberals. Don't pretend that isn't the case.
Wow, these authors are SUPER sneaky then, finding a way to falsely imply that correlation = causation even while explicitly stating the contrary!
Conservatism, at least at the state level, appears to be growing stronger. Ironically, this trend is most pronounced in America's least well-off, least educated, most blue collar, most economically hard-hit states. Conservatism, more and more, is the ideology of the economically left behind. The current economic crisis only appears to have deepened conservatism's hold on America's states. This trend stands in sharp contrast to the Great Depression, when America embraced FDR and the New Deal.
Liberalism, which is stronger in richer, better-educated, more-diverse, and, especially, more prosperous places, is shrinking across the board and has fallen behind conservatism even in its biggest strongholds. This obviously poses big challenges for liberals, the Obama administration, and the Democratic Party moving forward.
But the much bigger, long-term danger is economic rather than political. This ideological state of affairs advantages the policy preferences of poorer, less innovative states over wealthier, more innovative, and productive ones. American politics is increasingly disconnected from its economic engine. And this deepening political divide has become perhaps the biggest bottleneck on the road to long-run prosperity.