May 2, 2014

"Are White Republicans More Racist Than White Democrats?"

At FiveThirtyEight, they look at the statistics for the answer.

Also at FiveThirtyEight, "The ‘Blame Bush’ Era May Be at an End."

48 comments:

RecChief said...

"it may be because white racists have become more likely to identify themselves as Republican"

That's an interesting viewpoint to start from. Does Crack work at 538?

RecChief said...

Another point:

Where will the survey question about whether you would ever vote for a 'community organizer' be asked?


Or, just like "Chicago", is 'community organizer' racist code now too.

mccullough said...

Toward blacks, I think so. Towards Latinos it's a tie. Towards Asians white Democrats are more racist.

tim maguire said...

I was surprised at the lack of divergence between Democrats and Republicans. The difference is almost certainly statistically insignificant.

Most important phrase in the whole essay: "arguably racist answers." Many of them were arguably not.

Bruce Hayden said...

GIGO- garbage in, garbage out.

Sorry, but there probably is a greater percentage of Blacks who don't bother trying to pull themselves up by their bootstraps. That is based on percentages on government assistance. And, there is more generational welfare dependency. Apparently, accepting reality is now considered racist by the left.

The questions didn't ask whether or not you believed that if you had two people with otherwise identical backgrounds, one white and one black, that the black one would be less willing to try to pull himself up by his bootstraps, etc. And, yes, I think that Blacks should be looking at the Dem party, and their reliance upon that party, since LBJ started our War on Poverty by subsidizing dependency, and as a consequence, did great damage to families in this country, and, esp. to Black families.

But, instead, because Republicans seem to be more willing to accept the reality that Blacks are some of the major victims of Democratic public policy over the last 50 years, they are considered racists. My view is that the real racists are the Dems who destroyed those Black families, and FiveThirtyEight for ignoring the reality behind their statistics to make a partisan political point.

Anglelyne said...

Are White Republicans More Racist Than White Democrats?

You know what would make an awesome survey? Take all those questions, but instead of limiting them to white attitudes toward blacks, make it totally inclusive, with every possible group permutation. ("What does group w,x,y,z think about groups a,b,c,d...)

I mean, why are people so obsessed with the attitudes of boring old white men, er "Republicans"? They're totally irrelevant to our glorious vibrant future, right? Die, already. I'd be much more interested in knowing if South Asians think "Whites Are More 'Unintelligent' than 'Intelligent'", or about "East Asians Who Oppose Living In A Half-Black Neighborhood" or "Hispanics Who Think Blacks Are More 'Lazy' than 'Hard-Working'", etc., etc. Mix it up!

Get more honest answers than you get from white Democrats, anyway.

Rick67 said...

I was singularly unimpressed by the data Silver and ??? use to arrive at their conclusion. Some of the measurements do not necessarily represent "racism", as Bruce Hayden notes above, it could reflect an attitude of "this demographic group has been negatively impacted by government policies intended to help, but in fact have helped cause social and cultural dysfunction".

That having been said, the authors do note (1) the gap between Dem and GOP whites isn't "that" wide, and (2) things haven't improved since Obama's election in 2008. Oh and one could add (3) even with such warped measurements, they couldn't come up with 100% of white Republicans are "racist". It's a back handed vindication that most(? close enough to all as to make no difference?) critics of Obama and the Democrats are not motivated by racial animus.

Unknown said...

Ok you've demonstrated that 538.com is another psuedo objective liberal bias website.

eric said...

What I found interesting is that all of those questions began to diverge right around the time of Obama's election.

In other words, the great uniter has managed to divide us.

Revenant said...

That's not statistics, that's numerology. :)

elkh1 said...

Obama's legacy: after 5 years, a black president still blames his predecessor for his own failure. He can't quite man up to take responsibilities.

Skeptical Voter said...

Well Nate Silver and the boys and girls at Five38 may think that the "Blame Bush Era" is over.

But I've got a news flash for them. Obama will be saying "it was Bush's fault" until the day he dies---all evidence to the contrary notwithstanding. I mean, why change now?

SomeoneHasToSayIt said...


No. Next question.

SomeoneHasToSayIt said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Rusty said...

I wonder what it would look like if they also polled white conservatives.

khesanh0802 said...

Have to agree with Bruce Hayden. The results of Dem policies for blacks have been disastrous.

JPS said...

If you want to know how white Democrats feel about blacks, listen to what they say about black conservatives.

If you want to know Democratic men how they feel about women, listen to what they say about women conservatives.

If you want to know Democrats they feel about gays and lesbians, listen to what they say about gay and lesbian conservatives.

I am not making a cheap partisan point. How much white Democratic solicitude is politically self-serving? Neither all of it, nor a trivial fraction, I think.

Of the liberals I know, some genuinely abhor bigotry, and some of them are full of it, while holding impeccably correct policy positions.

n.n said...

Denigrating individual dignity through statistical extrapolation is such an unseemly occupation.

Jupiter said...

So believing that blacks are "more lazy than hard-working" makes me a racist?

Does believing that men are more prone to violence than women make me a sexist?

Ignorance is Bliss said...

To determine if the belief that black aren't motivated enough to pull themselves out of poverty is racist, don't you have to compare that to the same person's belief about whites being motivated enough to pull themselves out of poverty?

If someone believea that, in general, nobody is motivated enough to pull themselves out of poverty, that would not be a sign of racism.

Paco Wové said...

"why are people so obsessed with the attitudes of boring old white men"

Just as generals always fight the last war, liberals always bravely face down the racism of the past – Remember Selma! – while backing heedlessly into the future.

Jason said...

Statistical noise. In some graphs, the sudden movements are much bigger than the difference between the charts.

Add in the effects of libtard bias.

Phil 3:14 said...

We were almost the same and then when elected Obama.


I blame Bush.

jr565 said...

Bush's only problem is he spent too much for a republican.
He wasn't responsible for the crash. The housing bubble was started under The dems. He was just there when it popped.

His move on Iraq, despite the second guessing was actually the right move, and where he faltered is when he started listening to the naysayers and tried to appease them.

And he did a great job on Katrina. Despite the argument that he doesn't care for black people he sent in the most resources EVER for a natural disaster. Its just that Katrina was the biggest natural disaster of modern times and the whole city was flooded. Look at how Obama's administration handled Staten Island. Bush got all the people who didn't evacuate out in a under two weeks to neighboring states.

In short, all the attacks on Bush were partisan assault jobs that were there to get dems in power and not because they were based on fact. The dems calling Bush a liar after Clontons actions was and is farcical.
The dems and Obama's critique of Bush's spending as being unpatriotic, when considering the dems spending is farcical.
The dems arguments about drone strikes and a police state after Obama's actions are farcical. Even their arguments about him causing the housing bubble, after spending all of the Clinton presidency pushing fairness in housing (read lowering interest rates so that people who,couldn't afford houses could).

So, I,ll give Bush props. He may not have been the greatest president, but his enemies were some of the most partisan demagogic and treasonous sons of bitches I've ever seen. So, I don't care what they have to say about bush.

jr565 said...

Who's more racist? well, which group is more likely to call a black person an Uncle Tom? It requires that blacks must think a certain way, and if they don't they are traitors to their race. I don't think most conservatives think that way. But my guess is, many dems do.

JPS said...

(Sorry for the garbled post. Went back, rewrote, forgot to erase pieces of old phrasing. I really was not drunk, though it does read that way.)

Danno said...

I think we have seen the last black Chicago community organizer elected as President, however, I wouldn't hesitate to vote for a conservative black such as Ben Carson or Clarence Thomas. In fact, Thomas, being the quiet deliberative guy he is, would be quite enjoyable, and we would not be subjected to daily speeches that accomplish almost nothing. A true font of wisdom he is!

Ambrose said...

Who stopped beating their wives first - Republicans or Democrats?

hombre said...

Progressives are the new regressives. Better to resurrect George Wallace and Bull Connor in relatively benign Republican form than to acknowledge the progress we've made.

Having said that, I'm curious if my reluctance to live in a half black neighborhood with a crime rate three or four times higher than the average white neighborhood makes me a racist. What if I am black and move my family to a white neighborhood for the same reason? What does 538 say about me?

Fernandinande said...

Apparently, accepting reality is now considered racist by the left.

Many of those questions had more to do with ignorance and political correctness (same thing really, tho PC includes hypocrisy) than racism, and perhaps it should've been called "Are White Republicans More PC Than White Democrats?"

a psychiatrist who learned from veterans said...

Van Jones, 'from the Left,' obliquely made a sad and interesting point on CrossFire today. He deplored 'America's' concern and pressure over the missing Malaysia flight vs. the 275 kidnapped black girls in Nigeria now being sold as 'child brides' for $12. Our racial attention is more importantly(?) drawn to the remarks of an 81 year old man to the younger mistress that wants to bring him down?

jimspice said...

I'd like to see those numbers run again while controlling for region, specifically north/north. Hell, through in income, education, the whole 9 yards. And include confidence intervals too.

stlcdr said...

"You are a __________ therefore you are a racist."

You say _______ therefore you are a racist."

"Somebody somewhere said something that I say is racist, therefore you are a racist."

drunkdebunker said...

An actual racist I know once said, "The n*****s hate the Mexicans because the Mexicans will work." How does that fit our general perceptions? I suspect no one will want to answer.

SomeoneHasToSayIt said...

drunkdebunker said...
An actual racist I know once said, "The n*****s hate the Mexicans because the Mexicans will work." How does that fit our general perceptions? I suspect no one will want to answer.


You suspect wrongly. Specific stereotypes usually have a basis in observable truths, at least generally.

Let's reverse your statement and see how it sounds:

"The sp*cs hate the Blacks because the Blacks will work."

Kinda' clanks, does't it?

Sam L. said...

"If there’s a discouraging trend, it’s not so much that negative racial attitudes toward blacks have increased in these polls, but that they’ve failed to decrease under Obama, as they did so clearly for most of the past three decades." We all have Obama to thank for this.

I may have to read 538 directly rather than depend on Ann to direct me to the really silly stuff.

Sam L. said...

And the second one illustrates the closed mentality of the Dems. Obama did not inherit the economy, he bought it willingly. And made it worse.

Hagar said...

It looks like the variance in the Republican responses may have a lot to do with the policies pursued by the Democratic Party at the time; in other words, it may be the white Democrats they don't like, and especially their ideology.

Hagar said...

Not quite what I meant to say. More pertinent to the question asked is that they resent the white Democrats mode of doing business; trading favors to voter blocs in return for votes, though the issues voted on may be of scant interest to such blocs.

The Crack Emcee said...

RecChief,

"Does Crack work at 538?"

Nope - you're ruining your image, with everybody else, all by your lonesome. I just told you so.

Bruce Hayden,

"Sorry, but there probably is a greater percentage of Blacks who don't bother trying to pull themselves up by their bootstraps. That is based on percentages on government assistance."

Not so much over-whelming and persistent racism, for centuries, that some aren't motivated to LIVE, much less work for whites with unearned, inherited, Homestead Act-inspired wealth? Surely, you jest, My Man.

Since when did getting a paycheck - even from the government - make any American sit still?

You talk nonsense - and the rest eat from the same silly trough:

khesanh0802,

"Have to agree with Bruce Hayden. The results of Dem policies for blacks have been disastrous."

Worse than not having a family tree? Man, you guys are sociopathic to the point of horror.

Paco Wové,

"why are people so obsessed with the attitudes of boring old white men"

"Just as generals always fight the last war, liberals always bravely face down the racism of the past – Remember Selma! – while backing heedlessly into the future."

Oh yeah - Republican Donald Sterling's history of rabid housing discrimination, resulting in the deaths of untold numbers, is nothing but "attitudes" - and that problem is just "liberals" whining.

Clueless. Absolutely clueless. There could be dead bodies in the street (there are, actually) and all you'd speak of is "liberal obstructions".

It's like you're programmed to spit conservative dogma - completely ignoring the facts - to the point of not even being human.

Ignore Sterling's deadly practices - keep focussing on his words and calling everyone stupid based on those alone. That's how vicious racism - that results in death - continues, while everyone claims colorblindness and love.

Stepford Conservative Racism.

Sam L.,

"'If there’s a discouraging trend, it’s not so much that negative racial attitudes toward blacks have increased in these polls, but that they’ve failed to decrease under Obama, as they did so clearly for most of the past three decades.' We all have Obama to thank for this."

You probably blame MLK for getting shot, too,...



Hagar said...

The Black Republicans ("Black here has nothing to do with skin color, just hard core Republican Party operatives and quite "white.") did the same thing after the Civil War. They were a minority in the country, even without the interdicted southern states, so they worked the government by horsetrading and shady deals to get what they wanted.

Today, I think the situation is similar for the left wing of the Democratic Party.

The Crack Emcee said...

Hagar,

"The Black Republicans ("Black here has nothing to do with skin color, just hard core Republican Party operatives and quite "white.") did the same thing after the Civil War. They were a minority in the country, even without the interdicted southern states, so they worked the government by horsetrading and shady deals to get what they wanted.

Today, I think the situation is similar for the left wing of the Democratic Party."

BWAAA-HA-HA-HA!!!

To say that - and to leave out any context for what black life was like "after the Civil War" - is criminal.

The fact Reconstruction only lasted 12 years - after all those deaths DURING the Civil War - should tell everyone what you're trying so hard to avoid saying:

That blacks were doing whatever they could, in a hostile environment, to secure a foothold in freedom.

But you go on about "horsetrading and shady deals" - while ALWAYS leaving the context of history out - as you try to convince me of your unbiased opinion of, and concern for, your darker-skinned fellow citizens after all this time.

After all this time.

"Today, I think the situation is similar,…"

You got THAT much right, anyway - but it's because YOU haven't changed much,...

Hagar said...

"Hello, man!"
"Axhandle!"

Rusty said...

I have never anyone more bigoted, more close minded and less tolerant than a liberal.

Unknown said...

Crack re blacks not having a family tree. I and every other adoptive person has no family tree. Its not a big deal. You are imagining that you lack something that whites have but that's your paranoia arising again.

Its been 150 years since emancipation (through the.sacrifice of 300 thousand Union soldiers) so your family tree should have reasonable extent. Of course for those black families that the government has blown apart the family tree would be stunted.

Unknown said...

Crack re blacks not having a family tree. I and every other adoptive person has no family tree. Its not a big deal. You are imagining that you lack something that whites have but that's your paranoia arising again.

Its been 150 years since emancipation (through the.sacrifice of 300 thousand Union soldiers) so your family tree should have reasonable extent. Of course for those black families that the government has blown apart the family tree would be stunted.

Hagar said...

And for Crack's continuing education, the term "Black Republicans" refer to Thad Stevens of Pennsylvania and his group of "radical Republicans" in Congress.

They are famous for pushing reconstruction and impeaching Andrew Johnson, but this was also the time when Credit Mobiliere was said to "own" half of the House and all of the Senate.

Hagar said...

People tend to forget that the Republicans of that time were also the party of the "big spenders." The Republican Party was formed by former northern Whigs, who wanted federal money for internal improvements. Being very much a minority, even in the northern states, they also took on every other cause espoused by dissidents to the existing Democrat establishments anywhere and everywhere, especially, of course, the anti-slavery and "Free soil" factions, but really, anybody unhappy with the Democrat Party in their locality would be welcome, regardless of how crackpot their ides might be. It was about votes.

The Democrats, besides being the hard core party for slavery in the South and squishy on the subject in the North, also was the "small government party," in the tradition of Jefferson and Monroe, and dead set against financial speculation, except in cotton of course, and any kind of "funny money" issued by banks, especially national ones.

The political maneuverings after the Civil War had more to do with these kind of things than race. Race was just used as tools to disadvantage the other party by both sides.