Posted on 10/26/2018 5:33:12 AM PDT by Kaslin
Do they live in two different worlds? White college graduate women favor Democrats over Republicans in House elections by a 62 to 35 percent margin. White non-college-graduate men favor Republicans over Democrats in House elections by a 58 to 38 percent margin.
Those results are from a Washington Post-Schar School poll conducted in 69 seriously contested congressional districts, 63 of them currently held by Republicans. The numbers in other polls are only slightly different for these two groups.
They all tell the same story. These Americans live in the same relatively small slices of America (average population about 750,000), not many miles away from one another if they're in major metropolitan areas or in similar communities in rural districts. But they take very different -- often angrily different -- views on where the nation is headed and on sensitive issues.
Most, though, take a similar view of what has long been considered a decisive issue: the economy. Fully 77 percent in the survey rate the economy positively, a huge contrast with just about every survey taken between 2000 and 2016. Several months of 4 percent growth, considered impossible by some economists, has apparently been impossible to ignore.
But when asked their view of the direction of the nation "apart from the economy," the respondents revert to partisan type. White college women are especially negative, and white non-college men are solidly positive. Anyone whose personal acquaintance ranges across these groups can appreciate why one finds President Donald Trump repellent and the other congenial.
But there's a policy component, too. It's not that white college women are diehard Keynesians and white non-college men supply-siders. People tend to tailor their economic theories to partisan preference, not vice versa. But the economic policies of the last two administrations and concurrent trends have had -- and were intended to have -- very different effects on white college women and white non-college men.
Then-President Barack Obama's 2009 stimulus package was heavily tilted toward college women. As my American Enterprise Institute colleague Christina Hoff Sommers wrote in The Weekly Standard in June 2009, the Obama economic team's original idea was to finance infrastructure, construction and manufacturing, sectors that lost 3 million jobs from 2007-09.
But feminist groups objected. Obama economist Christina Romer, Sommers wrote, recalled that her first email "was from a women's group saying 'We don't want this stimulus package to just create jobs for burly men.'" So Obama ditched his "macho" stimulus plan for one stimulating creation of jobs in government, and especially in education and health care, which had gained 588,000 jobs during the 2007-09 recession. Forget the bridge building and electric grid modernization; let's subsidize more administrators, facilitators and liaisons.
The results were disappointing. Sputtering growth nudged up toward 3 percent and down toward zero, as it was during the last quarter of the Obama administration. Administrators outnumbered teachers in higher education but added little value. Government payrolls were temporarily sheltered from cuts. There was little recovery in blue-collar jobs, reduced life expectancy among downscale groups, opioid dependency and deaths. There were millions of men lingering on the disability rolls.
The trajectory of the economy -- and the beneficiaries -- seems different in the Trump presidency so far. Growth is more robust, obviously, though some economists thought this was impossible. And the biggest gains are, in contrast with the last 30 years, in blue-collar jobs and downscale earnings.
It's not clear there's a connection between these trends and Trump's policies and promises to make blue-collar America prosperous again. White House economic adviser Lawrence Kudlow argues that tax reform -- especially corporate tax cuts and 100 percent depreciation -- has stimulated capital spending on manufacturing and jobs for burly men. That's certainly plausible, though it's probably wise to wait and see whether the trend continues.
It's also possible that economic gains or losses have been less important than increases in people's feelings when they are earning respect. And their angry feelings when they feel they're not.
How does this affect next month's election? White college women's anger has given Democrats an edge in enthusiasm and money most of this cycle. White non-college men's apparently rising anger over Brett Kavanaugh's nomination and pride in Trump's economy have apparently given Republicans a late boost.
How much? White college turnout is overstated in polls, says The New York Times' Nate Cohn, and overanticipated by a white college-dominated media. The Republican boost's size -- and perhaps its existence -- is unclear. The Post poll puts Democrats up 4 percent in its 69 districts; the NBC News-Wall Street Journal poll has the parties even in the most competitive races. What looked like a Whole Foods blue wave for Democrats looks more like a narrow Democratic -- or maybe Republican -- House majority.
The women have reached a consensus among them selves, that’s the way they exist
The men understand the facts
The women are basically ignorant
“Burly” men? I guess that even the average Milquetoast is a burly man when compared to the best the Left has to offer....
Gives Dems a reason for four more years of white hot seething rage against white men.
College educated means college indoctrinated. If I had life to live over starting at this year, I would skip college even though I got an engineering degree. I went back several years ago to judge a robotics contest. The SJW personal was imposed on top of everything. One professor didn’t want to face failing the black groups so he wanted to give the win to everybody. I asked who they would give the money to build the working model to and he said, “the actual winners.” There was a long pause while the entire table of judges turned to face him silently. He said, “Oh.”
What women are you talking about, pray tell?
Women make decisions based on what their heart tells them, men on what their brains tell them. Nothing much will change that. Emotion vs logic.
Two ships passing in the night...
The women have reached a consensus among them selves, that’s the way they exist
The men understand the facts
The women are basically ignorant
~~~
I am normally not a defender of PC speak and social relativism, but what you said is a terrible way to describe differences portrayed in the article.
While I personally believe that a lot about how people feel in their daily lives is influenced by many physical/physiological conditions, it’s also impossible to unmarry this from upbringing, formative influences, and cultural conditioning. It’s not stereotyping to say that boys traditionally are taught to get up and brush themselves off, because taking a hit is a part of life, and girls (this is probably most intense reinforced in college but most definitely doesn’t start there) are shown that it’s okay to look for (often shared) blame which reinforces a victim state. Feminists are extremely hypocritical on this phenomenon. They pay lip service to how important it is to raise independent little girls but all their activist focus is centered on grievances.
You can’t just call on gender ignorant though. I would say women have their eyes open a lot more than guys do. But as we so often talk about here, there are powerful biases that get trained into all of us, and political biases are not the only type.
Question: Are there or are there not morn in-college educated men then there are college educated women?
“White college graduate women favor Democrats over Republicans in House elections by a 62 to 35 percent margin. White non-college-graduate men favor Republicans over Democrats in House elections by a 58 to 38 percent margin.”
What that tells you is, colleges by and large don’t educate women, but indoctrinate them.
Only 6 Democrat-held Congressional seats are seriously contested this election? Gerrymandering works.
How so?
Wonder what % white college educated women are employed by Government agencies of one sort or another at either the local, county, state or Federal level?
It also confirms just how gullible females are.
Realizing actual intelligence has little correlation with formal intelligence, I will set forth my thinking that the women who frequent this forum, are, for the most part intelligent if not also, well educated.
This being the case, you might wish to make your comments on the subject private replies rather than subject yourself to more female “rejection.”
Women don't “see more” they feel more. Women vote, far too often, on their feelings. Rationality does not enter into it.
Saw this a lot during the Clinton/Obama regimes.
Most “moderate” women when asked why they supported the Dems always gave an emotion based answer on how they FELT about the Candidate. They could not make a rational reasoned response because they had NO idea what the candidates policy positions where. They were voting for the Dem just made them feel good for one reason or another.
The mania about O’Rouke in TX is a prime example of this. Women supporting him cannot give you a rational reason why they are supporting him. It is all abut how they FEEL.
Too many women are voting with their genitalia.
I question whether the women in that poll are truthful. Women more than most men are concerned about their appearance, especially before strangers. I suspect that they would feel pressure to distance themselves from Trump when asked about their opinion. Most men, on the other hand, would be very straightforward, and not care what a pollster thought about them. In fact, most men enjoy a fight from time to time.
Trump carried White college graduates in 2016.
Trump obviously carries White college graduate men.
Trump does quite well with White college graduate married women.
The Democrats have long been favored by White single women be they college graduates or not.
Typically, you have jumped to an incorrect conclusion.
A gender was not criticized
A class of women, a subculture, was criticized. To extrapolate to a whole gender is typical fake news.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.