Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-28-2021, 03:41 PM
 
Location: Kansas City, MISSOURI
20,860 posts, read 9,515,083 times
Reputation: 15572

Advertisements

See? Not a single mention of Missouri.
Quote:
Originally Posted by James Bond 007 View Post
Before the election I drove around some of KC's neighborhoods looking at yard signs. The neighborhoods that are probably the wealthiest in the entire city - those south of the Country Club Plaza - were a sea of Biden/Harris yard signs. They're neighborhoods that look like this:
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.0198...7i16384!8i8192
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.0055...7i16384!8i8192
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.0266...7i16384!8i8192
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.0033...7i16384!8i8192

There were probably 20 Biden/Harris signs for every Trump/Pence sign.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-28-2021, 04:39 PM
 
8,927 posts, read 2,959,992 times
Reputation: 5160
Quote:
Originally Posted by James Bond 007 View Post
Typical conservative cannot admit they're wrong!

Biden beat Trump in high income. Biden beat Trump in college education. Your own poll says so!

When I showed the pictures of Kansas City I was showing them merely as a local example of wealthy neighborhoods going big for Biden. It was YOU who decided to expand that to all of Missouri when you started mentioning the entire state of Missouri out of nowhere in posts 67 and 70. Maybe there's a lot of 100K income earners in rural areas in Missouri too, for all I know. Maybe some farmers, or something.
But Trump won the wealthy parts of MO too!

What don't you understand about this?

I just showed you the data!

He won ALLLLLLL income demographics in the state. Or do you still not accept that data?

You also stated that the "national" numbers favored democrats in high income areas and that "Missouri is probably not much different from the national stats." THAT's how Missouri came up!

Which again, I proved is WRONG! Way wrong.

You also said that there are a lot more rural poor people in the state....but again, well over 50% of the state is Urban and Suburban. Wrong again.

Do you still not accept this?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-28-2021, 05:20 PM
 
Location: Kansas City, MISSOURI
20,860 posts, read 9,515,083 times
Reputation: 15572
Once again, this was your own claim:

Quote:
Originally Posted by paracord View Post
Why did Trump win the "over 100k" demographic by a mile in 2020 then, and lose the under 50k demographic by a mile?
And this was your own poll which proved your own claim wrong:
Quote:
Originally Posted by James Bond 007 View Post
Here we go - FROM YOUR OWN POLL are the national figures:
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...-national.html

Education
College graduate: Biden 56%, Trump 42%
Postgraduate study: Biden 58%, Trump 40%

Income
$100,000 or more: Biden 51%, Trump 47%

Thank you, you just killed your own argument with your own link.
In addition to the data posted in post #1, that is all anyone needs to know. Wealthy are becoming increasingly liberal.

My original claim in post #3 never even mentioned Missouri. And neither did post #6. The only reason you keep bringing up Missouri is because you realize you have lost the argument with your own link, in addition to the OP.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-28-2021, 05:22 PM
 
1,162 posts, read 456,113 times
Reputation: 635
The more money you make, chances are you are republican.

The richest neighborhoods in Charlotte and Raleigh were all Trump signs
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-28-2021, 05:25 PM
 
1,162 posts, read 456,113 times
Reputation: 635
James is just salty that the democrat party is for the uneducated poors, who are even too lazy to vote
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-28-2021, 05:29 PM
 
Location: Kansas City, MISSOURI
20,860 posts, read 9,515,083 times
Reputation: 15572
Even back after the 2016 election they were observing this:
Democrats are replacing Republicans as the preferred party of the very wealthy
Quote:
In 2012, something unusual happened. The wealthiest 4 percent of voting-age Americans, by a narrow plurality, supported a Democrat for president.

This hadn't happened since 1964. Before that, it hadn't happened since possibly the 1880s (scientific survey data for back then is, sadly, nonexistent).

So was 2012 a blip, like 1964? Or was 2012 the start of a phase shift, in which the Democrats replace the Republicans as the preferred party of the wealthiest Americans?
And after the 2018 elections:
The Rich Turn to the Democrats
Quote:
Democrats won back the House of Representatives in the 2018 midterm elections thanks to strong gains among the rich. What many pundits have described as a Republican rout in the suburbs is nothing less than the party’s sharp decline among the wealthiest American households.

Imagine all 435 House districts lined up from richest to poorest according to their 2017 median household income (the latest available data from the Census Bureau), Silicon Valley (CA-18) at one end and South Bronx (NY-15) at the other. Before the 2018 midterms, the richest 15 percent of districts was fairly evenly split between Democrats (38) and Republicans (28), but no more. Sixteen of the thirty-seven seats (so far) flipped by the Democrats are in this strata. In the new 116th Congress, these wealthiest sixty-six districts will be represented by fifty-four Democrats and just ten Republicans (with two races yet to be decided). Starting January 3, 2019, twenty (twenty-one if Katie Porter’s lead in CA-45 holds) of the twenty-two richest districts will be represented by Democrats. This year the richest House districts in eleven (and possibly twelve) different states flipped from Republican to Democrat (CO-6, GA-6, IL-6, IA-3, KS-3, MI-11, MN-3, NJ-7, PA-5, SC-1, VA-10; UT-4 is still not called). Going further, in five states (six if Carolyn Bourdeaux wins GA-7) the top two richest districts flipped. These sixteen districts plus five others from the wealthiest 15 percent that weren’t tops in their states contributed well over half the Democrats’ new seats. Without them the House would never have turned blue.

Of course, districts are not individual voters. Though rich districts turned to the Democrats, this does not necessarily mean that the richest voters did so. Digging into some 2018 local returns does suggest, however, that rich voters across the upper income spectrum chose the Democrats this year. For example, Minnesota’s third district—the state’s richest, covering the wealthy Minneapolis suburbs—showed one of the biggest swings in the country to the Democrats. Not only that, the richer the city the bigger the swing to the left. It is still true that the very richest cities in Minnesota’s richest district cast a small majority of their votes for the Republican. But six of the sixteen cities with median household incomes over $100,000 turned blue, including the two most populous.
And a year ago:
How Democrats Became the Party of the Upper Middle Class

And you can find many more.

Anyone who still believes the majority of the wealthy still support republicans is still living in 1984.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-28-2021, 05:30 PM
 
34,278 posts, read 19,356,421 times
Reputation: 17261
Know whats sort of funny? Its not like these groups are 100% one party. Yall get into who owns which group when its relatively small differences.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-28-2021, 05:41 PM
 
Location: Kansas City, MISSOURI
20,860 posts, read 9,515,083 times
Reputation: 15572
Quote:
Originally Posted by Timonium View Post
The more money you make, chances are you are republican.

The richest neighborhoods in Charlotte and Raleigh were all Trump signs
Wrong!

This link, once again:
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...ction-map.html

In Charlotte, most of the wealthy neighborhoods in south Charlotte went for Biden, from single digit points to up to 20 points. All of Myer's Park went for Biden. Foxcroft went for Biden. The whole area around SouthPark went for Biden. Providence Plantation went for Biden. The only areas in south Charlotte that went for Trump were 2 areas around the Raintree Golf Club and Carmel Golf Club. And much of Mint Hill went for Trump.

Ditto Raleigh. All of Cary and Morrisville went for Biden! As well as Apex and a whole ton of wealthy areas around the RTP.
Attached Thumbnails
Democrats are the party of the wealthy, IRS data show-charlotte-2020-precincts.jpg   Democrats are the party of the wealthy, IRS data show-raleigh-2020-precincts.jpg  

Last edited by James Bond 007; 04-28-2021 at 05:53 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-29-2021, 08:06 AM
 
8,927 posts, read 2,959,992 times
Reputation: 5160
Quote:
Originally Posted by Timonium View Post
The more money you make, chances are you are republican.

The richest neighborhoods in Charlotte and Raleigh were all Trump signs
Did you drive around and take pictures like Mr. Bond?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-29-2021, 08:08 AM
 
8,927 posts, read 2,959,992 times
Reputation: 5160
Quote:
Originally Posted by James Bond 007 View Post
Once again, this was your own claim:


And this was your own poll which proved your own claim wrong:

In addition to the data posted in post #1, that is all anyone needs to know. Wealthy are becoming increasingly liberal.

My original claim in post #3 never even mentioned Missouri. And neither did post #6. The only reason you keep bringing up Missouri is because you realize you have lost the argument with your own link, in addition to the OP.
This may be the most retarded argument I've ever read here.

You're claiming the same article is WRONG about MISSOURI because it is right about the overall NATIONAL numbers!

HAHAHA!

Breathtaking.

If I post a picture of a blue sky and you call it red, I can't help you. All we can do is suggest psychiatric help.

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:41 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top