by Robert Griffin (Public Religion Research Institute) & John Sides (George Washington University)
Key Findings
- While the economic anxiety of “working-class” white people is often identified as a key driver in the ascent of President Donald Trump, our research shows how this theory breaks down in key ways.
- Traditional methods of gauging economic concerns are far more reflective of political leanings than actual economic distress. In contrast, when asked detailed questions about the state of their personal finances and the experience of hardships, racial and ethnic minorities report experiencing more economic distress than white people do. For example, black people and Hispanics are more likely than white people to report difficulty making housing, loan, or credit card payments and to report insufficient savings.
- This new measure of economic distress shows that working-class white people are not distinctively distressed relative to other groups. In fact, white Americans without a college degree report a lowerlevel of distress than college-educated black and Hispanic Americans. Non-white Americans report more economic distress at every level of income.
- Unlike economic “anxiety” as traditionally measured, economic distress has a modest relationship with partisanship. If anything, Hillary Clinton voters report more economic distress than Donald Trump voters. Economic distress is more strongly correlated with support for liberal, not conservative, economic policies.
- Among political independents, 52 percent of those experiencing relatively little distress approve of Trump, compared to 35 percent of those who are experiencing relatively significant distress. Genuine economic distress is arguably hurting, not helping, approval ratings of President Trump.
No comments:
Post a Comment