|
Red State, Blue State, Rich State, Poor State: Why Americans Vote the Way They Do | 
| Authors: Andrew Gelman, David Park, Boris Shor, Joseph Bafumi, Jeronimo Cortina Publisher: Princeton University Press Category: Book
List Price: $27.95 Buy New: $17.53 You Save: $10.42 (37%)
New (34) Used (17) from $16.95
Rating: 11 reviews Sales Rank: 49239
Media: Hardcover Number Of Items: 1 Pages: 248 Shipping Weight (lbs): 1.1 Dimensions (in): 9.6 x 6.5 x 0.9
ISBN: 069113927X Dewey Decimal Number: 324.973 EAN: 9780691139272 ASIN: 069113927X
Publication Date: August 10, 2008 Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days Shipping: International shipping available Condition: Brand New, Perfect Condition, Please allow 4-14 business days for delivery. 100% Money Back Guarantee, Over 1,000,000 customers served.
| |
| Similar Items:
|
| Editorial Reviews:
Product Description
On the night of the 2000 presidential election, Americans sat riveted in front of their televisions as polling results divided the nation's map into red and blue states. Since then the color divide has become a symbol of a culture war that thrives on stereotypes--pickup-driving red-state Republicans who vote based on God, guns, and gays; and elitist, latte-sipping blue-state Democrats who are woefully out of touch with heartland values. Red State, Blue State, Rich State, Poor State debunks these and other political myths. With wit and prodigious number crunching, Andrew Gelman gets to the bottom of why Democrats win elections in wealthy states while Republicans get the votes of richer voters, how the two parties have become ideologically polarized, and other issues. Gelman uses eye-opening, easy-to-read graphics to unravel the mystifying patterns of recent voting, and in doing so paints a vivid portrait of the regional differences that drive American politics. He demonstrates in the plainest possible terms how the real culture war is being waged among affluent Democrats and Republicans, not between the haves and have-nots; how religion matters for higher-income voters; how the rich-poor divide is greater in red not blue states--and much more. Red State, Blue State, Rich State, Poor State is a must-read for anyone seeking to make sense of today's fractured American political landscape. Myths and facts about the red and the blue: Myth: The rich vote based on economics, the poor vote "God, guns, and gays." Fact: Church attendance predicts Republican voting much more among rich than poor. Myth: A political divide exists between working-class "red America" and rich "blue America." Fact: Within any state, more rich people vote Republican. The real divide is between higher-income voters in red and blue states. Myth: Rich people vote for the Democrats. Fact: George W. Bush won more than 60 percent of high-income voters. Myth: Religion is particularly divisive in American politics. Fact: Religious and secular voters differ no more in America than in France, Germany, Sweden, and many other European countries.
|
| Customer Reviews: Read 6 more reviews...
Fun and easy to read December 6, 2008 Gelman, et. al., offer the political science version of pop-social science, in the Gladwell-Freakonomics vein. They do a fine job, though not quite reaching the captivating levels of Gladwell, etc.
Since the 2000 election and the near dead even split in the electorate, the "red-blue" divide has captivated politicos. The blue states voted for Gore and Kerry, and the red states put George W. Bush in the White House. What has amazed a few people is the fact that the poor states are the red states, which seemed to fly in the face of the storyline that the poor normally vote Democratic. Why do red-poor states - those states that actually take more money from the federal government than their inhabitants pay towards the federal government - vote Republican? Some, like Thomas Frank in "What's the Matter with Kansas?," suggested that poor folks were suckered into voting Republican because Party leaders hyped social issues (abortion, gay marriage) to get the poor on board, all the while ensuring tax cuts were passed for the benefit of the wealthy. It is intriguing to note that after the better part of 30 years of time in the White House, Republicans really haven't done a great job of passing conservative social legislation, but have done a fine job with tax cuts that have largely benefited the wealthy (the wealthy do, of course, pay most of the taxes). Well, Gelman and the rest rebut Frank by pointing out that the poor do indeed - in all states - vote more for the Democratic Party than do the wealthy. Again, that is the case even in red states. Granted, there is probably a higher proportion of poor folks in red states voting Republican than they do in blue states, but even in red states the poor are more likely to vote Democratic. It's the WEALTHY who are causing the red-blue divide. That is, the wealthy are more likely to defect from their financial interests, and they do so, obviously, in the blue states. Furthermore, it is the wealthy who are arguing over social policy, and the poor are sticking to their economic interests. Most importantly for the Democratic Party, Gelman and friends point out that, contrary to the arguments of the left, Democrats would not improve electoral outcomes by becoming more liberal. Doing so will only cause more moderates to leave the Democratic Party. Still, as any Democrat has should have learned, the winning strategy is not always the chosen strategy.
Regardless, "Red State, Blue State..." is an easy to read book with plenty of citations for any reader who wants to dig deeper into the theory, methodology, and articles of serious public opinion and voting behavior scholarship.
My biggest complaints about the book aren't too big. First, the early chapters were particularly choppy and almost read as cut-and-paste efforts. Thankfully the nuggets were interesting, but the overall themes were elusive. Second, for a short book, the price is a bit steep. Don't get me wrong: I love an easy to read short book, but don't charge me a big book price for it. Otherwise, a fine job on an important issue, which may be a little less relevant now with President-electObama's impressive 2008 victory. A few missteps by him, however, and we're right back to the 49-49 split with the increased likelihood of red state led Republican victories.
Not a light read November 10, 2008 3 out of 4 found this review helpful
This review is really just a warning for those of you out there who, based on this book's catchy title, might think it's another Blink, Nudge, Click, etc. It is most definitely not. There is a LOT of data here, and it's not always discussed in the friendliest fashion possible. Yes, there is tons of interesting stuff, but it's really not very accessible.
The writer's style seems to be one of an academic trying to write a popularization. Lots of stops and starts, lots of digressions, lots of repetition, lots of half-digested material. Flow seemed to be the biggest problem, with the author introducing one chart after another, but with very little feel for identifying an argument and advancing it forward.
Overall, very interesting data, but very poor writing.
In Depth Exploration of Political Paradox October 26, 2008 1 out of 1 found this review helpful
"Red State, Blue State" starts with an often under-reported paradox: wealthy states vote Democratic whereas wealthy people vote Republican. It then proceeds to explore this paradox from every angle possible using polling data.
My background is data mining. What impresses me most about "Red State, Blue State" is the way it effectively communicates results in understandable ways, particularly using charts rather than complicated formulas. It is not a book about innuendo, selected examples, or technical bravado. It is a book about effectively communicating the results of innumerable polls and many elections to understand a paradox.
The book is divided into three parts. The first introduces the problem, leading up to a chapter on how pundits -- both on the left and the right -- can be so confused. Chapter 3 introduces the idea of the "ecological fallacy", which is the tendency to take summarized information (say, poor states vote Republican -- which tends to be true) and to apply it to individuals (say poor people vote Republic -- which tends to be false).
The second dives into the issue in more detail, both historically and geographically. It is highly unusual to see authors attempt to apply theories about US politics to other countries. This is a daring approach, since most American readers will not find it relevant.
The final section discusses what it all means, particularly the importance of party stances on economic issues versus social issues.
I do not agree with every conclusion in the book. In particular, I feel that the data provides more support for the Republicans "southern strategy" than the authors do. In addition, there is one area where I believe the book could have gone into more detail, and that is the role of turnout in presidential elections.
Prof. Gelman (who is a renown statistician at Columbia University) and his coauthors do an excellent job exploring the relationships between the outcome of elections and individuals, states, and other geogrphic regions. At just over 200 pages, it is definitely worth reading.
Worth the read, but.... October 25, 2008 1 out of 1 found this review helpful
At a time when we are on the precipice of deciding who will become our next president, Andrew Gelman and his associates have delivered a terrific new book about recent voting patterns, demographics of all sorts and how states and their people vote, vis-a-vis the economy and other issues. It's less of a prediction about what happens next but as an analysis it's worth every page. As a narrative it's a slog.
Challenging a mere red state/blue state divide, the authors provide candor as to how and why we vote. As a resident of Connecticut, that pocket of insularity in the northeast, I was happy that Gelman countered the Thomas Frank book, "What's the Matter with Kansas", substituting Connecticut in its place. Decision-making about voting is a complex matter and the authors do a good job at its explanation. I recommend it but only wish it had been more readable.
Gummy bear vitamins for the politically curious October 16, 2008 1 out of 3 found this review helpful
This book is like a bottle of Gummy bear vitamins for the politically curious. The cover and maps look colorful and inviting. The words and charts are made from careful research of election results and polls. They are delightful, but require a bit of time to chew. The insights from the book fortify the mind to better digest the barrage of information and opinions about American voters.
Dr. Gelman introduces many common misconceptions about American voters with funny quotes from famous politicians and pundits. He offers reasons behind these myths and debunks them with clear analyses that are presented in the form of powerful and thought-provoking graphs. I appreciate the large amount of graphs & charts that he includes in the book, because they help the reader to see the logic behind his viewpoints.
To paraphrase Stephen Colbert, "Andrew Gelman knows American voters (and so can we)".
|
|
|
| |