Red State, Blue State, Rich State, Poor State: Why Americans Vote the Way They Do (Expanded Edition),   ISBN:9780691143934

Customer Rating: 

Andrew Gelman's thesis shouldn't surprise anyone who critically follows the news. He begins with the oft repeated media phrase, "limosine liberal", and goes on to demonstrate how reliably those with high incomes and those with low incomes vote Republican and Democratic respectively. The same correlation holds for religion.

There is some interesting material on how the correlations are different in other countries and in Mexico how quickly things can change.

The value of this book is that it provides a good number of ready reference charts, and a cogent analysis of how voting correlates with income and religious participation. Poor states may vote Republican, but poor people generally do not. Rich states may vote Democratic, but rich people generally do not.

Customer Rating: 

The catchy title made me pick Red State, Blue State up. But it seems that you can't judge a book by its title any more than its cover. There's not much catchy about the writing in this book. Solid but stodgy, the book reads like a textbook. Lots of information, but as written better referenced than read.

Political science students or teachers will probably get more out of Red State, Blue State than a casual reader, though the basic premise should interest most people. Its author, Andrew Gelman, poses a paradox -- poor people tend to vote Democratic, and rich people Republican, no matter where they live. Yet rich states vote Democratic, and poor states Republican. Why?

Several reasons drive this paradox, and Gelman analyzes them. The upshot is that the better-off in the rich states tend to vote more Democratic than the better-off in the poor states. That makes the rich states blue and the poor states red.

While that explains the paradox, why do rich-state rich people shift Democratic? That requires more explanation, which Gelman delivers. He gives lots of data, has lots of charts, and looks at lots of polling and recent election results to develop his themes.

Politics interest me, but only as an observer. That kind of interest kept me going through the first quarter of the book. Then my interest waned, and I just skimmed the rest. Since this book is rather short, many general readers may find the book's price steep for them. A student or teacher, used to textbook prices, may find the book a bargain.

(While on polling rather than political divisions, the book The Opinion Makers caught my interest much more than Red State, Blue State.)

Customer Rating: 

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.

Customer Rating: 

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.

Customer Rating: 

"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.