Education and the Electorate

Here's Obama versus McCain by educational attainment. It's close in every bracket except those with graduate degrees, where Obama has a big edge. When you look at these numbers it's important to recall that the largest bloc of people with grad school diplomas are public school teachers. It sometimes gets glossed as a cohort of college professors, but overall the number of people with professionally oriented degrees (teachers, lawyers, dentists, journalism school graduates, etc.) far, far outnumbers PhDs in the United States.

Comments

And don't forget MBAs, also not what one normally thinks of when describing "postgraduates."

Posted by vm | June 5, 2008 5:30 PM

Other people who are numberous who you don't think of as postgraduate: many IT professionals.

Posted by cnnr | June 5, 2008 5:38 PM

So the smarter you are, the more likely you are to vote Democratic. Tell us something we don't already know!

Posted by CN | June 5, 2008 5:51 PM

Alternatively, the leftier you are the more likely you are to waste extra years in school instead of producing something.

Posted by Noah Yetter | June 5, 2008 6:00 PM

Educated ≠ smart.

Posted by Mike in Denmark | June 5, 2008 6:03 PM

Also, some nurses and many, many public-sector professionals have master's degrees.

"People with a post-graduate degree" is basically most any mid-career white-collar worker who made it to a supervisory position. SOMEBODY is enrolling in those professional master's programs at the local college that you see advertisements for.

I, however, remain within the cohort of Democrat-voting elites with a Ph.D. I really need to find myself an apartment in San Francisco, Cambridge, or Manhattan's Upper West Side. I really feel I haven't yet fulfilled the potential of my stereotype.

Posted by Tyro | June 5, 2008 6:04 PM

Another way of looking it is that post-grads were more sheltered in the past, and are more sheltered in similar ways now. Some of those may be suffering from certain mild mental afflictions relating to guilt.

Posted by TLB | June 5, 2008 6:09 PM

also: doctors, lawyers, and architects all have masters degrees. Something tells me the number of lawyers in any given town far outweighs the number of educators. Am I wrong about this?

Posted by Jason | June 5, 2008 6:13 PM

Alternatively, the leftier you are the more likely you are to waste extra years in school instead of producing something.

Posted by Noah Yetter | June 5, 2008 6:00 PM

Yeah, those MBAs, dentists, scientists, teachers, doctors, etc etc sure are useless!

Posted by lfv | June 5, 2008 6:19 PM

If you look at education vs. income, the relationship is positive.

If you look at education vs. Democratic voting, the relationship is positive.

If you look at income vs. Democratic voting, the relationship is negative.

I seem to recall that if you look at the most extreme combinations of these factors -- such as poor, well-educated people or rich, uneducated people, these factors become almost ridiculously determinative -- like, virtually no poor/well educated types are Republicans, and virutally no rich/poorly educated types are Democrats.

Posted by Julian Elson | June 5, 2008 6:39 PM

Some of those may be suffering from certain mild mental afflictions relating to guilt.

As opposed to social phobia and paranoid delusions of a vast Brown Menace, which hits a fair few DSM-IV criteria.

Posted by pseudonymous in nc | June 5, 2008 7:06 PM

So the smarter you are, the more likely you are to vote Democratic. Tell us something we don't already know!
Posted by CN

Educational level does not equal intelligence.

No morons are PhDs, but many dullards believe that attaining degrees substitutes in later life for a lack of mental nimbleness, creativity, curiosity, and drive.
Thus you see a mass of people of average or below average intelligence becoming teachers with masters degrees, MSinSW, masters in public administration apparachniks. Their sheer numbers overwhelm the number of higher level mental function people with postgraduate degrees in more demanding professional fields and "skew" results in many surveys and polls about "attitudes to those with post-graduate degrees".

Posted by chris ford | June 5, 2008 7:11 PM

What I don't get is the "High School or less" category. Considering how poor this cohort is on average, it's bewildering how Republican it is.

Is it that rural people are far less likely to go to college than anyone else?

Posted by WillieStyle | June 5, 2008 7:43 PM

@ Jason - All modern Lawyers have doctorates. I.e., J.D.s

Posted by Trent | June 5, 2008 7:47 PM

Wow! Us educated people are really, really cool.

Posted by John Petty | June 5, 2008 8:08 PM

What I don't get is the "High School or less" category. Considering how poor this cohort is on average, it's bewildering how Republican it is.

Only if you believe the "the Democrats are the party of the little guy" nonsense.

Posted by Mixner | June 5, 2008 8:44 PM

All modern Lawyers have doctorates. I.e., J.D.s

Despite containing the word "doctor" in the degree title, nobody seriously thinks a JD is a doctoral level degree. That's not to say that most JDs, especially from decent schools, aren't fairly bright. But it's a totally different type of degree -- memorization versus original research.

There are two post-JD degrees for lawyers; there's nothing past the PhD.

Posted by James Joyner | June 5, 2008 9:17 PM

So you're telling us that teachers' unions support the Democratic candidate?

Despite containing the word "doctor" in the degree title, nobody seriously thinks a JD is a doctoral level degree. That's not to say that most JDs, especially from decent schools, aren't fairly bright. But it's a totally different type of degree -- memorization versus original research.

As a fellow PhD, can I tell you there's nothing quite as embarrassing as failed academics who get really defensive about how a PhD is mondo better than JDs?

Posted by marta | June 5, 2008 10:35 PM

Law school has very little to do with memorization (bar exams are something else). Certainly less than med school.

Posted by Pithlord | June 5, 2008 10:48 PM

Meanwhile, as Reverend Obama claims to champion public schools his kids attend elite private schools.

Posted by Linus | June 5, 2008 10:57 PM

Thank you, MattY!

What I'm going to do is find a couple dozen post-grads who support BHO and present them with examples of a couple of his lies and a couple of his incredibly flawed policies. Then, I'll ask them to describe why they still support him (if they do). It should be an interesting peek into the minds of his supporters, and might even be referenced by those studying other cults.

Posted by TLB | June 5, 2008 11:09 PM

Does this mean the Educated Elite get to be the Nascar-Dad/Security-Mom swing demographic of 2008?

Posted by Jinchi | June 6, 2008 12:09 AM

Linus: There are public schools and then there are southside schools. Believe, me (I live in Hyde Park) if you have a chance to make your kid a labbie you do so.

Posted by chichi | June 6, 2008 12:32 AM

What's that---? Obama has a couple of flawed policies and has found some wiggle room with the truth? Oh no!!!! This post-grad's entire worldview is crushed. I guess I will have to vote for John McCain instead, who has never misspoken, has never endorsed a flawed policy, has never flip-flopped a position, and is pure as the driven snow.

Thanks for setting me straight, TLB!

Posted by Adam Villani | June 6, 2008 12:44 AM

Linus: There are public schools and then there are southside schools. Believe, me (I live in Hyde Park) if you have a chance to make your kid a labbie you do so.

The hypocrisy lies in rabidly decrying the amount of "unfair" socioeconomic inequality in our society while giving your own kids what is perhaps the biggest "unfair" advantage in life that they can acquire--a primo education. If you think it's okay to give your kid the means to do much better in life than your neighbors' kids just because you can, you're hardly in a position to complain about the huge social disparities in wealth, health, education, longevity, etc. that arise from millions of other parents doing the same.

Posted by Mixner | June 6, 2008 1:09 AM

Similarly, everyone with kids who doesn't live in a home with lead-based paint should dose their kids with small amounts of lead, because it would be unfair to give their kids the unfair advantage of lack-of-lead-poisoning when many poor kids growing up in homes with lead-based paint are poisoned by it. Any real liberal who believes in equality believes that universal lead poisoning is the only fair solution, and anyone claiming otherwise is a hypocrite.

Posted by Julian Elson | June 6, 2008 2:16 AM

Back in 2004, Matt, like The Economist magazine, fell hard for the popular hoax that states that voted for Gore in 2000 had much higher IQs than states that voted for Bush -- e.g., Connecticut 113 vs. Utah 87. It was then recirculated right after Kerry lost.

If you look at the exit polls, Bush voters in 2000 had a negligible advantage in education level, while Kerry voter had a modest advantage in 2004.

The states with the highest average education levels, however, such as Massachusetts, do tend to vote Democratic.

For details see: http://www.isteve.com/iqhoax.htm

Posted by Steve Sailer | June 6, 2008 2:35 AM

If you are interested in non-hoax estimates for average IQ by states, here's Audacious Epigone's estimates based on 8th grade NAEP test scores. The general pattern is the farther north, the higher the average.

http://anepigone.blogspot.com/2006/11/iq-estimates.html

Posted by Steve Sailer | June 6, 2008 3:02 AM

Is Mixner a societal Marxist?

Posted by Reality Man | June 6, 2008 4:09 AM

Re: The hypocrisy lies in rabidly decrying the amount of "unfair" socioeconomic inequality in our society while giving your own kids what is perhaps the biggest "unfair" advantage in life that they can acquire--a primo education.

When I hear about some young person dying of cancer I think that's horribly unfair too. Does this mean I would be a hypocrite if I contracted cancer and obtained the best treatment for it I could?

Posted by JonF | June 6, 2008 6:56 AM

Does this mean I would be a hypocrite if I contracted cancer and obtained the best treatment for it I could?

No, your doctor's the hypocrite for being against cancer and treating it while never having had cancer himself.

Also, this poll by educational attainment would be more interesting if it were taken state-by-state with racial breakdown.

Posted by Tyro | June 6, 2008 8:33 AM

While these numbers will probably radically change by November (with probably Obama's basic lead with those with postgraduate degrees being the only definite comparison that will hold closely in November), they are rather interesting. IIRC, Kerry won among those with a high school degree or less while losing those with some college or only a college degree. Meanwhile, Obama is barely losing those with just a high school degree while being tied among college graduates.

Posted by Reality Man | June 6, 2008 9:06 AM

Yes. If this were Ph.D.s only, the slit would be more like 70-30. If it were Ivy Ph.D.s ( I'm one) it would be more like 80-20 or even 85-15. But hey, like Obama, I'm an elitest.

Posted by Matt | June 6, 2008 11:09 AM

Yes. If this were Ph.D.s only, the split would be more like 70-30. If it were Ivy Ph.D.s ( I'm one) it would be more like 80-20 or even 85-15. But hey, like Obama, I'm an elitest.

Posted by Matt | June 6, 2008 11:09 AM

Yes. If this were Ph.D.s only, the split would be more like 70-30. If it were Ivy Ph.D.s ( I'm one) it would be more like 80-20 or even 85-15. But hey, like Obama, I'm an elitest.

Posted by Matt | June 6, 2008 11:09 AM

Inductivist:
Mean IQ of college grads dropped 9 points from the 60s to the 90s
"Mean IQ--white college grads

1960s 113.72
1970s 110.59
1980s 108.04
1990s 104.42
2000s 105.12"
http://inductivist.blogspot.com/2008/06/mean-iq-of-college-grads-dropped-9.html

(he didn't include other races because their sample sizes were too small in the General Social Survey data he uses)

Posted by scottynx | June 6, 2008 11:56 AM

JonF,

When I hear about some young person dying of cancer I think that's horribly unfair too. Does this mean I would be a hypocrite if I contracted cancer and obtained the best treatment for it I could?

No. If you disagree with what I wrote, do you an actual, you know, argument to offer against it, or are you so flummoxed by it that bizarre nonsequiturs is all you can come up with?

Posted by Mixner | June 6, 2008 6:24 PM

It sometimes gets glossed as a cohort of college professors, but overall the number of people with professionally oriented degrees (teachers, lawyers, dentists, journalism school graduates, etc.) far, far outnumbers PhDs in the United States.
===============================================

Do you really think degrees in education are *professional* degrees?

Posted by Campesino | June 6, 2008 6:42 PM

Pretty sad:

The unflattering fact that we must own up to is that many, perhaps most, of those who choose teaching as a profession represent the very bottom of the academic barrel. Let's look at it.

The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) compiles loads of statistics on education. The NCES "Digest of Education Statistics" Table 136 shows average SAT scores by student characteristics for 2001. Students who select education as their major have the lowest SAT scores of any major (964). Math majors have the highest (1174).

It's the same story when education majors finish college and take tests for admission to graduate schools. In the case of the Graduate Record Examination (GRE), education majors have an average score that's the lowest (467) of all majors except for sociology majors (434). Putting this in perspective, math majors score the highest (720), followed closely by economics in third place (625).

Posted by Campesino | June 6, 2008 6:54 PM

Inductivist link I posted also shows a stable mean IQ for advanced degree holders over time. The data above is for bachelor's degrees.

Posted by scottynx | June 6, 2008 7:33 PM