USA 2016 Presidential election support by European ancestry

[sparkey]

Polls in the USA often include breakdowns by race, but this is the first one I've seen break it down by European ancestry. From BuzzFeed: https://www.buzzfeed.com/peteraldhou...the-white-vote

The article didn't include every ancestry they asked for, or that was volunteered, but they did include raw data, so I did a little tallying of my own. Here's a more complete list, ranked from most Trump support to most Clinton support:

German: Clinton 33%, Trump 51% (Trump +18)
American: Clinton 33%, Trump 50% (Trump +17)
Swedish: Clinton 33%, Trump 48% (Trump +15)*
Italian: Clinton 33%, Trump 44% (Trump +11)
Polish: Clinton 35%, Trump 44% (Trump +9)
Dutch: Clinton 34%, Trump 41% (Trump +7)*
English: Clinton 37%, Trump 43% (Trump +6)
Irish: Clinton 39%, Trump 40% (Trump +1)
French: Clinton 35%, Trump 35% (even)*
Norwegian: Clinton 37%, Trump 37% (even)*
Scottish: Clinton 41%, Trump 38% (Clinton +3)
Danish: Clinton 45%, Trump 27% (Clinton +18)*
Greek: Clinton 47%, Trump 12% (Clinton +35)*
Russian: Clinton 67%, Trump 29% (Clinton +38)*
*small sample size (<100)

[Angela]

Polls in the USA often include breakdowns by race, but this is the first one I've seen break it down by European ancestry. From BuzzFeed: https://www.buzzfeed.com/peteraldhou...the-white-vote

The article didn't include every ancestry they asked for, or that was volunteered, but they did include raw data, so I did a little tallying of my own. Here's a more complete list, ranked from most Trump support to most Clinton support:

German: Clinton 33%, Trump 51% (Trump +18)
American: Clinton 33%, Trump 50% (Trump +17)
Swedish: Clinton 33%, Trump 48% (Trump +15)*
Italian: Clinton 33%, Trump 44% (Trump +11)
Polish: Clinton 35%, Trump 44% (Trump +9)
Dutch: Clinton 34%, Trump 41% (Trump +7)*
English: Clinton 37%, Trump 43% (Trump +6)
Irish: Clinton 39%, Trump 40% (Trump +1)
French: Clinton 35%, Trump 35% (even)*
Norwegian: Clinton 37%, Trump 37% (even)*
Scottish: Clinton 41%, Trump 38% (Clinton +3)
Danish: Clinton 45%, Trump 27% (Clinton +18)*
Greek: Clinton 47%, Trump 12% (Clinton +35)*
Russian: Clinton 67%, Trump 29% (Clinton +38)*
*small sample size (<100)

Perhaps the long association of the Irish with the Democrat Party partly explains that result, but I don't get the Greek one. The Greek-Americans I know are often Trump supporters.

[sparkey]

Perhaps the long association of the Irish with the Democrat Party partly explains that result, but I don't get the Greek one. The Greek-Americans I know are often Trump supporters.

Greeks had a tiny sample size (n=17), the smallest next to Danish, so we probably shouldn't read too much into them. Their undecided percentage is also crazy high, probably due to the sample size again.

The weirdest one for me is Scottish. Aren't Scottish Americans typically older stock, many colonial? Why aren't they clustering with the "Americans" (typically Scots-Irish or other colonial British), or at least with English Americans? Instead, they're the only pro-Clinton group with a reasonable sample size.

[Angela]

Greeks had a tiny sample size (n=17), the smallest next to Danish, so we probably shouldn't read too much into them. Their undecided percentage is also crazy high, probably due to the sample size again.

The weirdest one for me is Scottish. Aren't Scottish Americans typically older stock, many colonial? Why aren't they clustering with the "Americans" (typically Scots-Irish or other colonial British), or at least with English Americans? Instead, they're the only pro-Clinton group with a reasonable sample size.

Is this Scots-Irish or actual Scottish? I somehow can't see the Scots-Irish of the border states or the highlands of the South being predominantly Clinton voters, can you?

[sparkey]

Is this Scots-Irish or actual Scottish? I somehow can't see the Scots-Irish of the border states or the highlands of the South being predominantly Clinton voters, can you?

It's a sample of a bit over 100 Americans who identified their primary ancestry as Scottish. "Scots-Irish" wasn't in the poll, so it's possible that quite a few Scots-Irish got mixed up in there, but I imagine that most Scots-Irish would have picked "American."

[Angela]

It's a sample of a bit over 100 Americans who identified their primary ancestry as Scottish. "Scots-Irish" wasn't in the poll, so it's possible that quite a few Scots-Irish got mixed up in there, but I imagine that most Scots-Irish would have picked "American."

You're probably right.

French is probably majority French-Canadian, so a lot from the North-east, so more liberal. I wonder why the difference between Swedish and Norwegian? The upper midwest has quite a history of "progressive" politics, Nebraska, the Dakotas etc. less so, more conservative. Was there a difference in terms of where the two groups wound up?

[oriental]

You're probably right.

French is probably majority French-Canadian, so a lot from the North-east, so more liberal. I wonder why the difference between Swedish and Norwegian? The upper midwest has quite a history of "progressive" politics, Nebraska, the Dakotas etc. less so, more conservative. Was there a difference in terms of where the two groups wound up?

I think the Norwegians are mostly in Washington State in the NW which is quite liberal while Swedes are mostly in Minnesota remember the 'Minnesota Vikings'? Former Vice Presidential Candidate Walter Mondale from Minnesota was Swedish. Minnesota is North Midwest and quite conservative.

[Angela]

Again, these are small sample sizes for the Swedes and Norwegians, so I wouldn't take it to the bank, but...

Minnesota conservative? It's been a blue state for a very, very, long time despite the fact that it's pretty working class, and Walter Mondale, a Democrat, for the time was quite liberal, although with the changes in politics, he'd probably be centrist now. (It's true that in rural areas they now vote for the Republicans, but that's true of New York State as well, and perhaps Swedish Americans might skew a bit more rural?)

It was the home of Hubert Humphrey let's not forget, and the epicenter of the "Progressive Movement".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_st...nd_blue_states

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_Era

The more I think about it, though, the more Trump may resonate with some of those people.

Actually, a much bigger percentage of Norwegian Americans live in the Midwest, where most originally settled, than in the Pacific Northwest.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norwegian_Americans

Swedish Americans are even more Midwestern: north and west of Chicago according to the following article.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swedish_Americans

[Fire Haired14]

The article exaggerates how much ethnicity matters to White Americans. The definition of White in America is first you look white(of Euro decrnt) and second you're normsl/mainstream culturally.

There are plenty of nonEuropeans in America who are culturally "white"/mainstream American. The only thing preventing them from being white is their physical aperence. Because European immigrants a century or more ago looked like Anglo and other natives they began to be seen mostly the same way especially when non-Euros were in subject. Few white Americans are not mixed ethnically. Few follow cultural tractions defined by ethnicity. Ethnicity simply is very unimportant.

I can tell all of you know Germans font vote for Trump because they're German but because of the political views of their region. I'm just frustrated by this article treating ethnicity as more important than it is.

[oriental]

As a student between quarters, our school had quarters instead of 6-month semesters and I spent the 10 days with a Minnesota family who were Italians. They told me when they first were in Minnesota they were called 'dagos' and 'wops'. I didn't know what that meant but I felt they were derogatory words. In Toronto an Italian guy guy told me the Italians who came to Toronto after the war were called 'dps' meaning displaced persons which was to him derogatory. So if you wonder why the 'political correctness' comes from in the 50s and 60s people were mean called ethnics derogatory names. We were called all kinds of names in India by the Indians who didn't like foreigners in their country. There were still a lot of British in India in the 50s and 60s. Anyway I didn't feel Minnesotans were liberal maybe the family lived in a suburb and suburbans are conservative.

[sparkey]

The article exaggerates how much ethnicity matters to White Americans. The definition of White in America is first you look white(of Euro decrnt) and second you're normsl/mainstream culturally.

There are plenty of nonEuropeans in America who are culturally "white"/mainstream American. The only thing preventing them from being white is their physical aperence. Because European immigrants a century or more ago looked like Anglo and other natives they began to be seen mostly the same way especially when non-Euros were in subject. Few white Americans are not mixed ethnically. Few follow cultural tractions defined by ethnicity. Ethnicity simply is very unimportant.

I can tell all of you know Germans font vote for Trump because they're German but because of the political views of their region. I'm just frustrated by this article treating ethnicity as more important than it is.

But why did regions develop certain political attitudes? Sure, there are some considerations like regional economic concerns resulting directly from the resources of regions (farming vs. mining vs. ports, etc.), but I have zero doubt that ancestral folkways played a part in the development of regional political attitudes. So while it's true that German Americans often live in the rural Midwest, you have to dig deeper and ask, why is the rural Midwest conservative to begin with? Sure, on an individual level, a person living in a region where other ancestries dominate is more likely to vote like their region than like their ancestry, but there are reasons that ancestry correlates with political persuasion.