Tag Archives: single women 2016 election

Trump’s People and Nevada Numbers

Trump demographics chart

I’ve done a bit of violence to the graphic from HuffPollster in order to clarify what we might describe as “Trump People.” Those potential voters described as follows: “Jason McDaniel and Sean McElwee: “[C]ompared to supporters of other Republican candidates in the primary, Trump supporters really dislike many groups in America. For these voters, Trump’s blend of casual racism and muscular nativism is the core of his appeal.” This analysis comes as no particular surprise.   The red line was added to the chart to indicate the half-way point – with scores above 50 indicating that the person being polled had feelings about another group that were generally positive; those with less than 50 had negative feelings about another ethnic or racial group which were generally negative.

Let’s move from left to right on the chart.  Trump People were less likely than other Republicans to have positive feelings about African Americans; they were even less likely to have positive feelings about Hispanic Americans.  As noted in yesterday’s post, approximately 27.8% of Nevadans are of Hispanic or Latino descent, an increase from the 2010 estimate of 26.5%.  [Census] 9.1% of Nevadans are African American, a percentage point increase from the 8.1% level in 2010. [Census

Clark County, the most populous area of the state, has an Hispanic/Latino population of 30.3%, an increase from the 2010 count of 27.8%.  [Census] The second most populous area, Washoe County, is 23.5% Hispanic/Latino of a total 446,903 population, 15.4% of the total state population.  For someone not from Nevada who might be reading this post, Nevada is essentially the Las Vegas Metropolitan area with the Reno/Sparks/Carson City area attached, slightly augmented by lots of miles and miles of very little but miles and miles.  The total state population is 2,890,845 and Clark County accounts for 2,114,801 of that, or 73.2%.  Loathe though we “ruralites” may be to accept it – the fact remains that in order to do well in Nevada statewide elections Clark County is the Grand Prize.

Thus, it’s appropriate to raise the question: How does a candidate who appeals to those who hold tentatively positive to negative views of African American and Hispanic/Latino groups attract voters in the major county which is 9.1% African American and 30.3% Hispanic/Latino?  It really doesn’t sound practical to essentially write off 39.4% of a population.

Trump’s people are more negative than other Republican primary voters when it comes to Muslims.  There have been “minor” increases in the Nevada Muslim population as reported in 2010, both increases in Clark and Washoe counties. [RCMS2010 pdf]  It’s altogether much easier to dislike people one’s never met, and the fact that there is no observable Muslim presence in rural areas may make the Trump appeal more palatable there.  However, “winning” in the rural counties only makes a difference in congressional races – not necessarily in statewide contests.

Only slightly higher on the Trump People’s scale of disliked groups are those who are transgender.  Precise numbers are more difficult to obtain, but estimates of Nevada’s transgender population range from 25,000 to 50,000. [LVRJ]  Using the highest estimate still leaves the total transgender population at 1.7% of the state total.  Again, this makes the transgender population a relatively easy target given the numbers. However, it may also render some of the Trump arguments more difficult, as in trying to explain why a maximum of 1.7% of the state’s population is a significant danger to the remaining 98.3%.

While those who were “supporting another candidate” or were a part of the “average response,” trended above the 50 mark on the chart – Trump people were generally below the line and therefore reported more negative feelings about gays and lesbians.  Again, we are not speaking of a large presence in Nevada, and one that is primarily centered in the  urban areas:

The total LGBT population is currently estimated at 88,005 or about 4% of the state population. [lgbtmap]  And the number in same sex relationships remains a small percentage of the state total population:

“Based on Census 2010, there are 7,140 same-sex couples living in Nevada. These couples were identified in all but one of Nevada’s counties. The majority of same-sex couples are male (53%), accounting for 3,768 couples. There are 3,372 female couples. The average age of individuals in same-sex couples in Nevada is more than four years younger than that of different-sex couples—43.8 and 48.2 years old, respectively.”  [Williams

Again, the Trump People tend to dislike a minority group, which tends to reside in – no elaborate conjecturing required here – the two urban areas of the state – where most of the other voters reside.

Trump People dislike “feminists” a bit more than they report disliking gays and lesbians.  There’s a problem with the definitions which get fuzzier the more individuals are poked and prodded on the subject. The textbook definition is that a feminist is one who believes in the political, social, and economic equality of the sexes.

If we look at national polling on the economic segment of the issue we find 73% of the American population supporting equal pay for equal work, with 64% of the men agreeing to that proposition along with 81% of American women. [AW.org]  The “classic definition” would then place 73% of the American population in the “feminist” category; including 81% of women and 64% of men. 

49.7% of Nevada’s population is female. 50% of the Clark County population is female.  49.7% of the Washoe County population is female.  If national polling among the “Millennials” is any guide then about 30% of Republican women and 10% of Republican men describe themselves as fitting into the feminist category; compared to 43% of independent women/23% of independent men; and, 62% of Democratic women and 32% of Democratic men.   Misogyny is not likely to play well to the independent and Democratic side of the  audience.

These issues are difficult to tease out because it’s a matter of how much misogyny is baked into the numbers, relative to the amount of sexism tossed into the mix.  The person the Trump People are supporting has been labeled sexist [Time]  and a downright misogynist [Slate] and both labels tend to blur into each other’s rhetorical territory.

However,  49.7% of Nevada’s population are more likely to respond positively to a candidate who acknowledges that in this State a woman who holds a full time job is paid on average $35,993 per year while her male counterpart receives $42,294. Meaning that women in Nevada are paid about 85 cents for every dollar paid to men, a pay gap of $6,301. [NP pdf]  A slogan of “equal pay for equal work” would appear to have a better chance of a positive result than railing on about feminist harpies.

There are 29,917 households in Clark County led by females, with no man present; and, 18,420 such households in Washoe County. [SubStats]  Polling back in January 2016 reported some relevant results among this subgroup:

“These women express a desire to support candidates whose policy agenda speaks to their distinct set of economic concerns, including equal pay, college affordability, paid sick days and family leave, and affordable child care. 

Yet, unmarried women also want a candidate who respects and cares for the wellbeing of women and families.  Unmarried women say they are more likely to support a candidate who will protect a woman’s access to reproductive health and birth control; at the same time, they are much less likely to support a candidate who opposes a woman’s right to have an abortion.  And women across the political spectrum outright reject a candidate who disparages women, even if they share policy positions with that candidate.” [AW.org]

In fact, the polling found disparagement was a deal breaker among 91% of Democratic women, 84% of independent women, and 73% of Republican women. [AW.org]  It would seem screeching about Femi-Nazis as “bimbos, fat pigs, slobs, and dogs” as tempting as it might be for some Trump People is counterproductive in the election department.

  Democrats Independents Republicans
January 471,342 234,229 423,308
May 518,124 247,344 452,028

Of course, the most important numbers are those of active voters (remotely equivalent to the likely voter category) and those show an increase of 9.93% in Democratic party registrations from January to May 2016; an increase of 5.68% in non-partisan registrations; and, and increase of 4.56% in Republican registrations.  [NV SoS pdf]

It may  be that the Trump People are not currently well positioned in Nevada’s electoral climate: A message appealing to a small but vocal base fearful and distrustful of minorities, and unfortunately located on the “disparagement” end of the spectrum where women are concerned, doesn’t appear to be all that potentially efficacious in contemporary Nevada politics.

Comments Off on Trump’s People and Nevada Numbers

Filed under gay issues, Nevada politics, Politics, Republicans, Women's Issues