The two ladies in question both teach Feminist Jurisprudence at law schools, and have no scientific pre-law background, having attended the same PR and IA school for their bachelors of art, they've no science or math background, social or natural. I recognize the data they are using, its ACS data from the Census Bureau, Pew did an analysis of it sometime back, needless to say they didn't draw the same conclusions, but then they didn't deliberately leave out the most blue least liberal demographic of the Dems, African-Americans, in their analysis, which has been a source of a lot of criticism on the book.



AA aren't particularly liberal, no, almost all blue though, red v blue state doesn't measure lib/con tendency. As is often pointed out, all that is indicated by Red v Blue is what percentage of the population of the state is urban.

Also not mentioned in the article is that those 5 young red states have a median first marriage age of 25, with the usual year and change higher for males over females, and the old blues are 30, DC sticks out at 32. When Pew looked at their data what they commented on was that the first marriage age of everyone was on a massive rise and that marriage length was shorter, more divorces. Utah, the very youngest, has half of it's first-time brides before age 24, not exactly in my mind a horrible sign.

It's just a number game though, which draws my criticism, and would draw it heavier if the authors actually had a scientific background, I can play with the same data and show you higher crime rates in blue states too, and as right-wing as I am I don't consider the dems to encourage crime. We see a lot of cherry picking of data to essentially change the real demographic culprits into political ones, its practically become a dance routine. My favorites are the ones conclusively proving how much dumber or smarter one group is over another, invariably a form of ideological masturbation that often uses false indicators and when they do it properly amounts to assigning a cause-effect relationship between two things which are actual effects. You remember that 'economic knowledge' survey that got posted a while back I'm sure, and while it was probable that pro-capitalist would know more about capitalist economic theory the choice in wording was clearly the root of the knowledge gap, nor did economic knowledge indicate anything about intelligence other than knowledge of economics.