ABSTRACT
Venerable media such as the New York Times and the Guardian produced maps and analyses of the states that voted for Trump and those that voted for Clinton in the 2016 US presidential election. Contrasts between these sets of states included rurality, educational attainment, loss of jobs for those without college degrees, coast vs. inland, and other obvious ways of looking at states. Numerous socioeconomic factors tightly connect with each other in the Trump set of states, many more than in the Clinton set. The Trump-voting states hosted much greater freeloading through the entire 2005–2015 period than the Bureau of Labor Statistics has posted on its website. The Clinton states show no significant associations between per capita productivity and indicators of household economic conditions, whereas the Trump states show strong associations between per capita productivity on one hand and poverty rate and median income on the other.
