|
bounty44 -> RE: Are most criminals democrats? (12/17/2015 1:49:00 PM)
|
http://www.philly.com/philly/news/politics/FactCheck_Are_most_violent_criminals_Democrats.html
quote:
The claim is based on research that found a majority of ex-felons in three states registered as Democrats. But that was a study of all ex-felons, not just violent criminals, as Cruz framed it.
so he is guilty of at least mis-speaking. small consolation though...most criminals are still [in this study] democrats, just not the "all the violent" ones.
quote:
Also, a follow-up study of three additional states by the same authors found the majority of ex-felons in those states were neither Republican nor Democrat.
this is hard to believe given the finding referred to in the first paragraph. and the article doesn't shed any light on why it was the case, which most assuredly would have been discussed by the authors. im going to guess the strong possibility the fact checkers, or the author of this article is not being accurate.
quote:
Another study estimated ex-felons are more likely to vote Democratic than Republican, but the authors caution that that doesn’t mean criminality is associated with partisanship. Rather, it is a reflection that those in the criminal justice system are more likely to be black, Latino or poor whites.
the only way through those mental gymnastics, and this is what the author is implying, is to hypothesize that black, latinos and poor whites who are charged with felonies get convicted of them at a significantly higher rate than do whites.
quote:
Their research into whether voting rights notification laws increase ex-felons’ voter turnout found that in three states — New York, New Mexico and North Carolina — a majority of ex-felons registered post-incarceration as Democrats. The breakdown was as follows: New York, 61.5 percent Democrat, 9 percent Republican; New Mexico: 51.9 percent Democrat, 18.9 percent Republican; and North Carolina, 54.6 percent Democrat, 10.2 percent Republican.
see my point above in the second quote---given these numbers, how is it even possible that a study with 3 additional states didn't find a majority of democrats?
quote:
“Cruz is misinterpreting our research,” Morse told us via email. “We only calculate the registration rates by party for discharged felons, and do not break this down by type of crime … So our work cannot speak to the partisanship of ‘violent criminals.’ ”
this is a rehash of my first point...instead of saying "violent criminals" cruz should have said "felons" (or rather, "ex-felons) but are we to suppose that somehow the violent offenders are apolitical and somehow different in that regard than the rest of their criminal brethren? it strains credulity.
quote:
Moreover, the two men published another paper in March 2014 with data from three other states — Iowa, Maine and Rhode Island — and the results were different. In all three of those states, a plurality was affiliated with no party (though in every case, there were far more registered as Democrats than Republicans).
again, no small consolation---so most criminals here weren't affiliated with a party, but note the parenthetical statement. when they are affiliated with a party, they are primarily democrats.
quote:
“Ex-felons’ partisan affiliations vary across states and I don’t think there’s enough evidence to claim that the national ex-felon population is ‘overwhelmingly Democratic,’ at least in terms of party registration,” Morse said. “There is more evidence that ex-felons are not very supportive of the Republican Party.”
except he didn't provide research evidence to that effect, and his later statement is somewhat in contradiction to his first one.
quote:
Morse pointed to the book “Locked Out: Felon Disenfranchisement and American Democracy” — written by Jeff Manza of New York University and Christopher Uggen of the University of Minnesota — which he said estimated that about 73 percent of ex-felons would vote Democratic.
sooooooo, they may not actually be democrats, they would just vote that way if they did indeed vote...
quote:
Indeed, Manza told us that he is aware of no direct survey of the felon population that asked about partisanship, meaning Cruz “has no direct evidence for what he said.”
this is somewhat misleading and dependent on their being some significant qualitative difference between felons and ex-felons. otherwise, cruz doesn't need "direct evidence" from a felon population. they are effectively the same population just at different points in time.
quote:
“I think the main things that are responsible for that correlation (between criminality and Democratic party affiliation) are race and poverty,” Uggen said. “If you look closely, it isn’t criminality that is so clearly associated with partisanship. We know very clearly that the criminal justice system falls more heavily on people of color in urban areas and people who are farther down the rungs of the socioeconomic ladder.”
this could very well be true...but it doesn't change the notion that most of them, at least the ones convicted, are nevertheless democrats.
quote:
Uggen noted that their research focused mainly on Oregon and Minnesota and so, “I can’t really speak to the national picture with confidence.” However, he said, “it is certainly the case (among ex-felons) that there are likely more individuals who would identify as Democrats rather than would identify as Republicans.”
sooooo, yeah.
quote:
According to the Pew Research Center, about 80 percent of the black population in the U.S. aligns with the Democratic Party.
given that, if there are more blacks than whites in prison, then it follows theres a good chance there are more democrats than republicans in prison too.
quote:
Cruz was on firmer ground when he went on to say that Democrats “go in and fight to give the right to vote to convicted felons. Why? Because the Democrats know convicted felons tend to vote Democrat.” There is evidence from the studies that ex-felons are more likely to register as Democrats than Republicans when their voting rights are restored.
so right...they weren't democrats "before"---they just become democrats "after"---a possibility yes, but again, a little bit of the credulity thing.
|
|
|
|
