Both Republicans and Democrats have focused on the whiteness and maleness and less-education and anger of the Trump voter, especially in the Rust Belt counties/states that switched from narrowly Democratic to narrowly Republican four weeks ago. The impression is created of a slow, resentful giant emerging from the earth wearing a tool belt to trudge down to the voting booth, claiming what he believes is his.
Yet the impression of giantness is based on percentages in the turnout. The totals of absolute votes are known, but their composition is only estimated, based on exit polls. If “Trump got turnout from his people,” that could have been countered by Hillary getting turnout from her people.
It could be that the giant was the one who stayed in the earth. Hillary did better among women, so “giantess” might be more accurate. One might have expected less excitement among African-Americans after the draw of voting for Obama, but there seems to have been a lot less excitement. A smallish giant may have risen up, but a few smaller giants lying down may have been more the issue. The dog that didn’t bark may be the real story.
There is a lot of discussion about the male-female voting in this election, overlooking an important qualifier, as usual. The split was greater this time, but it’s the same split we see every election. In the breakdown by marital status, not further broken down by race, married men were solidly for Trump; married women and unmarried men were about even-up; single women were strongly for Hillary. When one looks only at a strict male-female breakdown it can obscure the knowledge that husbands and wives tend to vote similarly. I recall a number of 80% from years ago, though I have no idea what the basis of that was. The reporting this election focused more on wives who were angry at their husbands who were voting for Trump, and Dear Abby*, what should I do? I admit that’s better clickbait.
As for the education breakdown, I’m not sure the MBA’s are going to be as solidly Republican as years ago, nor are engineers, but I’ll bet it’s still strong. Graduate degrees in education are going to trend strongly liberal, but not entirely. The public administration/social service group is going to be overwhelmingly liberal. I bring this up because from whence comes the money, one’s self-interest, does influence the vote. The intended implication that more education = wiser usually leaves that out.
*I love it when important publications try to pretend they are writing something above the level of Dear Abby, when they actually are a couple ticks below.