Winning both above and below median income is a little nuts...
It's honestly just the 1% freaking out
this post was submitted on 05 Nov 2025
273 points (92.8% liked)
Mildly Interesting
23372 readers
646 users here now
This is for strictly mildly interesting material. If it's too interesting, it doesn't belong. If it's not interesting, it doesn't belong.
This is obviously an objective criteria, so the mods are always right. Or maybe mildly right? Ahh.. what do we know?
Just post some stuff and don't spam.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Really what I don't understand about Americans ... they are given two political options ... one sensible one and one batshit crazy one .... and it's still a complicated toss-up that they have to endlessly debate about.
Yes, but the sensible one has icky brown people. And my pastor told me that us blond blue eyed tall people are the chosen ones. You see, that's why we are politically "right", cuz we're on the right side! Gahyuck 😛
Mm it's more democrats are more sensible then repubs but they aren't at all sensible compared to most politicians that claim to be left of center.
This is what happens when money can purchase politics.
The American education system only had a very brief window of competency...
That's it, the tragic truth is we're woefully uneducated. There was a brief bright spot in the 80s/90s but even that wasn't great.
Other than that, it's the fact that so much of the country is isolated small towns. People in NYC and bumfuck Alabama don't really have a lot in common, so there's no real unifying identity or even set of values.
And then obviously oligarchs corrupting both parties so they couldn't lose. But its worth mentioning they lost control of the DNC almost a year ago.
We are bombarded with propaganda and large numbers of us aren't able to filter out true information. All of it is by design. While we're running around arguing with each other and being appalled by the outrage of the week the billionaires and their cronies (our "elected" representatives) do everything they can to siphon more and more money out of us. We're fed constant comfort and false security that keeps us complacent for fear that it'll be taken away. We're constantly forced to compare ourselves to others keeping us striving beyond reason to attain X so we can be happy or fulfilled or whatever their selling.
And how is it going in your country? Because i would bet my bottom dollar that the far right nationalist party either just made massive ground in your last election, or are predicted to have a massive increase in the next election. This isn't an American issue, it's a "our modern society is crumbling around us" issue.
This pisses me off the most. We're all getting a good look at how bad it can actually start going, like we have a real life example happening right now, not just rhetoric, and apparently we're all fucking excited for our turn.
I'm going to get my tinfoil hat on and say its the global illuminati new world order shadow government lizard people controlling everything because im not sure I can face reality believing the majority of people are that fucking stupid.
the global illuminati new world order shadow government lizard people
That was also right-wing projection, BTW.
https://newrepublic.com/article/182008/erik-prince-secret-global-group-chat-off-leash
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/cpac-trump-hungary-poland-orban-europe-maga/
Because the neoliberal order has absolutely decimated the standard of living for most people. People are driven from their homes by skyrocketing prices while their standard of living declines. We all see the wealth we are creating, but each year get a smaller and smaller slice of the pie. Fascists pry at the obvious flaws in the system, while the established institutions and parties swear that just a bit more austerity and investment into tech and finance companies will make everything better. Free-marlet capitalism has failed and everyone knows it, but the only the fascists are allowed to voice their solution since it further benefits the wealthy.
You would be correct if the "far right nationalist party" was anything comparable to actual fascists.
Sure, our rightmost mainstream party just had its second best election ever (≈20 %). The thing is that this party has been a decent part of parliament (8-17 %) since the 1980s. They were part of a government coalition with three other parties from 2017-2021.
Frankly, they're nowhere near being an actual far-right nationalist party. On a global scale, they're more of a "far-right" populist party for people that want to complain about all the other parties. They're basically immigrant-loving democratic communists compared to pretty much anyone but Bernie Sanders over in the US.
I think part of the problem in the US right now is that your Overton window is shifted so far to the right that pushing back against authoritarianism is no longer a given. So while Europe is definitely seeing a worrying surge of far-right nationalism, the pushback here is much stronger. Also, a European far-right party doing terrifyingly well and becoming the biggest party in parliament typically amounts to something like 20-30 % of the vote. When no other party will touch them with a fire poker, 30 % doesn't really give that much real power, so there's a decent protection in the multi-party system as well.
But you see, only one side wants to punish the people I don't like, so... the choice is clear. /s
Every time I look all options are crazy. Some might be slightly less crazy, but all are crazy in some way.
It's important to note that this table doesn't actually directly compare transit riders' vs drivers' voting habits. It's "election districts with..." more transit riders or drivers. There could be other outside variables such as income levels and political party affiliations in those different districts that influenced these results.
This is also true about all of the other variables in the table. It's only comparing trends between districts, not between individual people.
No it's not. This is divisive bullshit and statistics gore.
The numbers you're looking at are how districts with more or less transit riders / drivers voted. On top of that, it was a pretty close split amongst both sides, with just slightly more on each side leaning one way or another.
Wouldn't drivers also want free transit so there's less traffic?
I've tried this argument with them, it doesn't work. They just shift focus to "Waste of our money", which of course is then "What about roads", and then they go back to "But people use roads", "But people use transit too". They'll just point to the next thing fox news has taught them.
They've already decided those who disagree with them are below them. The people who use transit aren't people in their minds, not truly. Second class citizens at best, untermenschen at worst.
I've frequently broken peoples brains when they're arguing against transit and they use that. "Only poor people use transit". I ride transit, and I make a decent living in tech. They then either make a really lame attempt at a joke like "You must not be doing that well" then or stumble and mutter and change the subject. Can't have anything that challenges their worldview right?
They're not thinking with facts they're thinking with feelings.
I don't know if it's unique to the US, but there's a perception that "progress" is a farce that never helps as much as politicians claim. I personally think it's because we've got such a long history of means-testing welfare to such a ridiculous extent, like we kick people off disability if they have more than $2k in the bank, that "free bus for everybody" just sounds like a scam, too good to be true.
Not really - they are paying a lot for their car and want transit riders to take more of the share of the transit costs. If they gain more from free transit than they cost is a complex subject.
They may also understand that transit is expensive and for most the cost of transit isn't why they wouldn't ride in the first place and so free transit won't make much a difference. Meanwhile charging for transit and also giving transit the money that free transit would cost would give enough money that better service could be provided and poor service (for the individual trip) is why most people don't ride transit. (though NYC transit spends far more on better service than it should so who knows)
Staten Island, you say!
Wealth vs wages? Cars require a substantial amount to buy, and then a decent liveable paycheck that leaves you something to play with for fuel and upkeep. Public transport is something more affordable for wage slaves.
I’m sure there’s a bit of geography going on here. I wouldn’t be surprised if Staten Island has far more cars than the other boroughs due to their having fewer public transportation options. I know Cuomo had more supporters there than other boroughs.
URL?
Idk what I'm looking at lol. Don't blame me though I'm from Wisconsin
Zohran Mamdani is the democratic socialist democrat, Cuomo the Sex Pest is the former democrat governor of the state, and Curtis Sliwa is the republican.
Districts with the freaks that drive cars in NYC voted more against Mamdani and everyone else for Mamdani.
Districts with the freaks that drive cars in NYC voted more against Mamdani and everyone else for Mamdani.
This is uncalled for. People who are different are not freaks and need to be thought of as humans who are different.
District is a poor measure - others have pointed out already there was a close split, but you can abuse statistics to make them show any division you want.
People who are different are not freaks
Are they really all that different though? I drive too. Granted, not in NYC, but still doesn't really justify that kind of behavior.
A slight majority of people in either direction.
It's crazy how easy it is to manipulate some of you people the moment some statistic goes over 50%
Misleading statistics gore.
And note that Sliwa voters composed 15% of drivers - about double that of residents above median income.
So 58% of districts are at or above median income, but only 24% of districts have more drivers than riders?
Could it be that both variables are closely correlated, and the latter is just sampling closer to the tail end of the distribution?
Yeah, this is Garbage level analysis of statistics.
You can see something similar in NJ Governor's election as well.