Talk Elections

MD (doctors)
JD (Lawyers)
MBA (Business Administration)
Pharmacy
MPA (Public Administration)
Urban Planning
Education
Astronomy
Public Health
Religion
Social Work
Engineering

MD (doctors) - Romney
JD (Lawyers) - Obama
MBA (Business Administration) - Romney
Pharmacy - Obama
MPA (Public Administration) - Obama
Urban Planning - Obama
Education - Obama
Astronomy - Obama
Public Health - Obama
Religion - Romney
Social Work - Obama
Engineering - Obama

MD- Republican
JD- Democrat
Pharmacy- Republican
MBA- Republican
MPA- don't know
Urban Planning- Democrat
Education- Democrat
Public Health- Democrat
Astronomy- Republican
Social Work- Democrat
Engineer- Republican
Religion- Democrat

^^^

Astronomers would vote for a party with a large contingent who believes the earth is 6,000 years old??

Doctors - Toss-Up
Lawyers - Toss-Up
Business Administration - Romney
Pharmacy - Obama
Public Administration - Possibly Obama, not confident
Urban Planning - Obama
Education - Obama
Public Health - Obama
Religion - Romney
Social Work - Obama
Engineering - Romney
Astronomy - Toss-Up

The science field tends to be Republican while the liberal arts voters tend to be more Democratic. However, we've seen in many elections where those with post graduate degrees vote at a higher percentage for Democrats than those with a 4 year college degree.

Engineering is probably a toss-up. Engineers as a whole are heavily Republican, however there is virtually no benefit in terms of salary or job advancement to getting anything higher than a BS in engineering if you want a private sector job, so most engineers don't bother. If you're getting an MS and/or PhD in engineering, it's because you want to be a researcher or a professor. I know two guys who are doing PhDs in biomedical engineering and they are both lefties who love Obama. I know plenty of people who got bachelor's degrees in engineering and now work in oil & gas or chemical engineering and they are all severely conservative Republicans.

Ironically, someone whose livelihood depends on deciphering our country's complicated tax code should be fighting tooth and nail against anything that flattens or simplifies the tax code, and probably shouldn't be supporting Republicans. And they sure as hell should oppose getting rid of the corporate income tax, considering their clients are...corporations who want to minimize their tax burden.

Doctors - Lean Obama
Lawyers - Toss-Up
Business Administration - Romney
Pharmacy - Obama
Public Administration - Not sure, I would say Obama
Urban Planning - Obama
Education - Solid Obama
Public Health - Obama
Religion - Solid Romney
Social Work - Obama
Engineering - Toss-Up
Astronomy - Obama

Engineering post-grads are probably lean-Dem overall, though not by any means guaranteed Dem. PhD students as a whole vote overwhelmingly Democratic, but engineering is something of an excepting. I do think there is some selection bias with the more conservative engineers opting for industry and the more liberal engineers disproportionately for grad school. Keep in mind that our stipends and research are largely government funded. That's not a minor concern and probably a huge reason for the leftward lean in academia. Another factor is that engineering students skew heavily male, so the gender gap plays a role.

Still in my experience, there are some around with every ideology in engineering grad school. I'd say Obama probably won engineering PhDs nationally but not by a huge margin.

Considering the largely young and unmarried demographics at play here, combined with a post-graduate degree being one of the strongest indicators other than race of voting Democratic, the numbers here should be strongly Democratic across the board. There's probably an exception for MBA students (MAYBE religion?), people are overthinking this.

^Yeah many if not most of the Republican voters with post-grad degrees are white male olds.

Why are people considering doctors and lawyers toss-ups/lean Dems? Aren't these groups among the strongest Dem voters?

Lawyers yes, doctors not so much.

MD's voted overwhelmingly for Romney

I remember reading a study about med students being disproportionately Dems. I know it's a fact that, like, 70%+ lawyers are Dems, which makes of these comments mystifying.

I agree with Badger. Based on demographics alone, I would guess that most post graduate students skew heavily Democratic. Heck, very few people in advanced academia skew Republican.

This is true. Other than professionals such as doctors and lawyers though, most Republican professions don't require a post-graduate degree. Instead they go out and make money after college.

You guys seem to be equating post-grad religion with clergy or people working in organized religion. That might be partially true, but at least a large minority of them are academics, religious historians, people who study comparative religion, etc; who obviously are very liberal. Really need to break down that category.

I myself am one of them; a religion scholar and let me tell you our department is full of liberals. They're not very liberal, but solid Democrats. The clergy at the schools I've attended lean Republican; purplish red to light red. What I've been fortunate enough to avoid is liberal professors who bring every topic of discussion back to Bush and Iraq. There's a lot of that to watch out for in academia. My religion classes helped to make me the happy moderate that I am, but didn't turn me to the dark side. I've become quite a critical thinker.

As to MBAs, I don't know how common it is in the US for various specialisations to actually do a master. In Germany, a Bachelor is worth nothing (even not for chartered accountants), so virtually every  economic professional needs an MBA here. A quick count among my MBA friends and acquaintances (including colleagues, and guys I went to school with) yields something like 12 left-leaning vs. 2 right-leaning vs. 1 toss-up, but that is Germany, and may also include quite an selection bias on my side.

In terms of specialisation, I would guess the following:
Marketing - strong Obama
Recruiting - strong Obama (many females)
Banking / Finance - toss-up (international exposure favouring Obama, self-identification favouring Romney)
Accounting / taxation - toss-up or lean Obama
Production management/ control - Romney
IT-related - Obama
Top management - depends on sector, industry strong Romney, services toss-up or lean Obama.

Overall, I would guess it is an Obama lean.

Scientists strongly lean Democratic, according to this Pew study.
http://www.people-press.org/2009/07/09/section-4-scientists-politics-and-religion/ (http://www.people-press.org/2009/07/09/section-4-scientists-politics-and-religion/)
55% of scientists are lean democrats; 6%(!) are republicans. Counting in leaners, the figure is about 81% democratic.

As such, I would expect science postgrads to have strongly supported Obama.

Some reasons for this:

a) A large proportion of scientists work in the public center
b) They are disproportionately agnostic; almost none are evangelicals (see chart at bottom).
c) Scientists of today (as opposed to say, 150 years ago) are much more interconnected throughout the globe. There is much less nationalistic rivalry as opposed to that between Germany and Britain in the early 20th century. Thus, they are strongly internationalist (and therefore do not take kindly to anti-UN rhetoric).
d) They spend longer getting degrees, therefore more time is spent in predominantly liberal postgrad cities.

So from what it seems here, most postgrads in scientific fields, including (and perhaps especially) astronomy are liberal. They would have strongly supported Obama.

Doctors, however, do not seem to be as liberal. I see more of a liberal trend occurring over several decades, in part a result of the general educational elite moving towards the democrats. However, doctors are more conservative than scientists probably because they operate in a more corporate setting; there is less public sector influence.

The setting one works in is more of an influence than the education they were part of.

Evidence?

e) (Much of the) Republican party's support for anti-scientific views: Support for ID/YE Creationism, scepticism/denial of global warming. When President Bush declared his support for teaching ID and evolution as "competing theories", it really showed the problems Republicans have with science. Scientists are probably less likely to vote for such a party.

The more likely answer is that their funding comes from Democrats. Both parties and their factions are driven by income. That's how the world works.

Hmmm... if all the scientists'funding came from democrats (which it doesn't) that would de facto make the Republican party the anti-science party would it not?

And one's income does not dictate how one will vote; or else the republicans wouldn't win elections. Also, the fact that the states that get the most money from the federal government are Republican states, and vice versa for Democratic states (poignantly shown by the Christie-Paul feud).

Many of these states (including West Virginia, Arkansas, Kentucky, Mississippi) are among the country's poorest. The reason they vote for republicans is because of social issues.

No because what you're referring to is Republican rhetoric from the campaign trail as opposed to what really happens in congress. I don't know what this has to do with income. Just because a state gets money from the federal government doesn't mean they want it. The correct measurement would be to ask voters if they want the federal government involved so much. I agree they vote Republican because of social issues too, but people who are socially conservative tend to favor lower taxes and the right to work. Very few people hold views outside of their own party.

Doctors aren't as liberal as lawyers or academics, but they are far less Republican than they were 40 years ago.

But physicians are, on the whole, terrible with money. Most of them will never take an accounting or management course in their lives. That's why they tend to let the billing service they outsource their accounts to do the worrying about the money. My father has had years of post-doctoral training from some of the top teaching hospitals in the country. But if I try to go over his retirement accounts with him, basic math and financial terminology go completely over his head. If I ask him what medical procedures have the highest profit margins for him or what patient demographic generates the most revenue for his practice, he can't tell me. And most doctors can't. It's part of the reason they're such easy marks for pharmaceutical reps and people selling medical equipment.

I attribute that to the reason that most physicians, when they opt for public office, tend to be truly awful legislators and administrators.

Since when are legislators good with money? 99% of voters are more qualified to be in congress than your average congressman today.

I worked in hospital administration for a few years (including during the 2012 election) and all of the top executives were Democrats. I walked into the office one day and they were all laughing about Palin's comments about Libya. I think the anti-science/anti-intellectual wing of the GOP really turns off people in the medical field. They should be voting Republican based on their income levels, however it's hard to pull the lever for a candidate who stands for everything that your profession doesn't.

I bet I can't stand uninformed people either. Overall I'd think the medical field is divided though.

E
Someone with better cut and copy capacity than I do on my phone please get this to the irony ore mine post-haste.

I bet George Voinovich could do it.

What's your obsession with my favorite retired senator?

Actually, here in Laramie, I know of at least 3 or 4 Math or Cosci PostDocs and Professors whose opinions at times read off of the 2012 Republican Party Platform almost verbatim. I know this because one repeatedly makes jokes in class about the budget being so high, another one talked about union busting, "getting the Government off the backs of scientists" and about how wrong it was not to call illegal immigrants, illegal immigrants.  Another one just talked about busting unions. Another one put on defensive body language and said "I don't want to talk about it" when I mentioned Obama's debate performance. He's probably a staunch anticommunist because he's from the Eastern Bloc.  Then again, this is Wyoming and I even know a Poli Sci professor who made jokes about Sen. Simpson being pro abortion when she said, "they like to be called pro-choice" and a religion professor who said Barack is Arabic for "curse".

I mean,  STEM fields (outside of Astrophysics and Biology) aren't as policy dominated as humanities majors and many Math, Engineering and Cosc profs  do consulting and have start ups.

I don't know, but I tease him about it because he has an obsession with being harder on Republicans than Democrats.

Barfbag, the gentleman has been with medical executives who clearly didn't like the Republican  Party. Some of it is because of the anti-science views of most Representatives of this party, some of it is because they are left in their political views. The only people that you could think could be divided are the religious (attends church weekly) group of medical professionals, but they are a much smaller segment of doctors and nurses than the U.S. populace.

Accountants are typically more conservative and thus, the GOP usually does well with accountants.  However, in NY especially and in NJ and FL, a large chunk of accountants are jewish and thus, the democrats eat up a lot of that support.

Physicians? It depends on who pays the bills. If their payers are insurance companies, they might trend Republican. If Medicare and Medicaid -- then they are likely to be Democrats.

Is the government a source of income or a drain through taxes?

Engineers? Those in the oil business almost certainly trend Right. Civil engineers? If their income depends upon government contracts they might tend liberal.