Who are the Racists: Conservatives or Liberals

[Baruch]

Sweeping generalizations are stupid.

Only when people disagree with them.  Otherwise they are profound and penetrating ;-)  The anti-Trump folks make similar generalizations about the Rs and Trump.  I don't know if one can generalize about the Rs ... I just know I don't like them.  My eyes are wide open on Trump too.  Reagan did OK in spite of being a B movie actor.  Trump might do the same.  But the idea that some European-approved professor of the Ivy League (not Obama) ... who majored in political science, will be a dark horse in any election, happened just one time with Woodrow Wilson.  And opinions are mixed on him.

[chill98]

Honestly even without Sander's numbers, Clinton supporters aren't looking very good. I'm just eyeballing it, but it looks like Kasich supporters are actually slightly less racist than Clinton supporters overall.

And lets look at the big picture here. If these numbers are trustworthy, then yes Trump supporters are notably more racist. But hes hovering just above 40% on average while Clinton is hovering just below 30%. Now imagine this report without Trump in it.

30% of Clinton supporters are racist against Black people? This is a liberal group, right? Did i miss something?

These numbers being trustworthy is questionable.  Example from 2nd graph.  When I saw 22% of Clinton supporters agreeing with Blacks are less intelligent, one of the things that went through my mind was "so what did they think about Asians?"  and that is relevant for whether or not the response can be attributed to racism or repeating of things being discussed/researched for the last 50 years.

The debate concerns the interpretation of research findings that test takers identifying as "White" tend on average to score higher than test takers of African ancestry on IQ tests, and subsequent findings that test takers of East Asian background tend to score higher than whites.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_intelligence

To determine whether the response is 'racist' or just a response based on a specific criteria (test results for example) one would need to know why this percentage has responded to the poll in that way.

Which also brings up the question of whether or not the poll reflects peoples true thoughts on the intelligence of the various races or whether they are aware enough to know what response is expected/socially acceptable.  For example, fundy kids who are taking tests in school complain about evolution/science based portions of the tests because they answer the question with what they are taught rather than what they believe to be true.  Another example is polls on viewership of PBS programming.  People lie about how often they watch PBS to appear more intelligent.  There is no reason to believe that this polling is any different - more of Kasich and Clinton supporters have read that Asians test higher than whites, whites test higher than blacks..., but would still answer with the socially acceptable response. 

And to go a bit further with the various questions regarding criminal and/or violent, same thing applies.  We have been bombarded with statistics on who's in prison for which types of crimes - I think it is telling how the answers reflect what is socially more acceptable and why polls like this are useless to determine racist attitude. 

And finally, all of this is contingent on which group is correct (Trump vs Clinton supporters) regarding the answers. If the correct answer is 'we don't know' the graph itself is misleading because we don't know what the percentage of each supporters groups responded that way or even what % responded No.  Which is another reason to reject this graph.  It is obviously bias.