Donate
Independent, objective, nonpartisan research

JTF 2006GeneralElectionVoterProfilesJTF

Database

This is the content currently stored in the post and postmeta tables.

View live version

object(Timber\Post)#3711 (44) { ["ImageClass"]=> string(12) "Timber\Image" ["PostClass"]=> string(11) "Timber\Post" ["TermClass"]=> string(11) "Timber\Term" ["object_type"]=> string(4) "post" ["custom"]=> array(5) { ["_wp_attached_file"]=> string(43) "JTF_2006GeneralElectionVoterProfilesJTF.pdf" ["wpmf_size"]=> string(5) "89491" ["wpmf_filetype"]=> string(3) "pdf" ["wpmf_order"]=> string(1) "0" ["searchwp_content"]=> string(5764) "2006 GENERAL ELECTION VOTER PROFILES December 2006 Voters were mostly white, older, and affluent … and many were “blue.” The November 7th general election included about 8.6 million voters or 54 percent of California’s registered voters. Turnout this year was somewhat higher than the record low in California’s last gubernatorial election (2002). Similar to past elections, voters were predominantly older, white, college-educated, affluent, and homeowners. Men and women turned out about equally, and one in four voter households included a union member. Reflecting voter registration trends, more Democrats than Republicans voted in this election, while 14 percent were independents. Governor Schwarzenegger cruised to an easy reelection victory. Republican Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger easily defeated Democratic State Treasurer Phil Angelides (56% to 39%) because of the support he received outside of his party. While nearly all Republicans voted for Schwarzenegger, so did three in 10 Democrats and over half of independent voters. One in three Latinos, about two in three whites, and majorities of both men and women also voted for Schwarzenegger. Schwarzenegger was favored over Angelides among the majorities of general election voters who believe that California is headed in the right direction, that the state will enjoy good economic times, and who approve of the governor’s job performance. Proposition 1B: Highway Safety, Traffic Reduction, Air Quality, and Port Security. Proposition 1B, a $20 billion bond, was approved by voters by a 22-point margin (61% yes, 39% no). There was majority support for this proposition across all political and demographic groups, with stronger support found among more-educated and liberal voters and renters. Proposition 1B was supported by more Democrats (69%) and liberals (71%) than Republicans (54%) and conservatives (53%) and was more strongly supported by Latinos than whites (71% to 62%). Proposition 1C: Housing and Emergency Shelter Trust Fund. Proposition 1C, a bond for nearly $3 billion, was approved by voters by a 16-point margin (58% yes, 42% no). The vote on this measure was strongly divided across partisan lines. Democrats (69%) and independents (57%) supported the measure, while just 40 percent of Republicans voted yes. Women, younger voters, less affluent voters, Latinos, and renters were among the groups most supportive of Proposition 1C. Those who disapprove of the governor’s performance in office were more likely to support this proposition than those who approve of his performance. Proposition 1D: Kindergarten-University Public Education Facilities. Proposition 1D, a school facilities bond for about $10 billion, was approved by a 14-point margin (57% yes, 43% no). Again, most Democrats (71%) and liberals (76%) supported this bond measure, compared to four in 10 Republicans and conservatives (41% each). Latinos were more likely than whites (74% to 55%), college graduates were more likely than those without a college degree (61% to 53%), and voters under 35 were more likely than older voters (73% to 56%) to favor it. Those who disapprove of the governor’s job performance were more likely than those who approve of his performance to vote yes on this bond. Proposition 1E: Disaster Preparedness and Flood Prevention Bond. Of the four bonds placed on the ballot as part of the infrastructure package, Proposition 1E, a flood prevention bond of about $4 billion, enjoyed the highest level of support, passing by a 28-point margin (64% yes, 36% no). Support for Proposition 1E was highest among Democrats (74%), women (67%), and renters (69%). Most voters who feel California is headed in the right direction, approve of the governor, and believe the infrastructure bond package was a good idea voted yes on 1E. Solid majorities across demographic and political groups also supported this bond. Public Policy Institute of California 415-291-4400 www.ppic.org 2006 General Election Voter Profiles % of General Election Voters 1B Proposition 1C 1D 1E Percentage Voting “Yes” on a Proposition 61 58 57 64 Gender Men Women 48 63 53 57 60 52 62 60 58 67 18-34 years old 11 65 64 73 66 Age 35-54 years old 41 59 54 56 61 55 years or older 48 65 57 56 66 Education High school only Some college 19 59 57 53 57 27 58 55 53 61 College graduate 54 65 57 61 67 Under $40,000 28 65 64 61 67 Household income $40,000 to under $80,000 35 65 57 58 62 $80,000 or higher 37 61 51 57 64 Race/ethnicity White Latino 72 62 54 55 64 14 71 67 74 66 Own/rent Own Rent 79 60 51 55 62 21 72 75 68 69 Union household Yes No 24 58 57 59 60 76 64 56 57 65 Party Democrat Republican 47 69 69 71 74 37 54 40 41 54 Independent 14 63 57 57 61 Liberal 32 71 76 76 74 Ideology Middle-of-the-road 28 66 59 63 65 Conservative 40 53 39 41 55 Job performance of Gov. Schwarzenegger Approve Disapprove 60 65 54 55 65 32 58 61 63 61 Opinion of infrastructure Good Idea bonds package Bad Idea 61 84 76 77 83 31 20 18 21 25 Direction of California Right direction Wrong direction 53 72 62 64 72 39 49 48 48 52 Sources: (1) PPIC Statewide Survey of 2,000 general election voters conducted from November 8th to 19th with a +/-2% margin of error for the total sample. Sample sizes for African Americans, Asian Americans, multiracial groups, other political parties, and undecided responses for governor’s approval, opinions of the bond package, and direction of California are not large enough for separate statistical analysis; (2) California Secretary of State, November 2006, for percentage voting “yes” on a proposition through November 28, 2006 (actual results on the propositions presented for general election voters). Public Policy Institute of California 415-291-4400 www.ppic.org" } ["___content":protected]=> string(164) "

JTF 2006GeneralElectionVoterProfilesJTF

" ["_permalink":protected]=> string(110) "https://www.ppic.org/publication/2006-general-election-voter-profiles/jtf_2006generalelectionvoterprofilesjtf/" ["_next":protected]=> array(0) { } ["_prev":protected]=> array(0) { } ["_css_class":protected]=> NULL ["id"]=> int(8578) ["ID"]=> int(8578) ["post_author"]=> string(1) "1" ["post_content"]=> string(0) "" ["post_date"]=> string(19) "2017-05-20 02:38:50" ["post_excerpt"]=> string(0) "" ["post_parent"]=> int(3806) ["post_status"]=> string(7) "inherit" ["post_title"]=> string(39) "JTF 2006GeneralElectionVoterProfilesJTF" ["post_type"]=> string(10) "attachment" ["slug"]=> string(39) "jtf_2006generalelectionvoterprofilesjtf" ["__type":protected]=> NULL ["_wp_attached_file"]=> string(43) "JTF_2006GeneralElectionVoterProfilesJTF.pdf" ["wpmf_size"]=> string(5) "89491" ["wpmf_filetype"]=> string(3) "pdf" ["wpmf_order"]=> string(1) "0" ["searchwp_content"]=> string(5764) "2006 GENERAL ELECTION VOTER PROFILES December 2006 Voters were mostly white, older, and affluent … and many were “blue.” The November 7th general election included about 8.6 million voters or 54 percent of California’s registered voters. Turnout this year was somewhat higher than the record low in California’s last gubernatorial election (2002). Similar to past elections, voters were predominantly older, white, college-educated, affluent, and homeowners. Men and women turned out about equally, and one in four voter households included a union member. Reflecting voter registration trends, more Democrats than Republicans voted in this election, while 14 percent were independents. Governor Schwarzenegger cruised to an easy reelection victory. Republican Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger easily defeated Democratic State Treasurer Phil Angelides (56% to 39%) because of the support he received outside of his party. While nearly all Republicans voted for Schwarzenegger, so did three in 10 Democrats and over half of independent voters. One in three Latinos, about two in three whites, and majorities of both men and women also voted for Schwarzenegger. Schwarzenegger was favored over Angelides among the majorities of general election voters who believe that California is headed in the right direction, that the state will enjoy good economic times, and who approve of the governor’s job performance. Proposition 1B: Highway Safety, Traffic Reduction, Air Quality, and Port Security. Proposition 1B, a $20 billion bond, was approved by voters by a 22-point margin (61% yes, 39% no). There was majority support for this proposition across all political and demographic groups, with stronger support found among more-educated and liberal voters and renters. Proposition 1B was supported by more Democrats (69%) and liberals (71%) than Republicans (54%) and conservatives (53%) and was more strongly supported by Latinos than whites (71% to 62%). Proposition 1C: Housing and Emergency Shelter Trust Fund. Proposition 1C, a bond for nearly $3 billion, was approved by voters by a 16-point margin (58% yes, 42% no). The vote on this measure was strongly divided across partisan lines. Democrats (69%) and independents (57%) supported the measure, while just 40 percent of Republicans voted yes. Women, younger voters, less affluent voters, Latinos, and renters were among the groups most supportive of Proposition 1C. Those who disapprove of the governor’s performance in office were more likely to support this proposition than those who approve of his performance. Proposition 1D: Kindergarten-University Public Education Facilities. Proposition 1D, a school facilities bond for about $10 billion, was approved by a 14-point margin (57% yes, 43% no). Again, most Democrats (71%) and liberals (76%) supported this bond measure, compared to four in 10 Republicans and conservatives (41% each). Latinos were more likely than whites (74% to 55%), college graduates were more likely than those without a college degree (61% to 53%), and voters under 35 were more likely than older voters (73% to 56%) to favor it. Those who disapprove of the governor’s job performance were more likely than those who approve of his performance to vote yes on this bond. Proposition 1E: Disaster Preparedness and Flood Prevention Bond. Of the four bonds placed on the ballot as part of the infrastructure package, Proposition 1E, a flood prevention bond of about $4 billion, enjoyed the highest level of support, passing by a 28-point margin (64% yes, 36% no). Support for Proposition 1E was highest among Democrats (74%), women (67%), and renters (69%). Most voters who feel California is headed in the right direction, approve of the governor, and believe the infrastructure bond package was a good idea voted yes on 1E. Solid majorities across demographic and political groups also supported this bond. Public Policy Institute of California 415-291-4400 www.ppic.org 2006 General Election Voter Profiles % of General Election Voters 1B Proposition 1C 1D 1E Percentage Voting “Yes” on a Proposition 61 58 57 64 Gender Men Women 48 63 53 57 60 52 62 60 58 67 18-34 years old 11 65 64 73 66 Age 35-54 years old 41 59 54 56 61 55 years or older 48 65 57 56 66 Education High school only Some college 19 59 57 53 57 27 58 55 53 61 College graduate 54 65 57 61 67 Under $40,000 28 65 64 61 67 Household income $40,000 to under $80,000 35 65 57 58 62 $80,000 or higher 37 61 51 57 64 Race/ethnicity White Latino 72 62 54 55 64 14 71 67 74 66 Own/rent Own Rent 79 60 51 55 62 21 72 75 68 69 Union household Yes No 24 58 57 59 60 76 64 56 57 65 Party Democrat Republican 47 69 69 71 74 37 54 40 41 54 Independent 14 63 57 57 61 Liberal 32 71 76 76 74 Ideology Middle-of-the-road 28 66 59 63 65 Conservative 40 53 39 41 55 Job performance of Gov. Schwarzenegger Approve Disapprove 60 65 54 55 65 32 58 61 63 61 Opinion of infrastructure Good Idea bonds package Bad Idea 61 84 76 77 83 31 20 18 21 25 Direction of California Right direction Wrong direction 53 72 62 64 72 39 49 48 48 52 Sources: (1) PPIC Statewide Survey of 2,000 general election voters conducted from November 8th to 19th with a +/-2% margin of error for the total sample. Sample sizes for African Americans, Asian Americans, multiracial groups, other political parties, and undecided responses for governor’s approval, opinions of the bond package, and direction of California are not large enough for separate statistical analysis; (2) California Secretary of State, November 2006, for percentage voting “yes” on a proposition through November 28, 2006 (actual results on the propositions presented for general election voters). Public Policy Institute of California 415-291-4400 www.ppic.org" ["post_date_gmt"]=> string(19) "2017-05-20 09:38:50" ["comment_status"]=> string(4) "open" ["ping_status"]=> string(6) "closed" ["post_password"]=> string(0) "" ["post_name"]=> string(39) "jtf_2006generalelectionvoterprofilesjtf" ["to_ping"]=> string(0) "" ["pinged"]=> string(0) "" ["post_modified"]=> string(19) "2017-05-20 02:38:50" ["post_modified_gmt"]=> string(19) "2017-05-20 09:38:50" ["post_content_filtered"]=> string(0) "" ["guid"]=> string(81) "http://148.62.4.17/wp-content/uploads/JTF_2006GeneralElectionVoterProfilesJTF.pdf" ["menu_order"]=> int(0) ["post_mime_type"]=> string(15) "application/pdf" ["comment_count"]=> string(1) "0" ["filter"]=> string(3) "raw" ["status"]=> string(7) "inherit" ["attachment_authors"]=> bool(false) }