Political Divide Deepens Along Educational Lines
American voters have historically been divided along multiple lines such as gender, race, and geographic location. Women have increasingly leaned toward supporting Democratic candidates, with the gender gap widening, particularly after the fall of Roe v. Wade, which has left the country split into states that uphold abortion rights and those that have banned the practice. Additionally, how well former President Donald Trump can sway minority voters, particularly Latino and Black men, could have a significant impact in key battleground states with close margins.
Rural voters tend to back Republican candidates, while urban voters align more with Democrats, and suburban regions often become the deciding factor in elections. However, according to Doug Sosnik, a seasoned Democratic strategist and former political director for President Bill Clinton, one factor now outweighs all others in predicting voting behavior education level.
Education and the Shifting Political Landscape
Sosnik highlighted that education has become the most reliable predictor of how an individual is likely to vote in U.S. elections. Speaking on the “CNN Political Briefing” podcast, he noted that this political realignment, which began in the 1970s, has been accelerated by Trump’s rise to prominence over the past three election cycles. As the U.S. transitions into a more knowledge-based economy, there is a growing divide between individuals who attain higher education and those who do not.
Those with higher education level now form the base of the Democratic Party, while individuals who feel left behind economically, primarily non-college-educated voters, have shifted toward the Republican Party. This divide is evident in wealth distribution as well. According to the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, households headed by college graduates hold three-quarters of the nation’s wealth, despite representing only 40% of the population. In contrast, households led by high school graduates possess significantly less wealth, highlighting the stark economic inequality between these groups. This disparity mirrors voting trends, where voters with a college degree predominantly supported President Joe Biden in the 2020 election, while Trump garnered significant support from non-college-educated White voters.
Education’s Role in Battleground States and Swing Voters
Sosnik further argued that the battleground states likely to decide the upcoming presidential election are those with a balanced mix of college-educated and non-college-educated voters. States like Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Georgia, North Carolina, and Arizona all reflect national averages in education levels, making them highly competitive. An outlier in this trend is Nevada, a battleground state with one of the lowest levels of educational attainment in the country. Additionally, while blue states with high educational attainment are clustered in the Northeast, Utah, a traditionally red state, also ranks high in educational achievement.
In terms of swing voters, Sosnik emphasized the importance of two distinct groups. The first consists of traditional swing voters, such as political independents or moderate Republicans, but the second group, which could be even more decisive, includes voters who are contemplating whether to vote at all. For Trump, these voters are often non-college-educated White men, who, if they participate, are expected to support him. For Vice President Kamala Harris, these voters might be women galvanized by the abortion debate, or young people, who are less consistent in casting ballots but could play a key role in this election.
Ultimately, this realignment based on education may reshape both presidential and midterm elections, as voting behavior continues to evolve in response to these shifting demographics.
