Skip to main content

It's been a while since anyone has been shocked that Republicans hate pretty much everyone but the sick bastards in the mirror, but I thought it would be enlightening to work out quantitatively just how big a proportion of the US population the Republican Party actively campaigns against, so I'll describe step-by-step each of the demographics they openly demagogue, find out what proportion of the population they represent, and then at the end of the process put the data into a pie chart showing how much of America the Republican Party hates.

For each category, I use the most recent available data, which in most cases is the 2010 US Census.  There is some complexity involved in using this data, because some categories unavoidably overlap due to being based on different subjects, so we'll just treat them one at a time and then chip away at the total population in the pie chart.  The reason we can do that is because Republicans don't look more kindly on people for being a member of a privileged group if they're also a member of a demonized group - i.e., they don't like religiously devout Latinos more than average Latinos, or rich gay people more than average gay people.  If you are a member of any group they hate, they hate you period.

However, in the interests of understatement, I only include groups for which there is a strong and consistent case of Republicans demonizing and acting against, and leave out those who are attacked only due to generalized, non-targeted bigotry.  We can start with the largest, most obvious, and currently most prominent subject of Republican hatred - women (50.8%):

graph1

So right off the bat, they already hate and demonize half of Americans, and we just got started looking at this.  And the fact that many women are Republicans doesn't seem to change it one bit - Republican women either go along with the demonization and belittlement of their own sex as a strategic compromise to support other aspects of their agenda, or else actively agree with it and support the messages involved.  

The next largest and most obvious category is Hispanics/Latinos of any race (16.3% of the total population).  However, since obviously this ethnic category is also divided by gender, that 16.3% partly overlaps with the 50.8% already included in the chart.  We have to take into account that 48% of Hispanics/Latinos are women, so we can only advance the red portion of the chart by the compound percentage of the remainder - Hispanic/Latino men of any race (8.5% of total population):  

graph2

The third largest demographic hated by Republicans is the non-religious, accounting for an overlapping percentage of 16.1%.  This is a far more difficult category to break down, because we have to find how many of that percentage are women and Hispanic/Latino men in order to advance the chart by the remainder.  According to the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life, 41% of the non-religious are women, and 11% are Hispanic/Latino of both sexes.  

Now, I haven't been able to find the percentage of non-religious Hispanics/Latinos who are women, so the best we can do is compound that 11% with the 41% of the broader non-religious category who are women, even though that is not scientifically rigorous.  So what we have then is the estimation that 4.5% of the non-religious are Hispanic/Latino women, leaving 6.5% of the non-religious as Hispanic/Latino men.  Added to the overall 41% who are women, we have to reduce the total non-religious proportion added to the pie chart by 47.5%, yielding 0.161 - (0.161 * 0.475) = about 8.5% more we can add to the red region of the chart.  Since we're getting into some extended arithmetic here, please excuse me if I screw up the numbers at any point or if my mathematical logic goes haywire somewhere in a calculation.  With the male, non-Hispanic non-religious added:

graph3

Democrats are 36% of eligible voters but only 23% of the total population, and a big percentage of that 23% are women.  For some damned reason I haven't been able to find exact figures on the percentage of registered Democrats who are women, so we'll have to be cautious and rely on a reasonable figure that errs in favor of reducing the increase to the pie chart, since we're trying for an understatement of just how much of the American people the GOP hates.  Let's say that 55% of registered Democrats are women - which tracks with the gender gap, and errs on the side of decreasing the new pie slice.  

That leaves 0.23 - (0.23 * 0.55) = 10% of the total population as registered Democratic men, to which we must now apply exclusions for Hispanic/Latino men and  non-religious men.  This is even trickier, because these are two groups heavily associated with the Democratic Party, and as with women I don't find the data available for registered Democrats.  At this point we have to rely on guesswork in the absence of specific information, so the most reliable way forward is to leap to two guesses that seem reasonable in context and uphold the standard of understatement by increasing the exclusion: 8.5% of Americans are Hispanic/Latino men, and their ethnicity breaks much more strongly Democratic than their gender breaks Republican, so it would suffice as a deliberate overestimate to put the figure at 60% of the 8.5% being Democratic voters (which is itself a substantially larger number than registered Democrats).  

This means the total population being examined goes down to 0.10 - (0.085 * 0.60) = 4.9%, and we can then focus on the non-religious male exclusion.  Since this is getting too involved for guesswork, let's just be brutal and cut it roughly in half, and call it 2.5%:

graph4

Now, the percentage of the population identifying as liberal oscillates around 20%, so we can use that as our starting point for this category - one which few would dispute Republicans have a bitter and all-encompassing hatred of.  According to some tables on Wikipedia, 54% of liberals are women, 9% of liberals are Hispanic, and 92% of liberals vote Democratic.  Let's get the big hairball out of the way and lop off .92 * .20 =  18.4%, leaving 1.6% to be divided among the remaining exclusions.  We already assumed that 55% of Democrats are women, so let's compound that with the liberal women figure 0.54 - (0.54*0.55) = an exclusion of 24% of 1.6%.  So 0.016 - (0.016*0.24) = 1.2%.  

Note I'm deliberately not compounding the sub-exclusions themselves, which serves both to keep the final result understated and also to save me an excruciating level of work I would probably screw up anyway.  Now we have to find exclusions for Hispanic men and the non-religious.  We'll use the same brutal standard as before in forming the religious exclusion (half), then reduce the remainder by a fifth to maximally account for Hispanic males.  This leaves 0.48% as our overlap-free pie piece for liberals thus far, based on the categories we've chosen to address before.  As you can see, the pie pieces will invariably get smaller and smaller as you go regardless of which categories you begin with, because each new category has to have parts of itself excluded to account for the categories already dealt with.

So at this point I won't graphically add a new pie piece with each new category, because no matter how significant they are, the exclusions from previous categories will reduce them to smaller and smaller portions.  Instead, we'll continue doing the math for each new category, and then add the rest to the chart at the end.  Categories remaining: Non-Hispanic blacks, the Underclass, public employees, union workers, LGBT, and Muslims.  

Non-Hispanic black people or African-Americans are 12.2% of the total population, and since we're getting into smaller and smaller pie pieces, we can use more convenient estimates to exclude prior categories: Lop off half for women, leaving 6.1%.  We don't have to do any exclusions for Latino men because the census datum I used specifically deals with non-Hispanic black people.  About 12% of the total is non-religious, so if we just haphazardly assume that breaks down equally between men and women, we can reduce the total by 6% of itself: 0.061 - (0.061*0.06) = 5.7%.  Black voting hovers around 90% Democratic, so that exclusion yields 0.057 - (0.057 * 0.90) = 0.57%.  Then if we just assume that liberalism follows the same patterns among this narrowed segment of black voters as it does nationally, we can once again adopt a brutal standard and cut the figure in half, leaving a pie piece of about 0.29% (I won't bother with thousandths of a percent).

The Underclass is about 12% of the US population, and Republicans hate these people with a true passion.  Now, they probably also hate the working poor, working class, and middle-class, but we should be humble enough to err on the side of saying they merely disregard these classes and trample on them at every opportunity - but it's undeniable that they HATE the underclass with a fervid, drooling kind of burning bloodlust.  Since there isn't a lot of engagement with the underclass, and they don't have many opportunities to participate in polls, we have to make some assumptions about their religious beliefs and political viewpoints despite a relative lack of participation in elections.  First though, we know that women make a disproportionately large percentage of the underclass, so we can cut the proportion by 60%: .12 - (.12 * .60) = 4.8%.  Black and Latino men will also share a disproportionately high percentage, so we can just go berserk and cut it another 80%: .048 - (0.048 * .80) = 0.96%.  We can reasonably say the overwhelming majority are liberal, or would be liberal if their opinions are ever asked, so we can reduce it a further 90%: 0.96% - (0.0096*.90) = beneath our self-established threshold of thousandths of a percent, so we can end the exercise there.

We could go on at this point finding ever-decreasing slivers of the pie chart corresponding to public employees, union workers, LGBT, and Muslims, but I think we've hit upon a converging limit for where the final pie chart would end up.  And I should stress that the final pie chart doesn't necessarily indicate how much Republicans hate any given group, and it doesn't indicate the demographic size of any group other than the one arbitrarily chosen to be first since every group afterward has to be pared down to remove overlaps with the previous ones.  So many groups end up with short shrift regardless of where you start.  I started with women, but it would be equally valid to start with any other category mentioned.  In other words, the pie pieces are irrelevant - all the matters is the final pie and the red zone vs. blue zone.

Basically, the sum of the remaining pie pieces would end up being somewhere around 1% of the total, so we can show our final pie chart indicating what proportion of the American people Republicans hate:

GraphFinal  

As an epilogue, there is a case to be made that Republicans hate everyone who isn't white, including Native Americans, Pacific Islanders, Asians, and also immigrants of any background, but there isn't the same particular emphasis in their propaganda and dog-whistle campaigning.  So we should be understated and leave those out.  Likewise, we know there is a lot of endemic anti-Semitism among conservatives, but the Republican Party is usually diligent in avoiding that association.  And while they often demonize the Northeast and West Coast, they mainly do so in the South and Midwest, so there is no reason to suppose Republicans in the deprecated regions despise their own states.  Similarly, although they work against the interests of the middle-class, they know better than to openly demonize it.  

Basically, the blue portion of the chart above is overwhelmingly people whom Republicans merely do not go out of their way to demonize or harm, but who they're indifferent toward and more than willing to trample for the benefit of the vanishingly small sliver of the chart whose interests they actually serve and whose rights (and privileges) they care about: White, Christian conservative Republican men of Northern European descent, heterosexual orientation, with multimillion-dollar incomes or higher working at private-sector executive positions or self-employed in for-profit businesses.  The number of people in this country who satisfy all of those criteria wouldn't fill a professional football stadium, but that is basically whom the Republican Party exists to serve.  In their eyes, 71.3% of the American people - and that's a bare minimum number - are considered their enemies, and virtually all of the remainder are to be ignored or manipulated as the situation dictates.

So now you have a concrete talking point: The Republican Party hates 71% of Americans.  This is how much Republicans hate America.  Now, the above work is undoubtedly an abomination in the eyes of any professional statistician, but it is a reasonable reflection of reality and I invite anyone with better skills than I to make a more rigorous approach to the question if they wish.  But I stand by my results, and they're more than good enough to smack around conservatives with, considering how I've bent over backwards to reduce the size of the red area of the chart.  Once again, the money shot:

GraphFinal

Feel free to distribute or alter the above image to add more information or more potent descriptions.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (19+ / 0-)

    Technology is a compromise: You can use whatever tool you choose, but be assured it will use you back.

    by Troubadour on Thu Apr 12, 2012 at 10:16:23 PM PDT

  •  Fun with pie, but can you throw it (7+ / 0-)

    ;-)

    "Another world is not only possible, she is on her way. On a quiet day, I can hear her breathing." Arundhati Roy

    by LaFeminista on Thu Apr 12, 2012 at 10:41:05 PM PDT

  •  Good work with the numbers (4+ / 0-)

    and I didn't proof it but off the top of my head while reading this it seems ok.

    And good work with identifying all of the various demographics which are in play here.

    I'm not quite sure if another group can be added here, but will suggest it anyway.  It seems that you have done thinking about the various geographical areas, and the support of them seems logical.  Can we go one step further and add those that live in large cities, or those of us who aren't in the "real America?"  We may be able to identify a few more of those that they hate that are

    White, Christian conservative Republican men of Northern European descent, heterosexual orientation, with multimillion-dollar incomes or higher working at private-sector executive positions or self-employed in for-profit businesses.
    but live in urban areas.  If those above who live in cities can be quantified, I think that there may be another 3, maybe 4 percentage points added to the pie chart.  

    And with all of their hate..... they still keep winning elections.  

    •  I don't think they have any problem with urbanites (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ardyess, Youffraita, lostinamerica, Smoh

      as long as they're rich.  They only pander to rural prejudices as a gaming strategy, because it gets them more support among rural conservatives than it loses them among the people in cities who would otherwise support them.  City-dwelling conservatives don't care about the city they live in, and least of all whether someone is insulting it.  They live there, like they live in America, out of convenience.  But they also don't hate it - they enjoy nice restaurants and high-quality prostitutes like anyone else.

      Technology is a compromise: You can use whatever tool you choose, but be assured it will use you back.

      by Troubadour on Thu Apr 12, 2012 at 11:07:58 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  you are too generous; they hate 99% nt (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Troubadour, Words In Action
    •  They harm 99%. They hate 71.3%. (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      entlord, General Goose, Smoh

      Or at least that's what my admittedly loose process has come up with.  A more rigorous one would come up with a higher value, but it wouldn't be 99%.  The harm they do to the middle-class is based on disregard, not active hatred.

      Technology is a compromise: You can use whatever tool you choose, but be assured it will use you back.

      by Troubadour on Fri Apr 13, 2012 at 02:55:15 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Did I miss it (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    General Goose, Smoh, Troubadour, JoanMar

    or did you not include LGBT?

    Because, as far as I can tell, 90%+ conservatives, even gay ones, don't like the LGBT community.

    So, if 30% of Republicans hate themselves, you need a purple section of the pie showing some self loathing.

    I think, Therefore I am, ...A Democrat

    by Patriot4peace on Fri Apr 13, 2012 at 03:41:32 AM PDT

    •  You missed it. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      JoanMar

      It was one of the later categories mentioned when each new pie piece had become marginal due to the exclusions of previous categories.  You can start from any of the categories mentioned, so if you want to you can try out the same process beginning with LGBT.  I believe I explained that the size of the pieces has nothing to do with the proportion of the demographic or the degree to which Republicans hate it - it's just a marginal increase converging toward a whole.  The total of the pieces is what should be consistent.

      Technology is a compromise: You can use whatever tool you choose, but be assured it will use you back.

      by Troubadour on Fri Apr 13, 2012 at 04:10:41 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I guess the same applies to black folks? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Troubadour

        I'll revisit later.

        •  Yeah. You can start the process from any category (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          JoanMar

          and, relying on the same data and assumptions, you should arrive at the same general result, give or take.  The categories of people who Republicans hate that I mentioned are, in no particular order...

          1.  Women
          2.  Democrats
          3.  Liberals
          4.  Hispanics
          5.  Non-religious
          6.  African Americans
          7.  LGBT
          8.  The underclass
          9.  Union workers
          10.  Public employees
          11.  LGBT
          12.  Muslims

          I explained how other categories may be negatively affected by the bigotry Republicans cultivate, but are not consistently targeted for demonization as a general strategy.

          Technology is a compromise: You can use whatever tool you choose, but be assured it will use you back.

          by Troubadour on Fri Apr 13, 2012 at 06:09:03 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I don't see Teh Jooz in there (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Troubadour, JoanMar

            And aside from one or two PAC Daddies, they hates them some Jews. Just read Saturday's hate mail.
            And college graduates (or anyone they can label as "elite").
            And all teachers, except Sunday Skool teachers.
            Gawd, this is depressing.

            Class war has consequences, and we are living them.

            by kamarvt on Fri Apr 13, 2012 at 07:55:09 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •   A "real" capitalist would look upon everyone (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Smoh, Troubadour

    as potential customers. The GOP base are more like gang members. I don't believe that the oligarchy is racist, they look down on all the peasants. The wing nuts think if they do everything "right" that they will be invited to the party some day. Poor babies, that ain't never going to happen.

    We're fools whether we dance or not, so we might as well dance.

    by PowWowPollock on Fri Apr 13, 2012 at 03:53:42 AM PDT

    •  The owners of the Republican Party (0+ / 0-)

      have to compromise with their tools (a case in my point of my sig line) in order to maintain an effective criminal/political organization, so part of the money they invest in seeking their own objectives must be diverted to supporting the perverse agendas of religious fanatics, white supremacists, homophobes, xenophobes, and other assorted bigots.  Thus the ideological makeup of the GOP.  

      And I don't know if conservatives necessarily believe they'll ever be invited to the party - the fact is, so little of what they do is based on any kind of thought process, and is mostly just a compulsive expression of base instinct (greed, fear, hatred, envy, etc.).  They desire unconsciousness, and find thought painful and unrewarding.

      Technology is a compromise: You can use whatever tool you choose, but be assured it will use you back.

      by Troubadour on Fri Apr 13, 2012 at 04:24:28 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  You forgot members of non-Christian (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Troubadour, kamarvt

    religious persuasions: Islamic, Jewish (except those living in Israel), Wiccan, Buddhist, Hindi, Unitarian, etc. Exceptions are: Scientologists, Amish. Mormons are in a special category. Adored the first week of November, hated the rest of the year.

    Also, all students and college professors other than those from Liberty University.

    Scientists.

    •  I don't think they hate most of those groups. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      pucklady

      You can find examples of Republicans throwing hate speech at them, but it's not an institutional pattern, just blind right-wing berserking.

      As to academia, you may have a point there.  But I'm inclined to think they don't hate it per se - they're just willing to stomp on it when it gets in their way, and distrust its independence.  But as a means to warfare, social control, or business, they have no inherent problem with science and technology - as long as it doesn't enlighten the minds of the average person.

      The same kind of attitude applies to artists - generally conservatives just don't find them consequential or worth thinking about, but they'll react with absurd venom when the arts are used to criticize them or mobilize an unusual degree of positive change.

      So Goopers dislike and distrust almost everyone, but they only launch concerted, coordinated attacks on demographics whose oppression is needed to shore up their coalition.  

      Technology is a compromise: You can use whatever tool you choose, but be assured it will use you back.

      by Troubadour on Fri Apr 13, 2012 at 04:42:12 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  You are absolutely correct. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Troubadour, pucklady

      As for the Mormons, however, you could probably play it safe by looking at the primary locus of actual Mormon hate from the right, which are the Southern Baptists and the broader evangelical sphere. At least that's how things look from someone living in Utah...

      Otherwise I think you are spot on. A small minority of Republicans is actually okay with non-Christian religions.

      If history demonstrates anything it shows that campaigning and voting are necessary but insufficient. If you aren't part of publicly visible, uncompromising, irresistible dissent, you are still part of the problem.

      by Words In Action on Fri Apr 13, 2012 at 06:26:01 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  You Forgot to Add Postborn Children nt (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Troubadour, kamarvt

    We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

    by Gooserock on Fri Apr 13, 2012 at 04:46:34 AM PDT

    •  More like complete indifference than hate. (0+ / 0-)

      An important thing to remember about sociopaths is that just because they're willing to inflict pain, suffering, poverty, and death on a group of people doesn't mean they have anything against them.  So Republicans are perfectly okay with subjecting children to the ravages of poverty with no social support programs to help them, but only because they don't give a shit - not because they actively want to harm those kids (or at least most of them don't - I'm sure some of them actually do find some kind of pleasure in it).

      Technology is a compromise: You can use whatever tool you choose, but be assured it will use you back.

      by Troubadour on Fri Apr 13, 2012 at 04:58:40 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I was told there would be no math (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Troubadour

    Actually my favorite math formula is "pie are squared" - but that's dumb, everyone knows pie are round! Stupid mathematicians.

    Romney 2012 - You will be assimilated. Resistance is futile.

    by Fordmandalay on Fri Apr 13, 2012 at 08:08:55 AM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site