September 15, 2016

Educational divide in vote preferences on track to be wider than in recent elections

The contest for president between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump is marked by an educational divide that is far wider than in past elections.

In Pew Research Center’s August survey, registered voters with a college degree or more education favor Clinton over Trump by 23 percentage points (52% Clinton vs. 29% Trump) in a four-way contest that included Libertarian Party candidate Gary Johnson (supported by 11% of voters with at least a college degree) and Green Party candidate Jill Stein (4%).

By contrast, voters who do not have a college degree were more divided in their preferences: 41% backed Trump, 36% Clinton, 9% Johnson and 5% Stein.

If the gap between Clinton and Trump holds in November, it will be the widest educational divide in any election in the last several decades. And the current gap is particularly pronounced among white voters.

In most presidential elections going back to 1992, college graduates and those without college degrees have differed little in their vote choices: In 2012, Barack Obama narrowly won more votes than Mitt Romney among those with a college degree or more (50% to 48%), as well as those with less education (51% to 47%), according to exit polls.

There have been similarly modest differences in the vote choices of college graduates and those with less education in other elections in the past few decades. The largest gap was in 1996, when voters without college degrees backed Bill Clinton over Bob Dole by a 14-point margin (51% vs. 37%), while voters with less education were more closely divided (47% Clinton vs. 44% Dole). Today, it is the more educated voters who are more likely to favor the Democratic candidate, and the gap between the groups is far wider than it was 20 years ago.

Unlike the overall educational gap, an educational gap among white voters is not new – whites without a college degree have voted for GOP candidates by larger margins than their counterparts with more education in the last four presidential contests. But the gap this year appears to have grown wider. And if support for Clinton holds steady among white college graduates, 2016 will mark the first time in at least a quarter century that this group has supported a Democratic candidate for president.

Among white voters in the current election, college graduates support Clinton over Trump by a 14-point margin (47% Clinton vs. 33% Trump), while those without college degrees back Trump over Clinton by an even larger 25-point margin (51% Trump vs. 26% Clinton), according to the Center’s survey conducted Aug. 9-16.

Though a modest educational gap has been present among white voters since the 2000 election, over the past few decades, both whites with and without college degrees have consistently backed Republican candidates over Democrats. For example, according to the 2012 exit polls, Obama lost both the white college vote to Romney by 14 points (56% vs. 42%), and the white non-college vote by an even wider 26-point margin (62% vs. 36%).

The education gap in party identification

Recent Pew Research Center studies also have found increasing differences in party identification between those with more and less education. And there is a growing ideological divide between these groups, with highly educated adults holding increasingly liberal attitudes across a range of issues.

The Center’s recent analysis of long-term trends in voter identification finds that Democrats have made gains among college graduates, while less educated voters are now more divided in their affiliation.

In surveys conducted so far this year, the Democratic Party currently holds a 53% to 41% advantage in leaned party identification among voters with a college degree or more. In 1992, the GOP held a slight 49%-45% edge among college graduates.

Over the same period, the Democratic Party has lost ground among less educated voters. The balance of leaned party identification is now even among voters who do not have a college degree (46% each); as recently as 2008, Democrats had a 14-point advantage among this group (52%-38%).

Highly educated more likely than less educated to hold liberal views

Beyond the shifts in vote preference and party identification, highly educated adults also increasingly have liberal attitudes and values, while there has been less change among those without a college degree.

A recent Pew Research Center analysis found that in 2015, nearly half of college graduates (48%) held either consistently liberal (26%) or mostly liberal (21%) opinions about the role and performance of government, social issues, the environment and other topics.

By comparison, just 31% of those with less education had consistently (8%) or mostly (22%) liberal views.

Over the past two decades, there has been particularly sharp growth in the share of highly educated adults with consistently liberal attitudes – from 6% in 1994 to 16% in 2004 to 26% in 2015. Among adults with no college degree, just 8% had consistently liberal attitudes in 2015, up from 2% in 1994.

Topics: 2016 Election, Education, Political Party Affiliation, U.S. Political Parties, Voter Demographics, Voter Preferences

  1. Photo of Rob Suls

    is a research associate focusing on U.S. politics and policy at Pew Research Center.


  1. Anonymous1 month ago

    As a current student nearing graduation with a 3.63 GPA and about to enter Grad School I have taken courses at a few different intuitions along the way. I can say the entire College experience from the second you enter campus is clearly meant to indoctrinate you as a leftist. It’s particularly effective on the 18 year olds who are still having trouble asserting themselves among their peers much less question or stand up to one of the many bullies who are professors.

    For example a Sociology professor once dismissed me and told me to basically shut up, then laughed at me in front of the class when I told and anecdotal story. The story was about how I had attended a few classes in Philadelphia when I lived there at a technical school. At this school I was the only white person in a room of 30+ people. I was simply trying to explain first hand how that I had a taste of what it’s like to be in a minority group. I was simply saying how I could only imagine how bad it could actually have been for some people in the course of history like Jews in Egypt, Christians in Rome, Blacks in the segregationist south and so on.

    Yet the Dr. must have had something called hate clogging he ears that day because she lashed into me with vile hatred and it was apparent she thought I was saying I knew exactly what it was like to be minority and somehow downplaying this when in fact I was saying the complete opposite and my commentary was to illustrate how despicably discrimination is. I can only imagine if I was 18 at the time I might have ran out of the room in either rage or tears.

    Don’t get me wrong the professors are not even the major issue here, and I believe most of it comes from Washington DC via laws. For example all the training the college must put staff and students through is much like attending a re education camp in a George Orwell novel. Consider that during the 16/17 school year trainig I was required by law to take, all men were stereotyped as sexual predators, would be rapists, and anyone who is white as being of the privileged class. We were reminded many times to be tolerant of everyone, and that we must accept other peoples sexual perversions or denial or reality. By essentially telling us that a man who believes they were born a woman is a normal as the urge to urinate when your balder is full.

    Perhaps the most important element come via the textbooks where It really is a cerebral full frontal assault on your children by Leftist Academics. Consider that even business, engineering, and yes Mathematics textbooks have become vessels for left wing fanaticism and Democrat political propaganda. For example recently in a highly renown Statistics textbook written by a highly renown scholar on the subject nearly every chapter is complete with pictures and data that start with the bogy man himself “Anthropogenic Global Warming”. From there the data a subtle use of pictures imply things that read like a check list given to the author by the Democrat party itself. Along the way you get plenty of predictive programming which even Joseph Goebbels would have been proud of. This comes complete with subtle innuendo about how anyone that does not have a religious like devotion in agreeing with the peoples party and their theories might be evil and even want to kill the earth.

    I could go on as this issue is massive and complicated but I will leave it there!

  2. Anonymous1 month ago

    Just don’t confuse education with intelligence. Liberals run the college propaganda machine. Never let school interfere your education. I know quite a few people with lots education forget to look both ways before crossing the street.

  3. Anonymous1 month ago

    Can you say how the information was gathered?

    1. Bruce Drake1 month ago

      See if this helps:…

  4. Shanna Saubert (IURecGrad2011)1 month ago

    I appreciate the reporting, but why have you centered around racial divisions in your first graph (All Voters vs White Voters)? What about those who identify as mixed or a combination of races/ethnicities? Where is the data on other demographics, socioeconomic status, age, etc? There are ideological divisions with educational attainment that go beyond a white/non-white dichotomy that should be explored.

  5. Packard Day1 month ago

    I wonder if it is class rather than education that will determine the outcome of this coming Presidential election? For anyone living in a top 10% American household, these past seven years under the Obama Administration have been extraordinarily beneficial to almost all personal investment portfolios. It follows that Hillary Clinton promises four, and maybe even eight more years of the same great times. So, regardless of your education status, what is not to love if the above class situation applies to you and yours?