- Nov
23
2012
from FairWarning.org
Don't complain about women drivers; complain about Republican drivers. FairWarning.org takes a look at traffic fatality rates and voting patterns and finds that states that had higher rates of traffic deaths per 100,000 people in 2010 tended to vote for Mitt Romney in 2012.
The ten states with the deadliest highways all went for Romney. Wyoming had the worst fatality rates; South Dakota ranked ninth. 21 out of 24 red states had higher-than-average traffic fatality rates; only 6 blue states exceeded the national average
Of the ten states with the lowest traffic fatality rates, nine voted for Barack Obama in 2012. The exception was Alaska, which ranked ninth. The other two red states with lower traffic fatality rates than the national average were Utah (all those nice, sober, risk-averse Mormons) and Nebraska.
The numbers seem odd given the rural–urban split. The ten most dangerous states on this list all have large rural populations... though remember that "large" is relative: 65% of Wyomingians live in town, as do 57% of South Dakotans. Of the ten least dangerous states, all but Alaska and Minnesota have urban populations larger than the 81% national average. I feel a lot safer when I'm driving in the country than in the city.
Allstate Insurance seems to agree that there's something upside down about these numbers. In the eight years they've issued the "Best Drivers Report," Sioux Falls has won the top spot five times. But Allstate bases its rankings on frequency of car collisions. Folks in more urban areas may just have more stuff to bump into. But since they're stuck in city traffic, they aren't going as fast when they do crash. Out here in rural Republican country, we have less stuff to run into, but when we do crash, we work up a big head of steam on those long country roads and really crash.
But I can't help wondering at the historical parallel. Republicans tend to crash the economy the way they get into fatal car crashes. Then it takes Democrats to take the wheel and get us out of the ditch.
Take a note: when you've gone on a bender and you need a designated driver, pick a Democrat.
Update 19:44 MST: I finally got the numbers typed in. The correlation between the states' popular vote percentages for Barack Obama in 2012 and traffic fatalities per 100,000 people in 2010 is –0.6793 (noteworthy from a social sciences perspective, with p=0.00000004, which means there's darn little chance that this correlation is just random noise).
43 Responses to “Republicans Vote Badly, Drive Worse”
Blue hairs, red states: the deadliest mix.
Maybe it's that people in red states like to exercise their freedom to drive without seatbelts and their freedom to fly out the window of a moving vehicle. That's how a lot of the fatalities seem to happen - getting ejected from the vehicle in a crash that is survivable with seatbelts.
Those who talk freedom and personal responsibility are not responsible to their neighbor. Those who believe in caring about their neighbor are more concerned about their neighbor when driving a car or an economy. Only caring about ones own self is actually not a good example of personal responsibility. Caring about ones neighbor is the best personal responsibility.
Growing up in Minnesota we had a lot more traffic expecially if one went to the twin cities. They have less than half the traffic fatalities than South Dakota per capita. SD had the example of a juvenile delinquent governor who forced his way on things and our governor made a point of not having much respect for that. But I can not blame it on the difference of governors as much as the people who voted in one gorernor or another. People in leadership positions need to know that their example teaches the kids. But then that is why I am against the death penalty.
When there are more of us concentrated in a smaller space we become more cooperative if. Of necessarily more courteous. Nobody thinks they own the road on Manhattan Island I noticed driving there. If they conversely were to behave like some Rapid City drivers, nobody would ever get anywhere. City streets would be in permanent gridlock.
If I switch my voting registration to Democrat, will I reduce my chances of dying in a traffic accident?
Okay, okay, I'm kidding.
Funny thing ... when I lived in Connecticut (moved there after graduating college in Minnesota), I thought the drivers were aggressive, especially the way they'd tailgate.
Fifty-five zone (remember Carter's gift to us there?), and I'd go 55, and this psychobooby would paste his bumper to my butt, and then I'd hit 60, 65, 70! And still, right on my arse would his Type-A mug remain! So for kicks I'd hit 75, 80, maybe even 85, just to see when the luantic would back off.
And they'd die before they'd let you in at an entrance ramp. Or so you would suspect, merging on a crowded freeway.
Yet even then, I had heard the statistic that Connecticut drivers are among the safest in the country.
I figured they all must be addicted to Diet Mountain Dew, or something.
My experience was that you have to signal and move quickly. Yhey give you a shot, but if you hesitate, they lay on the horn, not because you're getting in their way, but because you're slowing down traffic flow. You have to get a feeling for the whole flow of traffic, something we have very little experience with out here.
It's a form of "groupthink" Stan.
Takes a little practice, but it comes eventually.
Meanwhile, getting paranoid about the other drivers (especially if you're the foreigner and they the natives) is probably unwise... if for no other reason than the one you kind of mention above.
All you do is end up frustrating yourself. LOL.
There are a few crazies anywhere. But this chart did even surprise me. I heard a rather conservative preacher in Houston tell how he had road rage also. His way of telling his people that he understood. He was one of those charismatic types that I thought had the Holy Spirit but patience and kindness and longsuffering are supposed to be fruits of the Spirit. But then anyone can sin, even preachers on the hyway.
Studies like this need to control for miles driven by individuals and what type of roads, distance to and from bars, etc. Rural geography may be as much a factor as the lunacy of red necks in red states.
Stan, changing registration won't help: you'll still have just as much chance of being run over by your former fellow travelers.
R, yes, there is a correlation between higher rates of seat belt use and lower fatalities per 100,000 people (r=0.40237, p=0.003), but it's not strong enough (by my read) to explain much of the variance.
There is a slightly stronger correlation (r=-0.4873, p=0.0003) between the percentage of people voting for Obama and the percentage of traffic fatalities coming from non-collision turnovers. It's still not a correlation I'd bet the farm on, but we seem a little more likely to find folks not using their seat belts and flipping their cars in places that voted for Romney.
(Side note: 9.9% of U.S. traffic fatalities come from non-collision turnovers. In South Dakota, 33.1% of our traffic fatalities come from non-collision turnovers. Only North Dakota has a higher rate, 33.7%.)
Indeed, Douglas, there is a lot of potential overlap of variables. I just checked the fatalities per 100 million miles traveled: the correlation between that figure and Obama's popular vote in each state is –0.64277, slightly less than the correlation between fatalities per 100K people and the Obama vote. When I resort that table by rank on fatalities per 100M miles, I get resutls very similar to the original chart: the 12 worst states all voted for Romney, and the 20 safest states are all blue except for Utah and Nebraska.
Good stuff Corey. What Ive been saying all along. You Dems get out and get a job and become part of the traffic. Get with the flow like Flem says and you won't get hit by people in the work stream/
Now get the murder rate charts out and see how those red states compare. Of course, lies, damn lies and stats.
Maybe Republicans own more cars while Democrats in the city use public transportation.
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/murder-rates-nationally-and-state#MRord
For Les. 11 of the top 15 highest murder states are 'red'. Road rage perhaps? LOL
This post reminds me of the ongoing battle in accumulating data for use in determining the CPI. Does it take into account all population in a state or determine only those who actually drive a car? Does it estimate how many miles are driven by each driver every year or only the number of deaths per resident or driver? And finally does it place deaths per mile of rural driving respective to urban driving?
Also in accordance with keeping it light I'd have to say that those states with the highest number of beer drinkers have the highest rates of accidents and those states with the highest rates of pot smokers have the lowest rates. (I mean c'mon those weed whackers are only going at half speed!) :) So driving with stoned democrats is safer than driving with drunk republicans. :)
LOL. Charlie, don't you see? Cory's giving you some good news here. Contrary to current conventional wisdom, the GOP isn't really a national train wreck. Just a car wreck.
I'll telecommute, Les. Then you guys will never get me!
But Les does get my motor running. Here are some correlations between the percentage vote Obama got and various 2009 crime stats (all based on incidents per 1000 people). Remember, a correlation of 0 means no relationship; a correlation closer to 1 means a strong positive relationship; a correlation closer to –1 means a strong negative relationship. With 51 data points (50 states + DC), any correlation under 0.276 is not statistically significant.
Total violent crime: 0.3259
Murder: 0.3272
Rape: –0.3831
Robbery: 0.5704
Aggravated assault: 0.0926
Total Property Crime: 0.0431
Burglary: –0.1789
Larceny/theft: 0.0364
Motor vehicle theft: 0.4460
Interpretation: if you are slightly more like to get murdered in blue states, there's a higher chance than that of getting raped in red states. The biggest correlation is between blue vote and robbery, though there's no reliable correlation between blue vote and burglary or theft (except for cars... which it's safer to steal since there are fewer Republican drivers to smack into us!).
Red state apologist, Jon Schaff on South Dakota's failure to thrive:
http://www.capjournal.com/opinions/columnist/forget-the-blue-state-model-sd-deserves-praise-for-fiscal/article_793ecee8-3513-11e2-aae3-001a4bcf887a.html
Interesting thesis, Charlie! Let's put down the glass and check the DUI stats (the numbers I have here are 2008): correlation between DUI arrests per 1000 people in 2008 and Obama vote in 2012 (don't make me build a whole new chart!) is –0.3970. Not terribly strong... and perhaps explainable by the hypothesis that more Republicans drowned their sorrows and drove home drunk (though not that nice folks in Utah, who are outliers in this discussion).
As for pot use, Bob Newland's compadres offer some monthly pot use stats. Sho 'nuff! Obama voters are somewhat higher than Romney voters are drunk. Correlation between Obama 2012 vote and monthly pot use in 2009: 0.5284. Correlation between pot use and traffic fatalities per 100 people: –0.428. Someone really needs to scream "Correlation is not causation!" but until someone does so shout, I'm going to say, hey! Put down your scotch, smoke a joint, and these numbers suggest you might get safer roads and better government!
Do blue states have lower average speed limits? Minnesota's speed limits are generally lower than SD. Maybe blue states have more progressive lawmakers in city, county and state government who set lower speed limits?
The GOP better do a whole lot better job nationally bringing the middle class white, black, and Hispanic voters into the discussion of balancing the budget while not looking like a machine for corporate profits if we ever want the White House back again. And while we are at it every state should demand that the Feds decriminalize the growing, sale, and possession of marijuana and let the states vote it either up or down respectively. Not saying at all that I think the legal unabridged use of marijuana is a good thing but the feds have zero constitutional, rationally effective or legal control over something anyone can grow in their basement or backyard.
Interesting, Chris! I check speed limits by state, do a little casual coding for limit ranges, and find speed limits on freeways and divided highways all correlating with the Obama vote stronger than –0.5: where speeds are higher, votes for Obama are lower.
Someone give Rep. Hoffman a breathalyzer test. I can't tell if he been drinking too much or if he's stone-cold sober, but something's happened to him to make him talk sense.
Thanks Charlie. Trooper Oxner, only doing his job better than anyone else in the state, has recently cost the state a million dollars or more with arrests of folks carrying pot headed to Mpls/St Paul and other very Blue ;-) states. SD with its limited budget continues to incarcerate in a war lost long ago.
Grow it, tax it, I'll let Dithmer elaborate on hemp products and get trooper Oxner into more important duties with his impressive talents.
Wow. That's a 180.
Nebraska's speed limit on state highways is 60.
Les, when you point out how much money SD spends on incarceration of pot smugglers, did you subtract the amount of productivity lost by pot smokers taking life real easy with no ambition.
I did Rog but didn't bring it up. It actually didn't balance against the further costs of those 100 or so intimidated by our trooper for every bust who chose not to spend in or even return to our fine state.
Btw I don't have enough ambition left to add pot to my daily dose of life, so no, I'm not an advocate for that freedom.
Montana advocate petitions cannabis as constitutional right:
http://www.kfbb.com/news/local/Medical-Marijuana-Advocate-Files-Proposal-to-Make-Cannabis-a-Constitutional-Right-in-Montana-180663361.html
I doubt the productivity lost by pot smokers is higher than the costs of alcoholism. The only time I am willing to work social costs into the equation over individual freedoms is when innocent children are affected negatively. The affects on the children of potsmokers couldn't possibly be worse than the children of alcoholics. Making it illegal doesn't seem to be much of a deterrent to marijuana use. Also, the libertarian argument for legalization is logical and we do have Prohibition to study for historical reference.
I'm still ambivalent about the argument for legalization, maybe because I'm a mother now I have that natural maternal fear of my children becoming hooked on drugs as teenagers due to a moment of poor decision-making. One thing that would make me support marijuana legalization is the fact that pot smokers would no longer have to go to the drug dealer for their weed, and so would no longer be tempted by all the free samples offered by the dealer. There is a horrible epidemic of teenage deaths from heroine overdosing in our country, especially among young girls.
How do number of Indian Reservations correlate with traffic fatalities? I'm sure that Democratic votes and reservations have some good correlation.
When working with SD:ASAP, some of the tribes were efficient and functional. Others barely functioned and police changed with every vote on anything. Train them to use breathalyzers and a week or month later and they would all be replaced by somebody else's relatives. I hope things have gotten better in the past 40 years.
I would bet the link to hard drugs is more closely related to alcohol than pot Bree. There is also an epidemic of trafficing through the connection of the man with the samples.
commercial teevee is the most dangerous gateway drug,
Yes I'd be much more interested in a War on Human Trafficking than a War on Drugs. Especially those nasty Zetas. Shoot all the traffickers as far as I'm concerned.
I'd like to see both aisles put as much into human trafficking as they do into the other woman's rights agendas. As my daughter says, if it was men under the duress of trafficking the national and international laws would change in a heartbeat.
Human trafficking by the FLDS is protected religious speech, innit? That's what Lance Russell and Marty Jackley will say when Brendan Johnson sweeps in there and busts the whole kit n' kaboodle.
Disclosure: i license my rigs in South Dakota because insurance for New Mexico is off the charts.
Lance Russell is on your side Larry. He's an environmental lawyer, remember? Attempting to link him to the protection of wierd cult enclaves is simply disingenuous.
BS: i'll believe Lance Russell is an environmental lawyer when he sues Powertech.
Douglas: Indian population! Interesting suggestion... but when I run those Census figures, I get low correlations that fail to beat p=0.05, thus not statistically significant. So the data don't let us draw any conclusions about whether the Red Man or the Red Neck is a worse driver. But in the close-but-not-quite range, the correlation between Obama vote in 2012 and American Indian population is actually slightly negative. If that correlation were significant, I'd suggest that even where you have a lot of Indians, they're surrounded by a lot of white Republicans.
Didn't have to wait long to find the next South Dakotans exercising their freedom to drive without seatbelts and their freedom to fly out the window of a moving vehicle. Couple from Montrose demonstrated these freedoms yesterday (he's still in critical condition, she's dead).
Leave a Reply