Are The Men Voting For Trump And The Women For Clinton?

Back on September 24th, 40 days before the election,  we shared with you how the LGBT vote stack up in the United States Presidential race (How Do The LGBT Votes Stack Up In A Recent U.S. Presidential Election Poll? ) .

 

When Libertarian Gary Johnson and Green Party candidate Jill Stein are added to the match-up question, Clinton still maintained the lead among registered LGBT voters with 63 percent support. Trump, on the other hand, had 15 percent support. Johnson was not far behind with 13 percent, followed by 8 percent support for Stein. – nbcnews.com

 

What if the vote was split between men and women?  Who would each binary gender vote for?   In an article in the Chicagoist.com titled, "Illinois Is The Only Midwest State That Would Not Elect Trump If Only Men Voted," we learn the following:

 

But of all the dudes apparently dropping the ball for the Dems, they’re not representative of Lincoln Land: Illinois is the only state in the Midwest that would still cast its electoral votes for Hillary Clinton if only men were to vote.

The national disparity is pretty jaw-dropping. In a male-only bloc, FiveThirtyEight projects that Trump would win in a landslide, 350 electoral votes to 188. Just as alarming is the map itself, which shows a lonely Illinois as the only state anywhere near the region to stay blue. Aside from us and New Mexico, the whole of flyover country, from the far Northeast to the far West Coast is a giant splotch of red.

“It seems fair to say that, if Trump loses the election, it will be because women voted against him,” Silver writes. It’s not that surprising, given pussygate, personal-space violation, Alicia Machado, etc., etc. etc. But Trump’s still-high standing with men is sadly instructive. It’s good to know that, at least in Illinois if nowhere else remotely nearby, that gender gap is surmountable. – chicagoist.com

 

 

Clinton is more popular with the men still earning 188 compared to Trump with the women at only 80.  the article focuses on the fact that Trump may not be elected due to women not voting for him, but it may also because there are men jumping the gender lines and voting for Clinton.

I think it is also good to point out that New Mexico along with Illinois would as well swing Hillary's way no matter if men or women were to elect the next president.  And 12 states would be Trump all the way for both men and women (Idaho, Wyoming, Utah, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Tennessee, Kentucky, and West Virginia).

Why do you think this difference exists?

Do you see this split in your household?

Is it because we are electing the first women president and women are sticking with Hillary to make history?

Is it because these poll results came out just after "pussygate?"

Is it because men are supporting a man and not a woman?

Do you think there is one question or political platform item that separates the genders?

 

h/t:  text and maps from chicagoist.com

What do you think?