gmalivuk wrote:The history of social darwinism and scientific racism would suggest that it in fact quite easy to be a bigoted biologist.
Yeah, that's a comically naive assertion.
Plenty of types of bigots.
It looks like some of ya'll have confused "bigot" for "republican".
There's a whole sordid past of gay bashing, racism, eugenics, etc that had at least some support from various scientific sorts. Gmalivuk is entirely correct, history supports that it's quite possible.
I agree that biologists have a strong liberal trend, but it's definitely not the same as an immunity to bigotry.
Thesh wrote:A lot of STEM is liberal arts anyway (specifically the sciences and mathematics).
Jobs and politics probably are loosely reflective of each other, although probably not enough to make it very useful when polling. My experience with computer programmers is that they tend to be more libertarian, which I'm guessing is due to having higher than average income as well as a personal experience which makes the idea of individualism sound attractive.
We certainly do have that bent. The same tendency exists among college students, however, which haven't gotten to that "higher than average income" yet. So, that probably doesn't explain it well.
Diadem wrote:Yeah based on personal experience I kind of suspect that people in STEM fields are on average less religious. Though I admit to not having hard data.
One interesting difference between STEM and non-STEM I consistently noticed during my own time as a student though: During breaks, outside a STEM-building, you saw maybe 2-3 people smoking. Outside non-STEM buildings there were always hordes.
Religion has an inverse relationship with educational attainment(it's slightly more complicated than this, but generally, people who completed college are less likely to believe in god. This is even more true if you factor out explicitly religious degrees).
So, while personal experience leads me to believe that CS students in particular are highly likely to be atheistic, I'd expect to see similar trends in many fields.
But, anyways, the fact that we have to qualify Trump's appeal with so very many qualifiers is exactly why he's having trouble. If your base is white men who achieved some education but not too much in specific fields, you don't have broad enough appeal. He's done a lot of dumb things to offend various subgroups for little to no practical gain, so it makes sense that his support overall isn't amazing.