C[omp]ute

From: andrew cooke <andrew@...>

Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2016 20:37:59 -0300

TBH this is somewhat unbelievable:
http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/2016/03/24/gender-is-costing-hillary-clinton-big-among-men/

  Half of the respondents were asked about the distribution of income in their
  own households - whether they or their spouse earned more money - before
  being asked about their preference in the Presidential general election. The
  other half were only asked about the distribution of income in their
  household at the end of the survey. This question was designed to remind
  people of disruption to traditional gender roles, without explicitly
  mentioning Clinton or a female president, and simulate the sorts of subtle
  gender-based attacks that can be expected when Clinton is a general election
  candidate.

  The effects of the gender role threat question are enormous. As Figure 1
  shows, men who weren't asked about spousal income until after being asked
  about the Presidential election preferred Clinton over Trump, 49 to
  33. However, those who were reminded about the threat to gender roles
  embodied by Clinton preferred Trump over Clinton, 50 to 42.

Andrew