Wil Wirtanen

Why the Hilldabeast was lying

From the article:

Here's the evidence. Of the 12 blue states that Hillary Clinton won by the largest percentage margins — Hawaii, California, Vermont, Massachusetts, Maryland, New York, Illinois, Washington, Rhode Island, New Jersey, Connecticut and Delaware — all but three of them lost residents through domestic migration (excluding immigration) over the last 10 years. In fact, combined, all twelve Hillary states lost an average of 6% of their populations to net out-migration over the past decade. California and New York alone lost 3,000,000 people in the past 10 years.

Now let's contrast the Hillary states with the 12 states that had the largest percentage-margin vote for Donald Trump. Every one of them, save Wyoming, was a net population gainer — West Virginia, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Idaho, South Dakota, Kentucky, Alabama, Arkansas, Tennessee, Nebraska and Kansas.

The move from blue to red states — almost 1,000 people every day — has been one of the greatest demographic stories in American history. If you go to states like Arizona, Florida, Tennessee and Texas these days, all you see is blue-state license plates.

Pretty much the same pattern holds true for jobs. The job gains in the red states carried by the widest margins by Trump had about twice the job-creation rate as the bluest states carried by Hillary.

Hillary mentioned GDP numbers. While it is true that the blue states of the two coasts and several of the Midwestern states are richer than the redder states of the south and mountain regions over recent decades, she failed to mention the giant transfer of wealth from Hillary to Trump states. IRS tax-return data confirm that from 2006-2016, Hillary's states lost $113.6 billion in combined wealth, whereas Trump's states gained $116.0 billion.

Read the rest.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 08:08 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 305 words, total size 2 kb.