I don't understand this post, especially in light of your previous post: The only person bringing race into this is you.
Oh please, the OP was a thinly veiled smear against working class Whites (aka: rednecks), the same demographic that progressives should be reaching out to, not ridiculing, since we cannot have a progressive majority without bringing them back into the party. So zip it with the snide comments about Southerners before we permanently lose them to the GOP.
I don't think "data" is the same as "smear", but I see your political point. That being said, asking that it be "broken down by race" makes me think you might have a racial bias, not the data. Naturally, I assume such is not true, but the point remains that your statements were cumbersome.
It was only a "thinly veiled smear against working class Whites" if you choose to make it so. I'm a white, male Texan and never viewed it as such. Unless the states are going to magically transform their demographics into something more palatable staticstics-wise, race has exactly NOTHING to do with this. The demographics are what they are; they're not going to change. You could maybe point to race as a contributing factor to diabetes and obesity (even THAT is debatable), but it should have NOTHING to do with whether or not they are prone to beating children, have less collective bargaining, receive more from the government than they give, graduate high school less often, have higher income inequality, have more poverty, etc. Unless, of course, you're saying those things are intrinsic to one race in particular.
It is not necessarily intrinsic, but certainly there is a strong correlation between race and poverty or high school graduation rates. You cannot be unaware of this, can you?
Didn't you just put up a thinly veiled smear against working class (blue-collar) whites by calling them all rednecks?
