[EL] Uh oh, Rick...

[Richman, Jesse T.]

One more response to Michael McDonald:

On Friday October 24th and 18:46 PDT, Michael wrote:


">I want to correct something I wrote previously, there are 6 issue areas, not 8, analyzed in Appendix Table a3 (actually five since the authors drop

>one of the areas without comment). Since Table 3 reports responses for all noncitizens, and no noncitizen voters were in three of the issue areas, I >can fill in the missing issue areas in Table a4
>Fine Businesses
>Noncitizen non-voters 35.3%
>Noncitizen voters 0%
>Increase guest workers
>Noncitizen non-voters 47.1%
>Noncitizen voters 0%
>If one were to run a Chi-squared test to determine if noncitizen voters and nonvoters are different on the issues, then these areas should be included in

As I pointed out already, the 0% values Michael suggests should be included for the analyses based on tiny non-citizen subsamples of 17 that included no non-citizen voters are just simply wrong.  This is based upon a misreading of our discussion of these issues.  They are excluded because there are no non-citizens in these tiny subsamples who responded that they voted. Since 0/0 is indeterminate, the zero's Michael suggests ought to be included DO NOT BELONG.  A better way to fill in the values would be:

Fine Businesses
Noncitizen non-voters 35.3%
Noncitizen voters N.A.%
Increase guest workers
Noncitizen non-voters 47.1%
Noncitizen voters N.A.%
Michael also noted that we excluded one category from the analysis.  This is the "none" category.  Basically, these are the people who took no position on any issue.  I excluded it specifically because I have no idea whether a response of "none" is more pro-immigration or not.  The five included categories include items that those opposed to immigration should support, and items those who support immigration.  Thus, a response "yes" to "none" might perhaps indicate some sort of disengagement and indifference, but it doesn't speak to the question of what direction the respondent's attitude is toward immigration.  As such, one might perhaps expect non-citizens who are engaged enough politically to vote to give fewer 'none' responses.  That's more or less what we see.  Here's the crosstab:


Crosstab



Voted

Total

.00

1.00

Immigration - none

Yes

Count

44

1

45

% within voted

9.7%

2.9%

9.2%

No

Count

411

33

444

% within voted

90.3%

97.1%

90.8%

Total

Count

455

34

489

% within voted

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%


Much as one might expect non-citizens who said they voted seem to have been somewhat less likely to fail to check any of the options (9.7 percent versus 2.9 percent).  This difference is not statistically significant, however, and the Chi-Square statistic is 1.714, p = .190.

Best Regards,

Jesse



Jesse Richman
Associate Professor of Political Science and International Studies
Director, Social Science Research Center
Old Dominion University
BAL 7028
Norfolk VA 23529
757-683-3853
www.odu.edu/~jrichman<http://www.odu.edu/~jrichman>


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20141028/ba0491a4/attachment.html>