9

Ted Cruz during in interview with Hugh Hewitt claimed that democrats are more likely to commit violent crime than republicans.

He apparently is getting this statistic from a study on three states entitled Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science.

TC: Now listen, here’s the simple and undeniable fact. The overwhelming majority of violent criminals are Democrats. The media doesn’t report that. What they report, and there’s a reason why the Democrats for years have been viewed as soft on crime, because they go in and they appoint to the bench judges who release violent criminals. They go in, and they do what Barack Obama tried to do, which is appoint a lawyer voluntarily represented for free, a cop killer, to a senior Justice Department position. They go in and fight to give the right to vote to convicted felons. Why? Because the Democrats know convicted felons tend to vote Democrat.

An article on politifact analyses the paper and concludes that Ted Cruz's statement is mostly false. But, there are a host of other online articles which make the opposite claim, (and vice versa).
I tried searching for academic articles, but couldn't find any.

  • 7
    Democrats tend to live in urban areas. Urban areas tend to have higher crime rates. I would be surprised if there wasn't some effect but I'm not aware of any data. – Loren Pechtel Nov 16 '16 at 5:29
  • 10
    @Shadur Where did I imply causation? The question is simply about the relationship, not whether being Democrat causes criminality. – Loren Pechtel Nov 16 '16 at 7:12
  • 2
    @gerrit only felons, not all criminals, and afaik not all elections. And not being allowed to vote doesn't stop them being members of one party of the other. – jwenting Nov 16 '16 at 12:34
  • 2
    @gerrit "Felons are allowed to vote in most states of the US" en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Felony_disenfranchisement It varies from state to state and if the right to vote is taken away a felon can often get it resorted. – DavePhD Nov 16 '16 at 12:38
  • 3
    @KDog - Why? Because if you don't control for the factor, then you can't say anything about that. It might be that poor people are more likely, not Dem vs Republican. Correlation vs cause, and if cause is not the point, why is the affiliation being raised, at all? In order to verify or validate that statement, you have to control for political affiliation not just count raw numbers. That means poor urban Dems vs poor urban Republicans, middle class suburban Dems vs middle class suburban Republicans, rural vs rural, maybe even controlling along racial lines. – PoloHoleSet Nov 16 '16 at 15:32

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .