How New York City voted. It's transit riders vs drivers

It's important to note that this table doesn't actually directly compare transit riders' vs drivers' voting habits. It's "election districts with..." more transit riders or drivers. There could be other outside variables such as income levels and political party affiliations in those different districts that influenced these results.

This is also true about all of the other variables in the table. It's only comparing trends between districts, not between individual people.

No it's not. This is divisive bullshit and statistics gore.

The numbers you're looking at are how districts with more or less transit riders / drivers voted. On top of that, it was a pretty close split amongst both sides, with just slightly more on each side leaning one way or another.

Wealth vs wages? Cars require a substantial amount to buy, and then a decent liveable paycheck that leaves you something to play with for fuel and upkeep. Public transport is something more affordable for wage slaves.

I’m sure there’s a bit of geography going on here. I wouldn’t be surprised if Staten Island has far more cars than the other boroughs due to their having fewer public transportation options. I know Cuomo had more supporters there than other boroughs.

Wouldn't drivers also want free transit so there's less traffic?

I've tried this argument with them, it doesn't work. They just shift focus to "Waste of our money", which of course is then "What about roads", and then they go back to "But people use roads", "But people use transit too". They'll just point to the next thing fox news has taught them.
- They've already decided those who disagree with them are below them. The people who use transit aren't people in their minds, not truly. Second class citizens at best, untermenschen at worst.
They're not thinking with facts they're thinking with feelings.
I don't know if it's unique to the US, but there's a perception that "progress" is a farce that never helps as much as politicians claim. I personally think it's because we've got such a long history of means-testing welfare to such a ridiculous extent, like we kick people off disability if they have more than $2k in the bank, that "free bus for everybody" just sounds like a scam, too good to be true.
- Fr, can’t have anything nice without a “bipartisan compromise” to means test 80% of people out of it. Just give the people access to a decent dignified living. We can afford it.
Not really - they are paying a lot for their car and want transit riders to take more of the share of the transit costs. If they gain more from free transit than they cost is a complex subject.
They may also understand that transit is expensive and for most the cost of transit isn't why they wouldn't ride in the first place and so free transit won't make much a difference. Meanwhile charging for transit and also giving transit the money that free transit would cost would give enough money that better service could be provided and poor service (for the individual trip) is why most people don't ride transit. (though NYC transit spends far more on better service than it should so who knows)

Staten Island, you say!

URL?

And note that Sliwa voters composed 15% of drivers - about double that of residents above median income.

So 58% of districts are at or above median income, but only 24% of districts have more drivers than riders?

Could it be that both variables are closely correlated, and the latter is just sampling closer to the tail end of the distribution?

Yeah, this is Garbage level analysis of statistics.

You can see something similar in NJ Governor's election as well.