Who voted no in the referendum?

The day after passing the polls, everyone is proclaimed winner, but who are the losers? In the case of the referendum to reduce the number of parliamentarians, approved by 69.96% of voters, they seem to correspond to a precise identikit: they live in the historic centers of large cities, have higher incomes and more expensive properties than the half. This at least the stereotype, which seems to confirm a first and approximate analysis of the data. But perhaps there is something else and it is worth a closer look. It is not said that those who have put the cross on the No are simply a quarrel unrelated to reality and linked to an old image of parties and politics.

First for and give, which to a large extent seem to confirm the stereotype of the privileged and conservative classes of a world today out of date.

In all major cities where the Post has conducted an initial examination, the areas where he won the No match almost perfectly with the more elegant neighborhoods. A Torino for example, the S in the reduction of the number of parliamentarians won with 60.7% and the No won only in districts 1 and 2 with 57.4%. the elegant center that includes Corso Einaudi, Corso Trieste, Corso Galileo Ferraris where a good property can cost around three thousand euros per square meter and a rented apartment of 60 square meters more than 500 euros per month (all quotes are taken from the database of the Tax Agency). If, on the other hand, we look at the northern periphery, in the former working-class neighborhood of Barça for example, we find rental prices slightly less than half compared to the center and a statement S of 72%.

In addition, in Turin a second correlation is outlined very clearly, parallel to the one between the No referendum orientation and housing prices or costs: the higher the percentage of graduates in the different residential areas of the city, the more likely it is that voters reject the option to cut parliamentarians. From the You Trend elaborations, they show how the orientation to No in the surveys rose above 50% in the neighborhoods where the density of graduates over the total population exceeds 20%; where the density of graduates exceeds 25%, the percentage of No approach and in some cases even exceeds 60%. By contrast, in areas where those with a university degree do not exceed 3% or 4% of the population, No does not exceed 25%.

Correlations between income (income assumptions), wealth (property value assumptions), and preference for No also occur in Milan. In the great historic center, where normally the Tax Agency can give home values ​​at 8,500 euros per square meter and income from 1,500 euros per month, the No to the reduction of parliamentarians won in Municipality 1 with 56.5%. But the only area where it prevails. If we go, for example, to Bicocca, where the purchase and rental of real estate costs a third of the city center, the S takes 60.37%: in the national average, but above the Milanese average of 56, 5% for the reduction of places.

The same story also a Rome, which on average of its municipalities presents 60.1% in favor of S. The maximum of the affirmation of No stops in the Parioli-Nomentano district (second Municipality), where the option to maintain parliamentary status here reaches 57%. Also in this area, of course, the Public Treasury registers properties among the most expensive in the city at more than 5,000 euros per square meter and even 1,000 euros per month for 60 square meters of rent. On the other hand, suburbs like Corviale, Prenestino or Centocelle score well above 60% of S.

A Naples instead, the No loses everywhere, but less in the Chiaia, Posillipo and San Ferdinando area. It remains generally true that the South was oriented towards the reduction of parliamentarians more than the North prosperous country. In Naples itself, the S obtained 74%, more than the national average, while in Palermo it obtained 71%. The victory, on the other hand, was relatively less in Florence (55.6%), Milan (56.5%), Padua (56.9%) or Bologna (57.2%).