You focused only on Republican low information voters, though. And, I won't argue with you about there being stupid Republicans. However, the stupidest claim one can make is that they are any more or less plentiful than stupid Democrats.Ian wrote:Hey there Mr. Defensive - I was railing against Low Information Voters, not just the legions of stupid Republicans out there.
Just as many.Ian wrote: I'm perfectly well aware that there are imbeciles who vote for Democrats as well.
It's not that you didn't do it this time, you -- and most other Democrats arguing this point -- never do. The point is constantly argued by Democrats that they are smarter than Republicans. All Republican presidents are stupid.Ian wrote: I picked the PPP survey because I'd been reminded of it recently, and I mentioned the other stuff (Obama being a muslim, etc.) because you mentioned it in the post above mine! My apologies for not going out of my way to explain that there are indeed dumb people in the D column as well.
A 2011 study found that those describing themselves as holding conservative views tended to major in things that related to more immediate employment, so they tend not to stay in school until they're 28.Ian wrote:
But if you'd like to be defensive about something, maybe I could point out that people with graduate degree levels of education are voting for Obama at least 60-40, whereas people with a high school degree or less are voting for Romney by the same percentages. So nyer.
Astrology? WTF?
http://voices.yahoo.com/presidential-po ... 67599.htmlPresidential Politics: More Educated Vote Republican
Contrary to Liberal Mantra, Bush (2004) and McCain (2008) Received the More Educated Vote
Based on data from the United States Census and renowned Cook Partisan Voting Index (CPVI), congressional districts with more educated residents are more likely to pledge their electoral votes to Republican presidential candidates. Conversely, congressional districts with less educated residents are more likely to pledge their electoral votes to Democratic presidential candidates.
As demonstrated below, there is a statistically significant positive correlation between the percentage of residents in each congressional district who are high school graduates (or higher) and support by those districts for Republican presidential candidates. Comparatively, there is a statistically significant negative correlation between the percentage of residents in each congressional district who are high school graduates (or higher) and support by those districts for Democratic presidential candidates.
As a point of probable interest, seven of the ten most educated congressional districts are partisan Republican districts and three are partisan Democratic districts. All ten of the least educated congressional districts are partisan Democratic districts.
No no no - that's a very flawed study, using a few out-of-context districts and high-school education levels. It's going to take a lot more than that to convince me that a cross-section of Democracts are dumber than a cross-section of Republicans. Peruse the comments on that page and you'll get some sense why that study you cited is crap. You're using confirmation bias and wishful thinking.Coito ergo sum wrote:You focused only on Republican low information voters, though. And, I won't argue with you about there being stupid Republicans. However, the stupidest claim one can make is that they are any more or less plentiful than stupid Democrats.Ian wrote:Hey there Mr. Defensive - I was railing against Low Information Voters, not just the legions of stupid Republicans out there.
Just as many.Ian wrote: I'm perfectly well aware that there are imbeciles who vote for Democrats as well.
It's not that you didn't do it this time, you -- and most other Democrats arguing this point -- never do. The point is constantly argued by Democrats that they are smarter than Republicans. All Republican presidents are stupid.Ian wrote: I picked the PPP survey because I'd been reminded of it recently, and I mentioned the other stuff (Obama being a muslim, etc.) because you mentioned it in the post above mine! My apologies for not going out of my way to explain that there are indeed dumb people in the D column as well.
A 2011 study found that those describing themselves as holding conservative views tended to major in things that related to more immediate employment, so they tend not to stay in school until they're 28.Ian wrote:
But if you'd like to be defensive about something, maybe I could point out that people with graduate degree levels of education are voting for Obama at least 60-40, whereas people with a high school degree or less are voting for Romney by the same percentages. So nyer.
Astrology? WTF?
But, in any case, your "Democrats are smarter" routine may not bear up to close scrutiny.
http://voices.yahoo.com/presidential-po ... 67599.htmlPresidential Politics: More Educated Vote Republican
Contrary to Liberal Mantra, Bush (2004) and McCain (2008) Received the More Educated Vote
Based on data from the United States Census and renowned Cook Partisan Voting Index (CPVI), congressional districts with more educated residents are more likely to pledge their electoral votes to Republican presidential candidates. Conversely, congressional districts with less educated residents are more likely to pledge their electoral votes to Democratic presidential candidates.
As demonstrated below, there is a statistically significant positive correlation between the percentage of residents in each congressional district who are high school graduates (or higher) and support by those districts for Republican presidential candidates. Comparatively, there is a statistically significant negative correlation between the percentage of residents in each congressional district who are high school graduates (or higher) and support by those districts for Democratic presidential candidates.
As a point of probable interest, seven of the ten most educated congressional districts are partisan Republican districts and three are partisan Democratic districts. All ten of the least educated congressional districts are partisan Democratic districts.
LOL -- Democrats must be smarter. That is why laws requiring people to have some form of identification to vote works such a major injustice on Democrats that they will lose elections because of it -- because Democrat voters are smarter. It stands to reason that they'd be smarter, because smarter people have a much harder time of it in that regard.Ian wrote:Coito ergo sum wrote: No no no - that's a very flawed study, using a few out-of-context districts and high-school education levels. It's going to take a lot more than that to convince me that a cross-section of Democracts are dumber than a cross-section of Republicans.
I'm not. I just cited the study. But, folks making the argument that one side or the other is "smarter" overall are the ones using confirmation bias and wishful thinking -- it's "I think this way, and I'm smart, so smart people agree with me..." It's "reality has a LIberal bias" and such bollocks.Ian wrote: Peruse the comments on that page and you'll get some sense why that study you cited is crap. You're using confirmation bias and wishful thinking.
LOL - you'll stick with whatever demonstrates your preconceived notion that Democrats are smarter.Ian wrote:
I'll stick with exit polls as a more reliable source of information.
Stupid people must be pretty good at doing better financially.Ian wrote: And the 2008 polls had little ambiguity to them: preference for Obama increased as education level increased. Karl Rove explains this correlation succinctly: "As people do better financially, they tend to vote Republican, unless they're highly educated." Captain Obvious to the rescue, IMO.
The differences are marginal, and also highly disputed in terms of the metrics used. There are differences between education and intelligence -- those two things are not the same, etc. Being from New Jersey or New York doesn't make you smarter, and most people there, Democrats and Republicans alike, are borderline retarded, just as most people are everywhere. You can feel free to present the damning evidence that Democrats are overall smarter than Republicans by and large. I'd love to see exactly what you're relying on.Ian wrote:
And if exit polls from 2008 don't convince you, just look at the damn map. Republican Presidents can count on Mississippi, Oklahoma, Kentucky, no problem. Democrats have no trouble with Massachusets, Washington, Maryland, etc. Care to discuss which states are overall more intelligent, red or blue ones? I'll be more than happy to go down that road. Surely you wouldn't contend that smarter people live in the deep South and the interior plains while the dumb ones are in the northeast and the west coast? The term "flyover states" exists for a reason. 15 of the top 20 most Democrat-leaning states are also 15 of the top 20 best educated states. Review a list of educational attainment by state populations, and then color them in red, blue and purple. The distinction is clear as day.
Yup.Ian wrote: Plenty of intelligent, educated people vote Republican. One can be brilliant and vote Republican and one can be an idiot and vote Democratic.
Evidence? And, let's see a study that doesn't fail for the same or similar reasons that you claim the study I cited fails.Ian wrote: Those are just the exceptions to the rule these days, that's all.
[/quote]Ian wrote: And it's not all that much of an exception. But it's yet another example of False Balance to claim that there are just as many dumb Democrats as there are Republicans. That's just a defense mechanism.
ScienceDaily (Feb. 24, 2010) — More intelligent people are statistically significantly more likely to exhibit social values and religious and political preferences that are novel to the human species in evolutionary history. Specifically, liberalism and atheism, and for men (but not women), preference for sexual exclusivity correlate with higher intelligence, a new study finds.
http://www.theatlanticcities.com/politi ... tive/1162/Ian wrote:Coito - You keep mentioning Voter ID laws, as if that trumps so many things. It's like the blind man describing the elephant by feeling its ass. Confirmation bias yet again.
Look at the goddamn map. And then look at it again. And then read about how people voted the last time a Presidential election was held. That's all the evidence I need to prove that there's a relationship between education/intelligence and voter preference. I WILL stick with exit polls to verify my preconceived notions, thank you very much. I dare you to refute them. There are LOTS of people providing exceptions, but that's the rule. I think you're just pissy because the truth hurts. Some might call it an inconvenient truth...
I didn't say it trumped anything. It certainly is a logical point, though. If Republicans are overall stupider, statistically, then voter ID laws would, it would seem to follow, disparately impact Republicans, unless they are stupid in general but nevertheless better able than their smarter Democrat compatriots at navigating the complex world of identification.Ian wrote:Coito - You keep mentioning Voter ID laws, as if that trumps so many things.
No, it just logically follows, assuming, of course, that smarter people do have an easier time of navigating the puzzling world of voter identification. Maybe you think I'm going out on a limb in assuming that.Ian wrote: It's like the blind man describing the elephant by feeling its ass. Confirmation bias yet again.
You prove my point. You apparently do not see the flaw in the "look at the map" bullshit. Look - let's say New York is above-average in education and IQ. Right? So, that state is majority Democrat. You conclude based on that that Democrats must be smarter. That is an unwarranted conclusion. It is certainly POSSIBLE -- and you'll have to admit this -- that the smarter New Yorkers tend to vote Republican, and the dumber New Yorkers tend to vote Democrat. Show me the evidence that among New York voters, the ones that vote Democrat tend to be smarter, and then you'd have a point.Ian wrote:
Look at the goddamn map. And then look at it again.
You need to present your evidence, I think, in terms of citation, link etc. Something that you're basing it on that I can look at in order to refute. I'm not going to go looking for whatever it is that you rely upon. Stick to whatever you want, but present it. Just writing about it is not enough.Ian wrote:
And then read about how people voted the last time a Presidential election was held. That's all the evidence I need to prove that there's a relationship between education/intelligence and voter preference. I WILL stick with exit polls to verify my preconceived notions, thank you very much. I dare you to refute them. There are LOTS of people providing exceptions, but that's the rule. I think you're just pissy because the truth hurts. Some might call it an inconvenient truth...
I look forward to a day when we can have a true Independent in the White House. I don't know how soon that will be: right now, being an Independent in Washington is like saying you'd like to be excluded (from good committee seats, from funding, etc.) and risk your own employment.
I don't have a disdain for New York. I was using it as an example.Ian wrote:Coito - first, see my edit above.
Then let's talk about your disdain for New York.
No. You need to present evidence that the more educated and intelligent vote Democrat. I've seen none yet. I don't think Republicans are smarter. I think they're about the same. You've made the claim Democrats are smarter, more educated and more intelligent. Prove it. Prove it based on New York voters, or Massachusetts voters. Pointing to the state as being blue is not enough, for reasons I explained.Ian wrote: You'll have to provide some better evidence that it is the more educated and affluent who vote Republican there.
I'm happy with looking at every state. I'm still waiting for your evidence that it's the smarter people in Massachusetts and/or New York and/or other blue states that vote Democrat, and not Republican.Ian wrote: Inner city neighborhoods and rural areas are a wash: both have lower levels of education than the state overall, and both vote on opposite ends of the spectrum. And to keep things in perspective, we'd also have to talk about Mississippi and Oklahoma compared to New York.
I never made that contention.Ian wrote: So you're contending that the more intelligent people in blue states are the minorities who vote Republican? You were with NY. I think that's nonsense, and you offered no proof for it.
Sounds wonderful, but you'll have to present evidence that the smarter people vote Democrat. It may well be that the expanding urban and minority populations are resulting in a shift Democrat. We'll have to see what the numbers show, when you post them, or link to them.Ian wrote: Your notion also ignores the dynamic within red states. Consider North Carolina: why has it gone from solid red to a battleground state? Because of all the people moving to the Research Triangle, that's why. Why has Virginia become a battleground? Because of the rapidly-growing DC suburbs, chock-full of very highly educated people. Your notion also doesn't explain why Vermont, with a greater percentage of rural voters than any other state in the union, is highly Democratic.
You are still missing it, aren't you? Look -- the color of the state does not tell us who in the State are Republicans and Democrats. Look at the Demographics in Mississippi and tell me there isn't a non-IQ related reason why it's a red state?Ian wrote:
You've got to look at the overall levels. Statistics are what they are. I've mentioned some data, but if you really want it in your face then how about this:
No doubt you can see where the blue states are and where the red states are. It's not a perfect correlation, but it's clearly there.Trigger Warning!!!1! :
Check out the top ten and bottom ten of each list.
No, I'm not grasping at straws since I'm not making the assertion. I illustrated for you why the color of a state does not get you to your conclusion. You keep pretending that because New York is blue, that means New York Democrats are smarter than New York Republicans. That does not follow -- at all. It is an unwarranted conclusion. It is illogical. If it is, nevertheless, "good enough for you" then you represent one data point against your position.Ian wrote:
Coito, you're grasping at straws, tossing out weird theories about how it must be the more successful people in blue states like NY who vote Republican without offering any proof besides your hunch, which doesn't hold up in comparison to how that dynamic would work with red states.
No, it's just an unsubstantiated conclusion generally offered, in my experience, by people who aren't very bright themselves. I give you personally more credit than the average person who brings this garbage up. But, if you really don't see how you haven't presented a shred of evidence that supports your claim...Ian wrote: And I'm sure you don't like my arrogance in bringing this subject up again, so you'll challenge me.
You have presented no evidence, the above list notwithstanding. It doesn't prove that the more intelligent people vote Democrat, or vice versa. It just doesn't.Ian wrote: But the reality remains that generally speaking, the dumber a person is the more likely they are to vote Republican nowadays, and vice versa.
If you think those charts show that more intelligent people vote Democrat, then you're not thinking clearly. And, the electoral map does not show what you say it shows. Again, just because New York is blue and New Yorkers are overall smarter and more educated on average than Mississippians (which is a red state) does not mean that Democrat voters are more educated than Republican voters on average. You have to be able to see the distinction there.Ian wrote: Refuting it makes you feel more comfortable as an educated person who votes Republican, and that's a perfectly normal reaction to uncomfortable facts. You can call me biased too if you like, but I have those charts on my side, I have the electoral map on my side, and you do not.
Let's take one at a time. I'm waiting for evidence on your first claim.Ian wrote:
Perhaps we could also talk about who the voters who consider themselves "highly religious" and "highly secular" are voting for. It's a far greater landslide than the education level one...
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests
