(08-27-2014 09:07 AM)john01992 Wrote:  

(08-27-2014 07:00 AM)WKUApollo Wrote:  

(08-26-2014 10:42 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(08-26-2014 03:00 PM)WKUApollo Wrote:  

(08-26-2014 12:08 PM)john01992 Wrote:  what truth? your argument is personal opinion based on watter matters. mine is "how come FNC has the least informed viewers?" or "How come liberal states generally have better education systems than their conservative counterparts" or "just remember, the creationists are on YOUR side"

Sadly, truth and statistics, ratings, etc. are rarely in sync.

Here's some interesting data:

President Obama won the high school dropout vote in 2012 65-34 percent.
President Obama narrowly lost the college graduate vote to Romney in 2012.
Among current college students President Obama only won that vote 49-48 percent.

One of the great misperceptions about President Obama's electorate is that the young support him in huge numbers. In actuality, the high school dropout youth supported him by a wide margin. It's not that college students overwhelmingly support President Obama that was the real news story in the last few years, it was that President Obama gained among college students and pulled about even with the Republicans. That's telling. In 2004 President Bush won the current college student electorate 54-46 over the Democrat. If you hear the news media, you'd never know that. What you assume is that college students overwhelming favor the Democrat.......not the case at all.

this is what pisses me off about the cons on this forum. you guys intentionally misrepresent information or use selective information. it's proof that you guys have a mentality of "I don't want to argue the truth, I just want to argue that my party is correct"

sure obama won the "some college" category 49-48 and lost the "college graduate" category 51-47. but what you conveniently omit is that he won the "post graduate study" category 55-42

Lol Dude. Obvious to most people, save you evidently, I was merely trying to show that the the educated folks didn't overwhelmingly vote for Obama and the uneducated only vote for Republicans, as you imply with your Fox News data. Of course, I could break down the numbers into minute little subsets to demonstrate some point (i.e. post grads, ethnic studies majors, fashion design majors, etc.) but small subsets would make me appear to be stretching, scraping, desperate, etc.

I'll give you the post grad numbers. Yippee. My points are still valid. Obama was a huge winner with high school dropouts (typically low information voters). It's about even with voters in college (which defies the message libs want to portray) and Republicans won the overall college graduate voting block, minus the post grad group.....even then, they only won 55%.

your points are not valid, the whole conservative mantra is about being afraid of change & progress even in the face of logic. it is a political movement based off of fear and having corporate influenced into their talking points. I mean seriously you have evolution and climate change denial, plus half your party thinks obama is a socialist or a muslim, the other half thinks there is a "gay agenda" to take over this country. if I had a dollar for every conservative conspiracy theory that was introduced to this forum by a con I'd have a fat wallet.

Wow. I show the numbers and dispute your claims, from many threads, that the uninformed and old folks are all that makes up conservatives and then you deflect and start a totally new topic about conservatives being conspiracy theorists, fearful of change, in bed with corporatists. I'm giddy you conceded the win to me on the fact that conservatives are the better educated voting block and equal in numbers among the educated youth of America.

(08-27-2014 09:09 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(08-27-2014 09:07 AM)fsquid Wrote:  

(08-27-2014 09:00 AM)john01992 Wrote:  

(08-27-2014 08:24 AM)fsquid Wrote:  the sad part is that you guys are arguing over less than a million people. We are talking less than 1% of households with TVs.

pretty much. i think it's stupid that we have so many resident FNC cheerleaders. doesn't get any more pathetic than that.

It's stupid to be a cheerleader of any of the 24 hour news networks.

Maybe it's the 24 hour thing that makes "news" so terrible these days. The networks need constant programming so they generate or create news. Need something to fill the time I guess.

I was reading an article about the coverage of the Reagan Shooting in 1981. The networks signed off around midnight because there was nothing new to report.

(08-27-2014 09:22 AM)fsquid Wrote:  

(08-27-2014 09:09 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(08-27-2014 09:07 AM)fsquid Wrote:  

(08-27-2014 09:00 AM)john01992 Wrote:  

(08-27-2014 08:24 AM)fsquid Wrote:  the sad part is that you guys are arguing over less than a million people. We are talking less than 1% of households with TVs.

pretty much. i think it's stupid that we have so many resident FNC cheerleaders. doesn't get any more pathetic than that.

It's stupid to be a cheerleader of any of the 24 hour news networks.

Maybe it's the 24 hour thing that makes "news" so terrible these days. The networks need constant programming so they generate or create news. Need something to fill the time I guess.

I was reading an article about the coverage of the Reagan Shooting in 1981. The networks signed off around midnight because there was nothing new to report.

Well, since one of the major news channels reported Reagan as being dead, it was doubtful that any new news would top that later in the night.

(08-27-2014 09:19 AM)WKUApollo Wrote:  

(08-27-2014 09:07 AM)john01992 Wrote:  

(08-27-2014 07:00 AM)WKUApollo Wrote:  

(08-26-2014 10:42 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(08-26-2014 03:00 PM)WKUApollo Wrote:  Sadly, truth and statistics, ratings, etc. are rarely in sync.

Here's some interesting data:

President Obama won the high school dropout vote in 2012 65-34 percent.
President Obama narrowly lost the college graduate vote to Romney in 2012.
Among current college students President Obama only won that vote 49-48 percent.

One of the great misperceptions about President Obama's electorate is that the young support him in huge numbers. In actuality, the high school dropout youth supported him by a wide margin. It's not that college students overwhelmingly support President Obama that was the real news story in the last few years, it was that President Obama gained among college students and pulled about even with the Republicans. That's telling. In 2004 President Bush won the current college student electorate 54-46 over the Democrat. If you hear the news media, you'd never know that. What you assume is that college students overwhelming favor the Democrat.......not the case at all.

this is what pisses me off about the cons on this forum. you guys intentionally misrepresent information or use selective information. it's proof that you guys have a mentality of "I don't want to argue the truth, I just want to argue that my party is correct"

sure obama won the "some college" category 49-48 and lost the "college graduate" category 51-47. but what you conveniently omit is that he won the "post graduate study" category 55-42

Lol Dude. Obvious to most people, save you evidently, I was merely trying to show that the the educated folks didn't overwhelmingly vote for Obama and the uneducated only vote for Republicans, as you imply with your Fox News data. Of course, I could break down the numbers into minute little subsets to demonstrate some point (i.e. post grads, ethnic studies majors, fashion design majors, etc.) but small subsets would make me appear to be stretching, scraping, desperate, etc.

I'll give you the post grad numbers. Yippee. My points are still valid. Obama was a huge winner with high school dropouts (typically low information voters). It's about even with voters in college (which defies the message libs want to portray) and Republicans won the overall college graduate voting block, minus the post grad group.....even then, they only won 55%.

your points are not valid, the whole conservative mantra is about being afraid of change & progress even in the face of logic. it is a political movement based off of fear and having corporate influenced into their talking points. I mean seriously you have evolution and climate change denial, plus half your party thinks obama is a socialist or a muslim, the other half thinks there is a "gay agenda" to take over this country. if I had a dollar for every conservative conspiracy theory that was introduced to this forum by a con I'd have a fat wallet.

Wow. I show the numbers and dispute your claims, from many threads, that the uninformed and old folks are all that makes up conservatives and then you deflect and start a totally new topic about conservatives being conspiracy theorists, fearful of change, in bed with corporatists. I'm giddy you conceded the win to me on the fact that conservatives are the better educated voting block and equal in numbers among the educated youth of America.

you cite numbers that don't even prove your point. a much larger number of people make up the "post grad studies" category than "HS dropout" plus the voter turnout rates is much higher as well.

Meanwhile I cite the basic fundamental ideology of conservatives to back up my point. your party literally thinks science is overrated and the bible should be our first priority. need I say more?

um yes I do:
http://www.americanscientist.org/science...servatives

But are liberals actually smarter? A libertarian (and, as such, nonpartisan) researcher, Satoshi Kanazawa of the London School of Economics and Political Science, has just written a paper that is set to be published in March by the journal Social Psychology Quarterly. The paper investigates not only whether conservatives are dumber than liberals but also why that might be so.

The short answer: Kanazawa's paper shows that more-intelligent people are more likely to say they are liberal. They are also less likely to say they go to religious services.

or how about this one:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/27...37796.html

(08-27-2014 09:12 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(08-27-2014 09:07 AM)john01992 Wrote:  

(08-27-2014 07:00 AM)WKUApollo Wrote:  

(08-26-2014 10:42 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(08-26-2014 03:00 PM)WKUApollo Wrote:  Sadly, truth and statistics, ratings, etc. are rarely in sync.

Here's some interesting data:

President Obama won the high school dropout vote in 2012 65-34 percent.
President Obama narrowly lost the college graduate vote to Romney in 2012.
Among current college students President Obama only won that vote 49-48 percent.

One of the great misperceptions about President Obama's electorate is that the young support him in huge numbers. In actuality, the high school dropout youth supported him by a wide margin. It's not that college students overwhelmingly support President Obama that was the real news story in the last few years, it was that President Obama gained among college students and pulled about even with the Republicans. That's telling. In 2004 President Bush won the current college student electorate 54-46 over the Democrat. If you hear the news media, you'd never know that. What you assume is that college students overwhelming favor the Democrat.......not the case at all.

this is what pisses me off about the cons on this forum. you guys intentionally misrepresent information or use selective information. it's proof that you guys have a mentality of "I don't want to argue the truth, I just want to argue that my party is correct"

sure obama won the "some college" category 49-48 and lost the "college graduate" category 51-47. but what you conveniently omit is that he won the "post graduate study" category 55-42

Lol Dude. Obvious to most people, save you evidently, I was merely trying to show that the the educated folks didn't overwhelmingly vote for Obama and the uneducated only vote for Republicans, as you imply with your Fox News data. Of course, I could break down the numbers into minute little subsets to demonstrate some point (i.e. post grads, ethnic studies majors, fashion design majors, etc.) but small subsets would make me appear to be stretching, scraping, desperate, etc.

I'll give you the post grad numbers. Yippee. My points are still valid. Obama was a huge winner with high school dropouts (typically low information voters). It's about even with voters in college (which defies the message libs want to portray) and Republicans won the overall college graduate voting block, minus the post grad group.....even then, they only won 55%.

your points are not valid, the whole conservative mantra is about being afraid of change & progress even in the face of logic. it is a political movement based off of fear and having corporate influenced into their talking points. I mean seriously you have evolution and climate change denial, plus half your party thinks obama is a socialist or a muslim, the other half thinks there is a "gay agenda" to take over this country. if I had a dollar for every conservative conspiracy theory that was introduced to this forum by a con I'd have a fat wallet.

And if you had to pay back $1 for each of those theories that proved to be true, you'd be flat broke, and the only thing left in your wallet would be the government issued condom you've had since high school.

wait, you mean there really is a liberal conspiracy to destroy this nation with gaydom????

(08-27-2014 09:12 AM)WKUApollo Wrote:  

(08-27-2014 09:00 AM)john01992 Wrote:  

(08-27-2014 08:24 AM)fsquid Wrote:  the sad part is that you guys are arguing over less than a million people. We are talking less than 1% of households with TVs.

pretty much. i think it's stupid that we have so many resident FNC cheerleaders. doesn't get any more pathetic than that.

This from the guy with about 1/3 of the posts in this thread.

and how many of them have been in defense of any cable news channel???

(08-27-2014 09:25 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(08-27-2014 09:22 AM)fsquid Wrote:  

(08-27-2014 09:09 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(08-27-2014 09:07 AM)fsquid Wrote:  

(08-27-2014 09:00 AM)john01992 Wrote:  pretty much. i think it's stupid that we have so many resident FNC cheerleaders. doesn't get any more pathetic than that.

It's stupid to be a cheerleader of any of the 24 hour news networks.

Maybe it's the 24 hour thing that makes "news" so terrible these days. The networks need constant programming so they generate or create news. Need something to fill the time I guess.

I was reading an article about the coverage of the Reagan Shooting in 1981. The networks signed off around midnight because there was nothing new to report.

Well, since one of the major news channels reported Reagan as being dead, it was doubtful that any new news would top that later in the night.

show that the rush to report something whether accurate or not is nothing new.

(08-27-2014 09:30 AM)john01992 Wrote:  you cite numbers that don't even prove your point. a much larger number of people make up the "post grad studies" category than "HS dropout" plus the voter turnout rates is much higher as well.

Meanwhile I cite the basic fundamental ideology of conservatives to back up my point. your party literally thinks science is overrated and the bible should be our first priority. need I say more?

um yes I do:
http://www.americanscientist.org/science...servatives

But are liberals actually smarter? A libertarian (and, as such, nonpartisan) researcher, Satoshi Kanazawa of the London School of Economics and Political Science, has just written a paper that is set to be published in March by the journal Social Psychology Quarterly. The paper investigates not only whether conservatives are dumber than liberals but also why that might be so.

The short answer: Kanazawa's paper shows that more-intelligent people are more likely to say they are liberal. They are also less likely to say they go to religious services.

or how about this one:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/27...37796.html

15% are dropouts
29% just a HS Diploma
41% College (Some, Associates or Bachelors)
15% College beyond a Bachelors

So 15% is MUCH LARGER than 15%? Oh, of the 15% with college beyond a Bachelors, only 11% attained the advanced degree.

(08-27-2014 09:43 AM)WKUApollo Wrote:  

(08-27-2014 09:30 AM)john01992 Wrote:  you cite numbers that don't even prove your point. a much larger number of people make up the "post grad studies" category than "HS dropout" plus the voter turnout rates is much higher as well.

Meanwhile I cite the basic fundamental ideology of conservatives to back up my point. your party literally thinks science is overrated and the bible should be our first priority. need I say more?

um yes I do:
http://www.americanscientist.org/science...servatives

But are liberals actually smarter? A libertarian (and, as such, nonpartisan) researcher, Satoshi Kanazawa of the London School of Economics and Political Science, has just written a paper that is set to be published in March by the journal Social Psychology Quarterly. The paper investigates not only whether conservatives are dumber than liberals but also why that might be so.

The short answer: Kanazawa's paper shows that more-intelligent people are more likely to say they are liberal. They are also less likely to say they go to religious services.

or how about this one:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/27...37796.html

15% are dropouts
29% just a HS Diploma
41% College (Some, Associates or Bachelors)
15% College beyond a Bachelors

So 15% is MUCH LARGER than 15%? Oh, of the 15% with college beyond a Bachelors, only 11% attained the advanced degree.

the numbers I look at said 12% for HS drop out and 15% for "post grad study" remember that that category includes people who completed AND did not complete post graduate work which your graph says is an additional 4%.

Oh and I enjoy the fact that you ignored the voter turnout rates. isn't it funny how you just casually forget to include the key details that destroy your argument?

(08-27-2014 09:48 AM)john01992 Wrote:  isn't it funny how you just casually forget to include the key details that destroy your argument?

Internet debating 101.

(08-27-2014 09:48 AM)john01992 Wrote:  

(08-27-2014 09:43 AM)WKUApollo Wrote:  

(08-27-2014 09:30 AM)john01992 Wrote:  you cite numbers that don't even prove your point. a much larger number of people make up the "post grad studies" category than "HS dropout" plus the voter turnout rates is much higher as well.

Meanwhile I cite the basic fundamental ideology of conservatives to back up my point. your party literally thinks science is overrated and the bible should be our first priority. need I say more?

um yes I do:
http://www.americanscientist.org/science...servatives

But are liberals actually smarter? A libertarian (and, as such, nonpartisan) researcher, Satoshi Kanazawa of the London School of Economics and Political Science, has just written a paper that is set to be published in March by the journal Social Psychology Quarterly. The paper investigates not only whether conservatives are dumber than liberals but also why that might be so.

The short answer: Kanazawa's paper shows that more-intelligent people are more likely to say they are liberal. They are also less likely to say they go to religious services.

or how about this one:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/27...37796.html

15% are dropouts
29% just a HS Diploma
41% College (Some, Associates or Bachelors)
15% College beyond a Bachelors

So 15% is MUCH LARGER than 15%? Oh, of the 15% with college beyond a Bachelors, only 11% attained the advanced degree.

the numbers I look at said 12% for HS drop out and 15% for "post grad study" remember that that category includes people who completed AND did not complete post graduate work which your graph says is an additional 4%.

Oh and I enjoy the fact that you ignored the voter turnout rates. isn't it funny how you just casually forget to include the key details that destroy your argument?

OK, we'll use your data instead of the graph I used from actual data from the census. So, 15% is MUCH LARGER than 12%. Got it.

As to "conveniently" leaving out turnout rates, you put that as a second argument by stating "plus the voter turnout rates is much higher as well". In essence, you made it a separate argument. We're mixing two separate topics here and it's easy to confuse. One is numbers of conservatives vs liberals and their educational levels and the other is numbers of voters by their educational levels.

You can break those numbers down and down continually.

High school dropouts vote Left
High school graduates vote Right
Bachelors degree holders vote Right
Advanced degrees vote Left.

You can break it down even more than that though.

Liberal arts BA degree holders vote left
Engineers vote Right
Accountants vote Right
Teachers vote Left

Lawyers vote Left
Doctors vote Right
Professors vote Left
Advanced engineers vote Right

And so forth and so on.

(08-27-2014 09:54 AM)WKUApollo Wrote:  

(08-27-2014 09:48 AM)john01992 Wrote:  

(08-27-2014 09:43 AM)WKUApollo Wrote:  

(08-27-2014 09:30 AM)john01992 Wrote:  you cite numbers that don't even prove your point. a much larger number of people make up the "post grad studies" category than "HS dropout" plus the voter turnout rates is much higher as well.

Meanwhile I cite the basic fundamental ideology of conservatives to back up my point. your party literally thinks science is overrated and the bible should be our first priority. need I say more?

um yes I do:
http://www.americanscientist.org/science...servatives

But are liberals actually smarter? A libertarian (and, as such, nonpartisan) researcher, Satoshi Kanazawa of the London School of Economics and Political Science, has just written a paper that is set to be published in March by the journal Social Psychology Quarterly. The paper investigates not only whether conservatives are dumber than liberals but also why that might be so.

The short answer: Kanazawa's paper shows that more-intelligent people are more likely to say they are liberal. They are also less likely to say they go to religious services.

or how about this one:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/27...37796.html

15% are dropouts
29% just a HS Diploma
41% College (Some, Associates or Bachelors)
15% College beyond a Bachelors

So 15% is MUCH LARGER than 15%? Oh, of the 15% with college beyond a Bachelors, only 11% attained the advanced degree.

the numbers I look at said 12% for HS drop out and 15% for "post grad study" remember that that category includes people who completed AND did not complete post graduate work which your graph says is an additional 4%.

Oh and I enjoy the fact that you ignored the voter turnout rates. isn't it funny how you just casually forget to include the key details that destroy your argument?

OK, we'll use your data instead of the graph I used from actual data from the census. So, 15% is MUCH LARGER than 12%. Got it.

As to "conveniently" leaving out turnout rates, you put that as a second argument by stating "plus the voter turnout rates is much higher as well". In essence, you made it a separate argument. We're mixing two separate topics here and it's easy to confuse. One is numbers of conservatives vs liberals and their educational levels and the other is numbers of voters by their educational levels.

I think it's really just different census data that we are using, but either way to assume that college graduates vote at an equal or lower rate to HS dropouts is just plain silly.

Further to my point,

You can take what I just said and break all of that down by all sort of other things, income, location, etc.

The point is that just like any statistic, they can be made to say whatever you want them to. It's folly to try and use data like that to claim one group is intellectually superior to another.

(08-27-2014 09:58 AM)john01992 Wrote:  I think it's really just different census data that we are using, but either way to assume that college graduates vote at an equal or lower rate to HS dropouts is just plain silly.

I agree wholeheartedly and never implied that dropouts vote at a higher rate or even near the rate of college graduates. It's about 70% to 40% rate for college grades to dropouts in their voting participation rates.

Listen, I'm not trying to defend Fox News or to defend extremists on either end of the spectrum. They can do that themselves. I merely just add data to discussions to provide some clarity to arguments laced with assumptions, opinions missing facts, etc. from both sides. The raw data helps to further discussions and I enjoy adding to the discussion there. I rarely voice my opinions or take positions....it's typically futile for me to do so.

As to all the conspiracy theories, religious cultism, corporate ties , etc. that the left try to place on all conservatives, it's part of the play book. Just as the far right tries to do the same with the left. I've found that most people who have that view of one or the other groups are either operatives of their chosen extreme or have a skewed perception of reality based on the postings of people on the Internet. Newsflash.... the average conservative and liberal are just a fraction of the posters on these types of message boards. Most posters on these boards, blogs, etc. are typically passionate ideologues and are not truly representative of the typical conservative or liberal.

(08-27-2014 10:10 AM)WKUApollo Wrote:  

(08-27-2014 09:58 AM)john01992 Wrote:  I think it's really just different census data that we are using, but either way to assume that college graduates vote at an equal or lower rate to HS dropouts is just plain silly.

I agree wholeheartedly and never implied that dropouts vote at a higher rate or even near the rate of college graduates. It's about 70% to 40% rate for college grades to dropouts in their voting participation rates.

Listen, I'm not trying to defend Fox News or to defend extremists on either end of the spectrum. They can do that themselves. I merely just add data to discussions to provide some clarity to arguments laced with assumptions, opinions missing facts, etc. from both sides. The raw data helps to further discussions and I enjoy adding to the discussion there. I rarely voice my opinions or take positions....it's typically futile for me to do so.

As to all the conspiracy theories, religious cultism, corporate ties , etc. that the left try to place on all conservatives, it's part of the play book. Just as the far right tries to do the same with the left. I've found that most people who have that view of one or the other groups are either operatives of their chosen extreme or have a skewed perception of reality based on the postings of people on the Internet. Newsflash.... the average conservative and liberal are just a fraction of the posters on these types of message boards. Most posters on these boards, blogs, etc. are typically passionate ideologues and are not truly representative of the typical conservative or liberal.

you can say that all you want, but there is a very clear reason why FNC dominates cable news and MSNBC doesn't. it's because the right has a much higher number of gullible/stupid people willing to eat that cr.ap up than the left has. Both sides have their idiots, the right just has more of them.

you can argue what you want but some of the core concepts of conservative values are linked with people who believe in those concepts have lower intelligence than those who don't. there are plenty of studies that show this, hell the education systems of lib and con states show this, and you can even see a con/lib correlation with IQ rates among the states.

hint: conservative states are lower, moderate states are in the middle, liberal states are at the top.

(08-27-2014 10:07 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  Further to my point,

You can take what I just said and break all of that down by all sort of other things, income, location, etc.

The point is that just like any statistic, they can be made to say whatever you want them to. It's folly to try and use data like that to claim one group is intellectually superior to another.

That's why half my argument is to just look at the conservative party platform (pro evolution, climate change doesn't exist, gays are scary) to find your answer

(08-27-2014 10:35 AM)john01992 Wrote:  you can say that all you want, but there is a very clear reason why FNC dominates cable news and MSNBC doesn't. it's because the right has a much higher number of gullible/stupid people willing to eat that cr.ap up than the left has. Both sides have their idiots, the right just has more of them.

you can argue what you want but some of the core concepts of conservative values are linked with people who believe in those concepts have lower intelligence than those who don't. there are plenty of studies that show this, hell the education systems of lib and con states show this, and you can even see a con/lib correlation with IQ rates among the states.

hint: conservative states are lower, moderate states are in the middle, liberal states are at the top.

Why is it I post actual data yet you post statements that imply they're based on data?

Nevertheless, here's the data (Average IQ)
1. Massachusetts: 104.3
2. New Hampshire: 104.2
3. North Dakota: 103.8
4. Vermont: 103.8
5. Minnesota: 103.7
6. Maine: 103.4
7. Montana: 103.4
8. Iowa: 103.2
9. Connecticut: 103.1
10. Wisconsin: 102.9
11. Kansas: 102.8
12. New Jersey: 102.8
13. South Dakota: 102.8
14. Wyoming: 102.4
15. Nebraska: 102.3
16. Virginia: 101.9
17. Washington: 101.9
18. Ohio: 101.8
19. Indiana: 101.7
20. Colorado: 101.6
21. Pennsylvania: 101.5
22. Idaho: 101.4
23. Oregon: 101.2
24. Utah: 101.1
25. Missouri: 101
26. New York: 100.7
27. Michigan: 100.5
28. Delaware: 100.4
29. N. Carolina: 100.2
30. Texas: 100
31. Illinois: 99.9
32. Maryland: 99.7
33. Rhode Island: 99.5
34. Kentucky: 99.4
35. Oklahoma: 99.3
36. Alaska: 99
37. W. Virginia: 98.7
38. Florida: 98.4
39. S. Carolina: 98.4
40. Georgia: 98
41. Tennessee: 97.7
42. Arkansas: 97.5
43. Arizona: 97.4
44. Nevada: 96.5
45. Alabama: 95.7
46. New Mexico: 95.7
47. Hawaii: 95.6
48. California: 95.5
49. Louisiana: 95.3
50. Mississippi: 94.2

I'm glad to see that California is now extremely conservative, given that they have the third lowest IQ average in the nation....bodes well for Republicans in the next election.

Of course, history, geography, local politics, racial/ethnic demographics, etc. have nothing to do with any of this (education, economic success, etc.). Let's just make generic statements and assumptions based on disparate facts to argue our points.

(08-27-2014 10:37 AM)john01992 Wrote:  

(08-27-2014 10:07 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  Further to my point,

You can take what I just said and break all of that down by all sort of other things, income, location, etc.

The point is that just like any statistic, they can be made to say whatever you want them to. It's folly to try and use data like that to claim one group is intellectually superior to another.

That's why half my argument is to just look at the conservative party platform (pro evolution, climate change doesn't exist, gays are scary) to find your answer

That's an opinion though. It has nothing to do with your innate level of intelligence.

Besides, IQ doesn't measure one's intelligence. We've seen that over and over again. Unless, you believe that black people are innately dumber than whites, since whites score higher consistently.

I think a lot of this is a maturity thing John. You don't agree with conservatives and you don't really see why these people think this way. You want to try to answer the why. Your answer is that you are smarter but as you develop and grow you'll see it has nothing to do with the other person's intelligence. It has to do with a million other things in that person's life.

Wanting to make political opponents out to be simply stupid or somehow inferior to you or your side is an immature and nasty little thing to believe. You won't go far in this world thinking everybody who disagrees with you is stupid.

In fairness to you, you are younger than a lot of folks on here. That phase will pass.

(08-27-2014 10:35 AM)john01992 Wrote:  you can say that all you want, but there is a very clear reason why FNC dominates cable news and MSNBC doesn't. it's because the right has a much higher number of gullible/stupid people willing to eat that cr.ap up than the left has.

That's asinine, but you know that.