• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

As we grow older

AK_Conservative

Active member
Joined
Sep 21, 2005
Messages
499
Reaction score
0
Location
Eagle River, Alaska
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
This may be a little HEATED on the leftists but im going to say it!

As we start out young, a mojority of people start their political views off emotion, i.e. liberalism. Though as we tend to grow older, which many of us are fortunite of (growing older), tend to focus political views in a conservative sense! Now what is the reason for this? Is it becuase as we grow older, we come to realize that emotion can not control a society, reality can? (my opinion) or is it as times change, the society changes. Meaning, if it was a liberal view 30 years ago, it would be a conservative issue today? Personally, i think it is more of the first option than the second, but it entales Both! What say you?


EDIT: I just realized i posted this in the wrong forum! Can someone move it to Political Platforms!
 

alphamale

Banned
Joined
Oct 9, 2005
Messages
1,120
Reaction score
0
Location
Southern California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
AK_Conservative said:
This may be a little HEATED on the leftists but im going to say it!

As we start out young, a mojority of people start their political views off emotion, i.e. liberalism. Though as we tend to grow older, which many of us are fortunite of (growing older), tend to focus political views in a conservative sense! Now what is the reason for this? Is it becuase as we grow older, we come to realize that emotion can not control a society, reality can? (my opinion) or is it as times change, the society changes. Meaning, if it was a liberal view 30 years ago, it would be a conservative issue today? Personally, i think it is more of the first option than the second, but it entales Both! What say you?
The proverb: "He who isn't a liberal at age 20 has no heart, he who isn't a conservative at age 40 has no head."
 

Technocratic_Utilitarian

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 3, 2005
Messages
670
Reaction score
0
Location
New Jersey
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
What say I? I say your full of conservoshit. Liberalism != emotion, but an analysis based on reason and logic. It's nonsense to consider an entire group of people as one monolithic block. Pull the weed from your ass. Conservatives don't have an iron grasp on logic, reason. That's nonsense. There are many highly logical liberals, and if you ever actually read Pew Research, you will find that Liberals constitute the most intelligent, informed voting block although they only mak up about 15-18% of the total voting population. Conservatives, however, are quite emotional many times as well as many Liberals. Look at their social rhetoric on family values, laziness, "save the children," and the culture of life...etc. Saying liberals are emotional, as if no humans are, is a silly hasty generalization fallacy. Don't even go there kid.

It has nothing to do with emotion, rather a reasoned ethical analysis combined with economic pragmatism. You cannot have a completely factual, economic view of society, because values are part of society. Values and Economics form Ethinomics. You have to balance economics with ethical concerns, even if you might not get the "best" economic return. Not everything is an investment; that's something conservatives have a hard time comprehending. There's nothing inhernetly emotional about Liberalism. Liberalism is based on the ethical principles established by John Rawls in his work: Justice as Fairness. That's not emotional; that's ethical.

If you want to play the unwarranted generalizations bullshit, then I can easily comment that conservatives swell in ranks as people get old, and old people have a correlation with senility. Therefore, it must be obvious that it takes senility to drive one to conservatism.

:lol:
 
Last edited:

Simon W. Moon

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 20, 2005
Messages
22,807
Reaction score
8,096
Location
Fayettenam
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Beliefs about politics and religion often have systematic bias, high certainty, and little informational basis. Being irrational is a good like any other; the lower the private cost, the more agents buy. For most political and religious beliefs, the private cost of irrationality is zero.

I don't think that there's any real trend toward more rationality.
Pop-cons and neo-cons, in particular have an open rift with the Realist conservatives.

Additionally, the terms liberal and conservative are very, very poorly defined- eg many people think that William Kristol and George W. Bush are conservative.
 

AK_Conservative

Active member
Joined
Sep 21, 2005
Messages
499
Reaction score
0
Location
Eagle River, Alaska
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Technocratic_Utilitarian said:
What say I? I say your full of conservoshit. Liberalism != emotion, but an analysis based on reason and logic. It's nonsense to consider an entire group of people as one monolithic block. Pull the weed from your ass. Conservatives don't have an iron grasp on logic, reason. That's nonsense. There are many highly logical liberals, and if you ever actually read Pew Research, you will find that Liberals constitute the most intelligent, informed voting block although they only mak up about 15-18% of the total voting population. Conservatives, however, are quite emotional many times as well as many Liberals. Look at their social rhetoric on family values, laziness, "save the children," and the culture of life...etc. Saying liberals are emotional, as if no humans are, is a silly hasty generalization fallacy. Don't even go there kid.

It has nothing to do with emotion, rather a reasoned ethical analysis combined with economic pragmatism. You cannot have a completely factual, economic view of society, because values are part of society. Values and Economics form Ethinomics. You have to balance economics with ethical concerns, even if you might not get the "best" economic return. Not everything is an investment; that's something conservatives have a hard time comprehending. There's nothing inhernetly emotional about Liberalism. Liberalism is based on the ethical principles established by John Rawls in his work: Justice as Fairness. That's not emotional; that's ethical.

If you want to play the unwarranted generalizations bullshit, then I can easily comment that conservatives swell in ranks as people get old, and old people have a correlation with senility. Therefore, it must be obvious that it takes senility to drive one to conservatism.

:lol:
:roll:

I think youre full of LIEberalism! Pull your head out of your ass! It is quite stated that People tend to turn to conservatism than liberalism! Though both do happen! I did not, as you say, consider an ENTIRE group of people as a monolithic block! Liberals do not have an iron grip on logic, look at Kennedy, Durban, Kerry, Dean! The bring so sence to the table! Only pure rhetoric! A majority of liberals want more funding going into welfare right? Well doesnt that suggest that more people will go on welfare? They get more money for no work right? While if we lower the funding, it would drive more people to find jobs, lowering the unemployment rate, and make this country better! But no, many believe the government should support them! What have they done to support the government? What about Gay rights? They would rather have the gay community FEEL better and let them get married instead of taking into consideration FAMILY values and the True institution of marraige! Family values is a very needed thing in america. So many problems with young ones these days are started with the family! That is a known fact, no matter how you look at it! Liberals base there public policy off emotion, which in turn (as the welfare example above) does not accomplish the main goal! Is that logical?

"There are many highly logical liberals, and if you ever actually read Pew Research, you will find that Liberals constitute the most intelligent, informed voting block although they only mak up about 15-18% of the total voting population."

I never said there was no logical liberals! I know there are plenty, but how often have you seen it in the past 10 years? I know there is illogical conservatives as well. If Liberals are the most intelligent as you quote, Why do they only make up 15-18% of the voting population?
 

1SGRet

New member
Joined
Jun 17, 2005
Messages
26
Reaction score
0
An excellent sumnation of your conservative inclinations.

We all do things - if we can - that increase or hold steady things that benefit us. We wish, if you will, to 'conserve' our well being. Our cash, or net worth. We figured GWB would help us retain our goodies.

We thought wrong...
 

nkgupta80

DP Veteran
Joined
May 31, 2005
Messages
1,720
Reaction score
59
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
1SGRet said:
An excellent sumnation of your conservative inclinations.

We all do things - if we can - that increase or hold steady things that benefit us. We wish, if you will, to 'conserve' our well being. Our cash, or net worth. We figured GWB would help us retain our goodies.

We thought wrong...

well i dont know about the whole emotions thing, becaseu conservatives as I've seen can be quite emotional in defining their views.

I think liberalism appeals to the younger because we are inclined towards change, inclined towards breaking the old and beginning the new. As we grow older, we've hopefully accomplished that change and thus tend to stick with the ideas we've developed over the years, thus spawning conservatism. Why are teachers and professors usually liberal? They're job is to teach students, to make them think outside the box, and that tends to go inline with liberal ideas.
 

Technocratic_Utilitarian

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 3, 2005
Messages
670
Reaction score
0
Location
New Jersey
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
I think youre full of LIEberalism! Pull your head out of your ass! It is quite stated that People tend to turn to conservatism than liberalism!
It's quite stated----duh---random appeal to masses != constitute an argument. Your original argument was as people get older, they turn to conservatism. Since it's fun to make generalizations based off of that, therefore, I can also come up with a stupid, spurious correlations to have fun as well!

Though both do happen! I did not, as you say, consider an ENTIRE group of people as a monolithic block! Liberals do not have an iron grip on logic, look at Kennedy, Durban, Kerry, Dean!
That's a good recognition, because I never said they have an iron-grip on it. You, however, are running around like a conservobot thinking conservatives are the penultimate incarnation of reason; they aren't.

The bring so sence to the table! Only pure rhetoric!
Nonsense. Conservatives spew rhetoric just as much as any other politician. Bull******** is part of the political job requirements.

A majority of liberals want more funding going into welfare right? Well doesnt that suggest that more people will go on welfare?
There is nothing wrong with have a welfare system, although it needs to be reformed. Welfare is necessity if you have any grasp of ethics, but then again, I doubt that's on your mind.

They get more money for no work right? While if we lower the funding, it would drive more people to find jobs, lowering the unemployment rate, and make this country better!
That's actually a nonsequitor. There are lots of poor who do work who are on welfare. They don't make enough money. Then again, Conservatives falsely assume that all poor are stupid, lazy. That's simply not true.


But no, many believe the government should support them!
Yes. You should support people temporarily who honestly need help. It is the morally correct thing to do. Many people in poverty, as I mentioned, are working. They do have jobs. Many more have children. You cannot assign a life of poverty to kids who did nothing. Even if their parents are lazy, you cannot change human nature. For a political group that frequenly uses the rhetoric "Think of the Children!" You seem not to give much of a **** about them.

What have they done to support the government?
The government exists to serve the public; the public doesn't exist to serve the state. Do you think they do?

What about Gay rights? They would rather have the gay community FEEL better and let them get married instead of taking into consideration FAMILY values and the True institution of marraige!

On one hand you try to pretend that conservatism is all about logic and reason, but then you blurt out imbecilic conservobot rhetoric like the above.
You blithly spurt off bullshit about "tradition" and "familiy values" as if you have a monopoly on it. Instead of focusing on important issues, Conservatives focus on the irrelevant. This is the only time I agree with Libertarians and Objectivists. Government has ****-all right to tell individuals how to lead their personal lives unless they are causing suffering to others. This isn't plato's repubic where the elite rules atop an Ivory Tower discussing the approprite "virtue" of the citizenry. Maximizing personal liberty serves the most Utility, and such concept is the only valid rule by which people should abide, and it is the only thing which government should socially promote. We don't need the nanny.


I have seen what you conservatives claim to be family values, and it's nothing of the sort. You want to maintain a neo-troglydite society in which "bitches" are subservient to men, barefoot and pregant, "niggas" be whipped, gays be in the closet, and the male be back at the forefront of the household ready to beat his children and wife into submission. Instead of focusing on pain and suffering, death and poverty, you focus on stupid **** like preventing people from seeing pornography, seeing titties on tv, having sex, worshiping as tey please, and being "ungodly." None of which is any of your buisness. Keep your values to yourself if you value them so much; don't force them on others and others won't force theirs on you.

Your "true menaing of marriage" is bullshit anyway. You don't know what the "true" intention of marriage is. Marriage is a legally binding contract between one or more consenting adults in which union serves economic, emotional interests. Marriage is both secular and religious, depending on the culture. However, there is no reason to assume that Religion = marriage. That's simply false. Even if marriage always were one mand + one woman, that premise does not logically lead to the conclusion you are after. Check your premises, as Ayn Rand would say.

Family values is a very needed thing in america. So many problems with young ones these days are started with the family!
I don't want your familiy values. My family is fine.

That is a known fact, no matter how you look at it! Liberals base there public policy off emotion, which in turn (as the welfare example above) does not accomplish the main goal! Is that logical?
False. Your conservative belief isn't "logical." All you are doing is changing the focus of authoritarianism. Conservatives bloviate about how socialist and evil liberals, yet all the while you are authoritarian socially. You want to promote your traditionalist, authoritarian social philosophy. Your entire diatibe about gays and family and marriage is an emotional appeal via tradition. That's illoogical. Liberals do make mistakes, but I would rather have personal liberty and economic regulation, than state capitalism and social authoritarianism.

"There are many highly logical liberals, and if you ever actually read Pew Research, you will find that Liberals constitute the most intelligent, informed voting block although they only mak up about 15-18% of the total voting population."

I never said there was no logical liberals! I know there are plenty, but how often have you seen it in the past 10 years? I know there is illogical conservatives as well. If Liberals are the most intelligent as you quote, Why do they only make up 15-18% of the voting population?
First of all, the fact that they are small is mutli-tiered, but that's also deceptive. Why? Liberals make up a larger portion of the population and the registered voting block than do either pro-gov't conservatives OR social conservatives. However, just because a group is small does not make itunintelligent. Secondly, however, the Liberals are growing in size. According to Pew, This group has nearly doubled in proportion since 1999.

However, there are very few of them when dealing with the total as there are very few of other groups within major parties. If you check the Pew Forum Research governing voter typology, most groups are small overall in the whole. The Democratic Party and the Republican party are made up of many small sub-sections. IE. Liberals, New Democrats, Populists, Conservatives, NeoConservatives, Disassociated, Libertarian etc.

Most Liberals consider themselves Independent, while some are in Repubicans and some are in Democrats. If you consider the Democratic Party "liberal" don't, since Liberals are only one group among many who are in the Democratic Party--as well as the Republican party! Liberals are highly critical of the Democrats and policy. For example, according to Pew, "Liberals are particularly negative in their assessment of the Democratic Party leadership. Just 23% of Liberals say the leaders are doing an excellent or good job [...] Among Democrats, Conservative Democrats are the least critical of the leaders' performance. So, if you want to stick blame, look at the Conservative Democrats, who think Democrats are so great.

According to Pew, Liberals have a very weak identification with the Democratic Party. " their identification with the party is the weakest among Democratic groups"



There are many things I like about the Liberal Philosophy. Have you ever heard of John Rawls? Further, I agree with these core Liberal values. YOu might not, but I cannot make you.

[They are] The most secular, and take the most liberal views on social issues such as homosexuality, abortion, and censorship. They differ from other Democratic groups in that they are strongly pro-environment and pro-immigration.

Out of all groups, they are the most socially libertarian. I like social libertarianism. I don't care what you do in private if you are not going out and hurting others. The government has no business in your personal affairs. LEGAL immigration is good, and a careful, balanced look at the environment is also beneficial.

http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?PageID=949
 

KevinWan

Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2005
Messages
175
Reaction score
0
Location
Massachusetts
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Technocratic_Utilitarian said:
There are many highly logical liberals, and if you ever actually read Pew Research, you will find that Liberals constitute the most intelligent, informed voting block although they only mak up about 15-18% of the total voting population.
I always thought it was the other way around... liberals were high-school drop outs. Those who don't attend college were liberals. It is more likely to do with their poor economic status. Those with higher levels of education tend to be more wealthy and hence conservative. Thats how I always thought it was anyway.
 

Technocratic_Utilitarian

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 3, 2005
Messages
670
Reaction score
0
Location
New Jersey
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
I always thought it was the other way around... liberals were high-school drop outs. Those who don't attend college were liberals. It is more likely to do with their poor economic status. Those with higher levels of education tend to be more wealthy and hence conservative. Thats how I always thought it was anyway.
And that's false analysis derrived through propaganda. The preponderance of research shows quite the opposite, and according to voter typology, Liberals are highly educated with a large quanity having college degrees. They are also among the most wealthy, and most of them live in nice areas of the city.

There is a difference between a Liberal and a Democratic. The group you are talking about is largely called the "disaffected" or "populist" group, not Liberal.

Basically, the Typology of the Social Conservative is such: White, Female, Religious, Old, and Southern. Accordingly, if you want to delve into unfair stereotpes, like most Conservatives do, most Social Conservatives are white, schizophrenic, senile southerners--51% of whom attend Bible study groups and live off of Social Security--lazy bastards. Although, making generalizations like that is wrong, which you don't seem to get.


Now, if you want to know a group that is downtrodden and undereducated, take a look at the Pro-Gov't Conservatives. Of this group, they are: Predominately female (62%) and relatively young; highest percentage of minority members of any Republican-leaning group (10% black, 12% Hispanic). Most (59%) have no more than a high school diploma. Poorer than other Republican groups; nearly half (49%) have household incomes of less than $30,000 (about on par with Disadvantaged Democrats). Nearly half (47%) are parents of children living at home; 42% live in the South.


A bunch of white, highly religious, protestant southern women who are poor. poor and only have a highschool diploma. Conservatives rock!

I would also like to point out that there is a high correlation between intelligence and education, and an inverse relationship between religiosity and intelligence. It's no surprise that Liberals are the LEAST religious, yet the most highly educated and the conservatives tend to be the most highly religious, yet...not exactly the smartest. :lol:
 
Last edited:

UtahBill

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
18,265
Reaction score
6,648
Location
Utah
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
KevinWan said:
I always thought it was the other way around... liberals were high-school drop outs. Those who don't attend college were liberals. It is more likely to do with their poor economic status. Those with higher levels of education tend to be more wealthy and hence conservative. Thats how I always thought it was anyway.
There are more liberals in the colleges than anywhere else. Most professors have never held a job outside of academia. As far as the uneducated welfare recipeints, they may be democrats, but they don't have the smarts to be liberals or conservatives. They vote with their personal interests in mind, and don't have enough knowledge to see a bigger picture.
I would say that liberals are more educated overall, but that does not equate to them having any common sense.
Besides, I think moderates are more prone to logic and reason, while the far lefties and far righties are still a bunch of monkeys up in a tree, hooting and hollering for no other reason than they like to hoot and holler. Making sense is optional.:2razz:
 

cnredd

Major General Big Lug
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 5, 2005
Messages
8,682
Reaction score
262
Location
Philadelphia,PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Technocratic_Utilitarian said:
The government exists to serve the public; the public doesn't exist to serve the state. Do you think they do?
I know it must be a rumor, but I think I heard somewhere somebody important once said, "Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country"...

Must've been another Conservative lie...:roll:
 

Technocratic_Utilitarian

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 3, 2005
Messages
670
Reaction score
0
Location
New Jersey
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
I know what Kennedy said. The fact that a famous leader says something does not make it true. He's not deified. I don't think the public should be made the serfs of the government; governments are tools for the people, by the people, of the people.

These are the "true" traditions of our country.
 

UtahBill

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
18,265
Reaction score
6,648
Location
Utah
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
I don't think JFK was a liberal, more like a moderate.
And liberal wasn't such a dirty word at that time. It was only after the fringe elements of the democratic party started getting so vocal that the word liberal started getting such a bad reputation.
Most of the founding fathers were liberals, but only by the old definition of liberal, not the current one. And lately, the word conservative has been turning into a very dirty word. It certainly isn't the same as the late fifties.
Both terms, liberal and conservative, have suffered from the abusive behavior of modern day dorkheads.:2razz:
 

Technocratic_Utilitarian

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 3, 2005
Messages
670
Reaction score
0
Location
New Jersey
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
UtahBill said:
There are more liberals in the colleges than anywhere else. Most professors have never held a job outside of academia. As far as the uneducated welfare recipeints, they may be democrats, but they don't have the smarts to be liberals or conservatives. They vote with their personal interests in mind, and don't have enough knowledge to see a bigger picture.
I would say that liberals are more educated overall, but that does not equate to them having any common sense.
Besides, I think moderates are more prone to logic and reason, while the far lefties and far righties are still a bunch of monkeys up in a tree, hooting and hollering for no other reason than they like to hoot and holler. Making sense is optional.:2razz:

People like to confuse extremeists on the left and the right with moderates and liberals. That's simply not true. THey also like to mix the terms Democrat and Liberal, when they aren't interchangable.

You might like the Pew Forum Research Centre. It is pretty eye-opening to the bullshit spread by all sides.

Modern Liberalism is a blend of social libertarianism and a mixed economy.

As far as the uneducated welfare recipeints, they may be democrats,
They are also republicans. There are several republic groups who are highly disaffected and poor, yet they vote Republitard because of the silly focus on "traditional values." They let their social emotions trump their economic status.
 

cnredd

Major General Big Lug
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 5, 2005
Messages
8,682
Reaction score
262
Location
Philadelphia,PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Technocratic_Utilitarian said:
They are also republicans. There are several republic groups who are highly disaffected and poor, yet they vote Republitard because of the silly focus on "traditional values." They let their social emotions trump their economic status.
And now the mask has been unveiled...
 

Technocratic_Utilitarian

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 3, 2005
Messages
670
Reaction score
0
Location
New Jersey
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
What mask? I have been saying this since day one. I find it odd, however, that no one cares about the blatanly false accusations against liberals, but when I call someone a Republitard, the Thought Cop comes out of his hiding. Nice. So I call them Republitards? So what. That doesn't alter the statistics that prove my case. Either address them or be done with this clever Ad Hominem.

I don't really like Democrats either.
 
Last edited:

cnredd

Major General Big Lug
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 5, 2005
Messages
8,682
Reaction score
262
Location
Philadelphia,PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Technocratic_Utilitarian said:
So I call them Republitard? So what. That doesn't alter the statistics. Done with the Ad Hominem argument yet?
Actually, the argument was going well until you decided to insult many members of the forum...to lower oneself in the mist of a quality debate says more about you than it does them...

I'll take an Ad Hominem attack over combining a race, gender, creed, or political affiliation with the word "retarded" anyday...
 

Technocratic_Utilitarian

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 3, 2005
Messages
670
Reaction score
0
Location
New Jersey
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Actually, the argument was going well until you decided to insult many members of the forum...to lower oneself in the mist of a quality debate says more about you than it does them...

I'll take an Ad Hominem attack over combining a race, gender, creed, or political affiliation with the word "retarded" anyday...

Style over Substance fallacy. Stop focusing on words, focus more on the argument, which I substantiated via research. By the way, nice glass house you live in; don't throw those stones too far. The idiot who started this thead, and then some conservobot later, tried to say that all liberals were lazy, stupid, welfare sucking highschool drop-outs. I proved him wrong,you didn't say jack to him. I call someone a Republitard, and you call in the thought police whip out the morality stick. Please.

Insults without an argument I don't use. THere's nothing logically invalid about insults WITH stats to back you up.
 
Last edited:

KevinWan

Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2005
Messages
175
Reaction score
0
Location
Massachusetts
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Technocratic_Utilitarian said:
And that's false analysis derrived through propaganda. The preponderance of research shows quite the opposite, and according to voter typology, Liberals are highly educated with a large quanity having college degrees. They are also among the most wealthy, and most of them live in nice areas of the city.

There is a difference between a Liberal and a Democratic. The group you are talking about is largely called the "disaffected" or "populist" group, not Liberal.

Basically, the Typology of the Social Conservative is such: White, Female, Religious, Old, and Southern. Accordingly, if you want to delve into unfair stereotpes, like most Conservatives do, most Social Conservatives are white, schizophrenic, senile southerners--51% of whom attend Bible study groups and live off of Social Security--lazy bastards. Although, making generalizations like that is wrong, which you don't seem to get.


Now, if you want to know a group that is downtrodden and undereducated, take a look at the Pro-Gov't Conservatives. Of this group, they are: Predominately female (62%) and relatively young; highest percentage of minority members of any Republican-leaning group (10% black, 12% Hispanic). Most (59%) have no more than a high school diploma. Poorer than other Republican groups; nearly half (49%) have household incomes of less than $30,000 (about on par with Disadvantaged Democrats). Nearly half (47%) are parents of children living at home; 42% live in the South.


A bunch of white, highly religious, protestant southern women who are poor. poor and only have a highschool diploma. Conservatives rock!

I would also like to point out that there is a high correlation between intelligence and education, and an inverse relationship between religiosity and intelligence. It's no surprise that Liberals are the LEAST religious, yet the most highly educated and the conservatives tend to be the most highly religious, yet...not exactly the smartest. :lol:
Sorry, but ur info is wrong. I also admire your lack of a citation for it.

I found this:
"Yet Republicans in the general public tend to be better educated than Democrats. In the 1994-2002 General Social Surveys (GSS), Republicans have over 6/10ths of a year more education on average than Democrats. Republicans also have a higher final mean educational degree. Further, Republicans scored better than Democrats on two word tests in the GSS--a short vocabulary test and a modified analogies test.

If one breaks down the data by party affiliation and political orientation, the most highly educated group is conservative Republicans, who also score highest on the vocabulary and analogical reasoning tests. Liberal Democrats score only insignificantly lower than conservative Republicans. The least educated subgroups are moderate and conservative Democrats, who also score at the bottom (or very near the bottom) on vocabulary and analogy tests.

The irony here is that if there were substantial numbers of Republican political scientists, psychologists, and sociologists at Duke and other elite schools, Professor Brandon might already know that in the United States, the two most similar groups in educational attainment and verbal proficiency are liberal Democrats and conservative Republicans--and that ordinary, non-liberal Democrats are among the least educated political groups."
http://instapundit.com/archives/014093.php

I could probably find a billion other websites either supporting my position or yours. Then I could find those that say there is no link with intelligence and political philosophy...
 

Technocratic_Utilitarian

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 3, 2005
Messages
670
Reaction score
0
Location
New Jersey
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Sorry, but ur info is wrong. I also admire your lack of a citation for it.

I found this: [on a completely biased, non-academic blogger's website]
Quote:
"Yet Republicans in the general public tend to be better educated than Democrats. In the 1994-2002 General Social Surveys (GSS), Republicans have over 6/10ths of a year more education on average than Democrats. Republicans also have a higher final mean educational degree. Further, Republicans scored better than Democrats on two word tests in the GSS--a short vocabulary test and a modified analogies test.

If one breaks down the data by party affiliation and political orientation, the most highly educated group is conservative Republicans, who also score highest on the vocabulary and analogical reasoning tests. Liberal Democrats score only insignificantly lower than conservative Republicans. The least educated subgroups are moderate and conservative Democrats, who also score at the bottom (or very near the bottom) on vocabulary and analogy tests.

The irony here is that if there were substantial numbers of Republican political scientists, psychologists, and sociologists at Duke and other elite schools, Professor Brandon might already know that in the United States, the two most similar groups in educational attainment and verbal proficiency are liberal Democrats and conservative Republicans--and that ordinary, non-liberal Democrats are among the least educated political groups."

http://instapundit.com/archives/014093.php

Did you even read your own bullshit website, you blithering idiot, or are you too busy breathing to think? I did cite my stuff, but you're apparently part of the illiterate-republitard faction, and couldn't comprehend the link. Judging by your choice of "research"--net blogs who are openly pundits---I am not suprised at your lack of ability. I appreciate your comments, though, regardless of their lack of validity. My research comes from Pew Research Institute which is widely used in academics and universities. It's very reliable, non-baised research organization. It uses facts and statistics, not "punditry."

This is a comment BY YOUR idiot author:

1. First, there's very little independent factual reportage on InstaPundit, and when I'm reporting something based on my own experience that will be clear.]I don't have a staff of fact-checkers, editors

2. He also mentions his site is entirely biased and non-objective, via his FAQ. Aren't you biased to the left? Aren't you biased to the right? Aren't you a jingoistic, libertarian, cultural imperialist?

Yes.



Don't qote blogs and pundit groups you mindless moron. Jesus Christ. YOu think you would at least know the difference between unbiased, academic research and blogging. Apparently your college education doesn't help--if you have one. He's not a research organization, he's not academic, and he's not supported by academic institutions, you blithering idiot---my research sources are.

I could probably find a billion other websites either supporting my position or yours. Then I could find those that say there is no link with intelligence and political philosophy...
Appeal to Numbers Fallacy.

Not only is your research unacademic, it's dishonest. You probably don't have the education to even know what Pew is. Pfffft. Child.
 
Last edited:

UtahBill

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
18,265
Reaction score
6,648
Location
Utah
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Apparently, as we grow older, we also grow crankier.:2razz:

My grandfather, a lifelong merchant marine sea captain, never said just "democrats", it was always "******* DEMOCRATS". Grandma used to shush him when we grandkids were around, and was even known to hide the newspaper from him until after we left from our visits.
I am more politically sophisticated than he was, and not as biased in one direction or another. I say "DAMN POLITICIANS".:mrgreen:
 

Navy Pride

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
39,883
Reaction score
3,070
Location
Pacific NW
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
AK_Conservative said:
This may be a little HEATED on the leftists but im going to say it!

As we start out young, a mojority of people start their political views off emotion, i.e. liberalism. Though as we tend to grow older, which many of us are fortunite of (growing older), tend to focus political views in a conservative sense! Now what is the reason for this? Is it becuase as we grow older, we come to realize that emotion can not control a society, reality can? (my opinion) or is it as times change, the society changes. Meaning, if it was a liberal view 30 years ago, it would be a conservative issue today? Personally, i think it is more of the first option than the second, but it entales Both! What say you?


EDIT: I just realized i posted this in the wrong forum! Can someone move it to Political Platforms!
I think when people are young they are fun loving and very idealistic and they usually have teachers who are liberal.........As they grow older and get in to the real world, get married and have a family they grow much wiser and become much more moderate and conservative in their thinking........
 

Navy Pride

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
39,883
Reaction score
3,070
Location
Pacific NW
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Technocratic_Utilitarian said:
Ahh yes, because all teachers are young. That makes sense. :roll:
No most high school teachers tend to lead to the left.
 
Top Bottom