U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-10-2008, 07:36 AM
 
Location: Charlotte
12,646 posts, read 13,615,208 times
Reputation: 1679

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Haaziq View Post
You're insisting that Obama would win if only 'educated' people were allowed to vote. You're insisting that a high level of education would make the majority of people choose one candidate over another. That is simply false. You need to stop making subjective statements and passing them off as if they are absolute truth
No, what he's implying, is that based on the Demographic of Senator Obama's current support - he would be a shoe-in.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-10-2008, 07:39 AM
 
4,182 posts, read 5,659,447 times
Reputation: 1719
Quote:
You're insisting that Obama would win if only 'educated' people were allowed to vote. You're insisting that a high level of education would make the majority of people choose one candidate over another. That is simply false. You need to stop making subjective statements and passing them off as if they are absolute truth
Once again, you need to check your faculties before responding. The title of the thread is "IF Only College Educated People Were Allowed to Vote". The word IF implies conditionality..... IF A, then B. Therefore, it is not a statement about absolute truth, but rather a statement about conditionality.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2008, 07:39 AM
 
Location: An absurd world.
5,165 posts, read 8,080,306 times
Reputation: 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by walidm View Post
No, what he's implying, is that based on the Demographic of Senator Obama's current support - he would be a shoe-in.
That doesn't mean you're smart if you vote for Obama. Young college students are majority liberal and Obama is more liberal than any other candidate.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2008, 07:41 AM
 
Location: An absurd world.
5,165 posts, read 8,080,306 times
Reputation: 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by ndfmnlf View Post
Once again, you need to check your faculties before responding. The title of the thread is "IF Only College Educated People Were Allowed to Vote". The word IF implies conditionality..... IF A, then B. Therefore, it is not a statement about absolute truth, but rather a statement about conditionality.
But you're trying to draw a connection between being smart and supporting Obama. There is no connection.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2008, 07:41 AM
 
29,462 posts, read 33,705,926 times
Reputation: 11093
Quote:
Originally Posted by walidm View Post
I owe you a rep...ndmnlf
I owe him one also. We should a thread for higher level discourse and see how the representation by candidate preference plays out.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2008, 07:43 AM
 
29,462 posts, read 33,705,926 times
Reputation: 11093
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haaziq View Post
But you're trying to draw a connection between being smart and supporting Obama. There is no connection.
Once again I must say that this is a response to the claim by Hillary about her demographic base. Which means that if you remove them from the voting scene Obama loses some of that group but she loses the majority by over a 2/1 margin.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2008, 07:44 AM
 
4,182 posts, read 5,659,447 times
Reputation: 1719
Quote:
No, what he's implying, is that based on the Demographic of Senator Obama's current support - he would be a shoe-in.
Thanks Wal, for clarifying. I'm just basing my view on the consistent polling data results showing that Obama wins consistently among college-educated voters. So it is but logical to conclude that if the non-college educated were excluded from participating in the current primary, then Obama would already be the nominee.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2008, 07:47 AM
 
16,701 posts, read 18,917,881 times
Reputation: 6798
Please.... intelligent people are every bit as "dumb" as the general population in terms of politics... you have TWO corrupt candidates... you have to vote for one... the smart person would of stood up and not vote for either or change the system so that corrupt candidates are barred from running... then again, people are easily corrupted.. the corrupt leading the corrupt... I posted about setting up "penalties" for people who vote politicians that "serves" their own agendas instead of the public's agenda... people here didn't like that..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2008, 07:49 AM
 
Location: Albemarle, NC
7,730 posts, read 12,448,448 times
Reputation: 1489
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haaziq View Post
That doesn't mean you're smart if you vote for Obama. Young college students are majority liberal and Obama is more liberal than any other candidate.
Idealists. They believe that Obama will really shake up DC. I don't think he will. In fact, I see him as more of the same, only in a shiny new package. He still helps his friends when it benefits him. He turns his back on those he has supported when it's politically important to distance himself. And many of the bills he's sponsored or written call for more government intervention and redistribution of wealth. Obama's popularity is born out of a generation raised on reality tv and American Idol.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2008, 07:54 AM
 
Location: An absurd world.
5,165 posts, read 8,080,306 times
Reputation: 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by paperhouse View Post
Idealists. They believe that Obama will really shake up DC. I don't think he will. In fact, I see him as more of the same, only in a shiny new package. He still helps his friends when it benefits him. He turns his back on those he has supported when it's politically important to distance himself. And many of the bills he's sponsored or written call for more government intervention and redistribution of wealth. Obama's popularity is born out of a generation raised on reality tv and American Idol.
I agree except for your last sentence.

Many people of this generation (I'm actually of the 'reality show' generation.) don't support Obama. I think he'd be the worst choice for president. He thinks he can create all these multi-billion dollar programs to supposedly 'solve problems', but won't stop and think about the debt we're in or the status of our economy.

I wish Ron Paul could get the nomination, but people will look at the best looking candidate instead of the best candidate.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top