Study shows social conservatism linked to lower intelligence (Iraq, ethics, Reagan)
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.
Ashkenazi Jews IQ 113 voted Democrat 79% in last Presidential election.
Asians...IQ 106 voted Democrat 62 % in last Presidential election.
Both of these groups have higher IQ's than your average white, non-hispanic. IQ 103 who voted Democrat 43% in last Presidential election.
College graduates vote slightly in favor of Dems.....non college graduates in favor of the GOP ( despite this subset being heavily black/hispanic and poor )
It's not a game. It's just a reality of life you can't swallow. To be frank. The Democratic party is composed of the most intelligent voters and the least intelligent voters. The GOP is in the middle thinking how awesome they are.
I've been saying this for years.....Real stupid...you don't vote, or must be cajoled into voting ..Just plain stupid you vote GOP...have some smarts you vote Democrat.
The unmitigated pretentiousness and prideful ignorance of this post is amazing...no humility at the thought that your opinion could possibly be wrong...
and what the hell is "have some smarts"?....
I have pondered for years as to why anybody would vote for a person, Obama, with no experience....I asked countless liberals as to why would you cast your vote for someone who as no past indicators that he is equipped to handle the job....
the responses?..."he's like super-smart"..."he could heal America's image around the world".."he's a good speaker"...(really, that one took the cake)....Honest to God, if someone could list at least one important accomplishment, prior to his election, I will change my position...
(and here we are, at present, am I surprised that Obama couldn't help lower the unemployment rate or do anything to improve things significantly?....of course not, there has been no reason to believe he could...not sure why everyone else thought otherwise and getting mad)
That made no sense, I am sure someone straight out of Harvard is "super-smart" yet you wouldn't hire him to be CEO of a company, let alone an entire nation, yet here we are....and I have yet to hear one reason from the uber-intelligent left "voter" why they were for him..
I have also wondered why liberals put so much faith in a govt, made of people who never had to hire someone, pay business expenses, turn a profit, or meet a payroll to try and fix and control the economy..some of these people never even had a real job in the private sector .....yet you put your faith in them to create jobs?....WHAT?...
and then turn around and attack the actual business that provide jobs whenever the complain about the govt obstruction in someway....think about that, they want jobs, but when told by the actual job providers that they are being directly or indirectly roadblocked by the govt, they side with the govt....you want jobs, but side with those who are making it harder for you to get them?...made up of people who never even had a real job themselves?..
I remember before Obama was elected, a survey was taking by CEOs and I think 70% of them said an Obama presidency would be bad for the Economy...how did the liberals responses?...that "they are mad that they had to pay taxes now instead of taking another vacation, and they are being racist"...here, we have CEOs, you know, the ones that provide the jobs you people want, telling us that this guy could be bad news and you cry "racism"?.....
I can think of a number of stories where business out-right telling us they don't like what the govt is doing and instead of arguing that, the left dismisses it with hostility....why?...I thought you people wanted jobs? these people are telling us why there is no jobs but instead you try to defend and protect the govt from charges made by the business world..for what?...because its a democratic held govt?...is party loyalty so important to that you would shot yourself in the foot to hold it?...is that what "smart" people do?...
I can do this all night, the mind-numbing, hypocritical, bizarre things I see liberals do, yet I have not once thought it was out of stupidity or lack of intelligence...out of what?....still trying to figure that out...but I don't think its because they are "stupid"...
and by the way, not sure using a ten item Wordsum vocabulary test is the best way to determine intelligence....I don't know why you are using that test from a random unreliable site as some kind of cold hard fact...is that what "smart" people do?
Enough with the apocalyptic, black/white thinking. Very few liberals are socialists or communists, relatively few are even social democrats. Somebody has been slipping something in your koolaid. Many of us, including President O., are pretty moderate. We want a sound economy, but we also believe that providing healtcare and good infrastructure in the wealthiest country in the world makes sense. And we believe the public and private sector balance each other. And letting medical ill fortune be one of the top sources of bankrupsy, while we build weapons for every despot under the sun, seems immoral. Most of us also would love to see less government waste and duplication.
The right has become so irrationally aggreived that they continue to lob these stupid insinuations constantly. Clinton balanced the budget and was basically a decaffienated republican. Obama is not far behind. He will be reelected precisely because he is centrist.
And the bottom line is , compared to the services we get, our taxes are pretty low, both globally, and for the US historically. And except for Homeland Security, government payrolls have been shrinking since the 1990s. I can name at least a dozen countries with higher taxes and proportionally larger government sectors and comparable quality of life than the USA, and I would be hard pressed to think of more than a couple states where the tax burden is lower and life comparable. So, Americans don't have that much to complain about. and we are far from chasing some socialist Armaggedon. The deficits started in the era of Reagan, when the snake oil of "trickle down economics" started. Every republican Pres. since Reagan has exploded the government deficit and stuck it to the working classes. The fact that they get all Limbaugh'd up and continue to support such Republicans sleazeballs just supports the point of this thread. Through their own stubbornness and appetite for constant propaganda, America's social conservatives have been turned into snarling lapdogs for the super rich and the Brylcreem prophets of the religious right.
I'm not attempting to lay out some formal argument for you. Every thing I see shows self described liberals to have higher IQ's than self professed conservatives.
Perhaps you have a study, or some exit polling that shows otherwise?
Let's look at that, rather than your anecdotal story, or how one conservative views liberals? Which doesn't mean jack.
Very few liberals are socialists or communists, relatively few are even social democrats.
Of course not. When you realize the socialist dream you'll be hating life.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiddlehead
Somebody has been slipping something in your koolaid. Many of us, including President O., are pretty moderate. We want a sound economy, but we also believe that providing healtcare and good infrastructure in the wealthiest country in the world makes sense.
The president sees a far more detailed assessment than these:
Quote:
Some of our preliminary assessments are highlighted below:
The whole international system—as constructed following WWII—will be revolutionized. Not only will new players—Brazil, Russia, India and China— have a seat at the international high table, they will bring new stakes and rules of the game.
The unprecedented transfer of wealth roughly from West to East now under way will continue for the foreseeable future.
Unprecedented economic growth, coupled with 1.5 billion more people, will put pressure on resources—particularly energy, food, and water—raising the specter of scarcities emerging as demand outstrips supply.
The potential for conflict will increase owing partly to political turbulence in parts of the greater Middle East.
NIC 2025 Project (http://www.dni.gov/nic/NIC_2025_project.html - broken link)
And he hasn't said one freaking word to you about. In fact he's speeding up the process. What does that say about your moderate president?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiddlehead
And we believe the public and private sector balance each other. And letting medical ill fortune be one of the top sources of bankrupsy, while we build weapons for every despot under the sun, seems immoral. Most of us also would love to see less government waste and duplication.
You couldn't even imagine how ironic this statement is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiddlehead
The right has become so irrationally aggrieved that they continue to lob these stupid insinuations constantly. Clinton balanced the budget and was basically a decaffeinated republican. Obama is not far behind. He will be reelected precisely because he is centrist.
Aggrieved of what? Maybe you should take a look back at the 2021, 2017, 2013, 2009 assessments. Not that I expect that much out of you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiddlehead
And the bottom line is , compared to the services we get, our taxes are pretty low, both globally, and for the US historically. And except for Homeland Security, government payrolls have been shrinking since the 1990s.
Yeah, because the west will no longer be able to afford multiple bureaucracies on top of multiple bureaucracies.
We'll call it the evolution of government. The asteroid is about to hit in other words. The over bloated dinosaurs are about to be worked right out of history.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiddlehead
I can name at least a dozen countries with higher taxes and proportionally larger government sectors and comparable quality of life than the USA, and I would be hard pressed to think of more than a couple states where the tax burden is lower and life comparable.
You don't seem to understand. The world will equalize meaning a construction worker in Singapore will be paid the same as a construction worked with the same skills in Boulder, Colorado.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiddlehead
So, Americans don't have that much to complain about. and we are far from chasing some socialist Armageddon. The deficits started in the era of Reagan,
B.S. You should try looking how many time the debt ceiling was raised before Reagan was even elected.
I guess I'll have to help you:
Quote:
World War II and After The debt ceiling was raised to accommodate accumulating costs for World War II in each year from 1941 through 1945, when it was set at $300 billion.15 After World War II ended, the debt limit was reduced to $275 billion. Because the Korean War was mostly financed by higher taxes rather than by increased debt, the limit remained at $275 billion until 1954. After 1954, the debt limit was reduced twice and increased seven times, until March 1962 when it again reached $300 billion, its level at the end of World War II. Since March 1962, Congress has enacted 69 separate measures that have altered the limit on federal debt.16 Most of these changes in the debt limit were, measured in percentage terms, small in comparison to changes adopted in wartime or during the Great Depression. Some recent increases in the debt limit, however, were large in dollar terms. For instance, in May 2003, the debt
limit increased by $984 billion.
But you'll outright ignore that because it doesn't compute with your standards of what you think this planet is all about.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiddlehead
when the snake oil of "trickle down economics" started. Every republican Pres. since Reagan has exploded the government deficit and stuck it to the working classes. The fact that they get all Limbaugh'd up and continue to support such Republicans sleazeballs just supports the point of this thread. Through their own stubbornness and appetite for constant propaganda, America's social conservatives have been turned into snarling lapdogs for the super rich and the Brylcreem prophets of the religious right.
What else did you think was going to happen as the West's income and standard of living is eroded? They're going to want more of what they do make.
You, and your cohorts, are wrong on every single thing you stand for and on every front.
What I cannot figure out is this. If one assumes the liberals/democrats are visionary impractical dreamers gazing off into the distance, and conservatives are the practical, observant, common sense folk, how can that be matched with the abject failure of deregulation, globalization, and trickle down economics. Since Reagan, we have been told that cutting taxes on the rich will create growth and jobs. All it seems to have done is enrich the richest 10%, and left everyone else high and dry. The rich seem to be doing better and better, but tell me, who else is? We've had stock market and real estate bubbles, flat wages, loss of manufacturing, crumbling infrastructure, ballooning deficits, no bid military contracts, a complete and unmitigated mortgage and bond fraud that nearly destroyed the global economy, plummeting home prices, massive unemployment, serial corporate bailouts, packing the Supreme Court so that now corporations are citizens, yet you cannot easily go bankrupt, and yet the richest ten percent keep getting richer, and things for the rest of us pretty much stink. And the more money the rich get, the more they have to plow into lobbyists, right wing radio and TV propaganda. It seems pretty obvious to me that we live in Las Vegas, and the house always wins. Yet, the observant, practical ones cannot see this. There are few places left (Butte, Montana, Pittsburgh, PA), where working guys still fight for their rights. In the rest of the country it seems like the working class would write checks to Donald Trump himself if he could promise to keep two guys from kissing. Crazy, or just plain dumb? I really don't get it.
I'm attempting to lay out some formal argument for you. Every thing I see shows self described liberals to have higher IQ's than self professed conservatives.
Perhaps you have a study, or some exit polling that shows otherwise?
Let's look at that rather than your anecdotal story or how one conservative views liberals>
Ok let me say this again:
not sure using a ten item Wordsum vocabulary test is the best way to determine intelligence....I don't know why you are using that test from a random unreliable site as some kind of cold hard fact...
using questionable information, from a questionable website isn't much of a "formal argument"..
and again, what the hell is "have some smarts"?...
and if you think vast amount of people, on the left, electing someone to the Presidency without at least one important accomplishment or reason to do so is "anecdotal"....then I take it that you, yourself can list that accomplishment then?.....
that's less then a 10% difference and taking in the margin for error, its even less.....and I wouldn't call the Nytimes unbiased....Come on, first that odd Wordsum test from that random website, now this?..do the use very flimsy info, from unreliable sources to proudly pat yourself on back as if you are on the "smart" side something the "intelligent" do?
Of course not. When you realize the socialist dream you'll be hating life.
The president sees a far more detailed assessment than these:
NIC 2025 Project (http://www.dni.gov/nic/NIC_2025_project.html - broken link)
And he hasn't said one freaking word to you about. In fact he's speeding up the process. What does that say about your moderate president?
You couldn't even imagine how ironic this statement is.
Aggrieved of what? Maybe you should take a look back at the 2021, 2017, 2013, 2009 assessments. Not that I expect that much out of you.
Yeah, because the west will no longer be able to afford multiple bureaucracies on top of multiple bureaucracies.
We'll call it the evolution of government. The asteroid is about to hit in other words. The over bloated dinosaurs are about to be worked right out of history.
You don't seem to understand. The world will equalize meaning a construction worker in Singapore will be paid the same as a construction worked with the same skills in Boulder, Colorado.
B.S. You should try looking how many time the debt ceiling was raised before Reagan was even elected.
But you'll outright ignore that because it doesn't compute with your standards of what you think this planet is all about.
What else did you think was going to happen as the West's income and standard of living is eroded? They're going to want more of what they do make.
You, and your cohorts, are wrong on every single thing you stand for and on every front.
Well, thanks for the debt. limit info. Appreciated. I still sense an apocalyptic wacko energy to your post that I don't want to respond to. Suffice it to say, I think out government needs to be pruned a bit, but is otherwise ok. The bigger government countries (Canada, UK, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Germany, etc.) are not seeming like terrible places to me. I've been there, and they don't scare me. The libertarian, Jeffersonian ideal you are seeking is fine, except I have never seen it anywhere in the history of the planet. Give an example, if you like.
not sure using a ten item Wordsum vocabulary test is the best way to determine intelligence....I don't know why you are using that test from a random unreliable site as some kind of cold hard fact...
using questionable information, from a questionable website isn't much of a "formal argument"..
and again, what the hell is "have some smarts"?...
and if you think vast amount of people, on the left, electing someone to the Presidency without at least one important accomplishment or reason to do so is "anecdotal"....then I take it that you, yourself can list that accomplishment then?.....
that's less then a 10% difference and taking in the margin for error, its even less.....and I wouldn't call the Nytimes unbiased....Come on, first that odd Wordsum test from that random website, now this?..to use very flimsy info, from unreliable sources to proudly pat yourself on back as if you are on the "smart" side....
Yes I get it...it's not a pure standardized IQ test....but IQ test scores have a strong correlation with SAT scores, remembering sequences of numbers, vocabulary, Military aptitude tests, etc. So we don't need to totally dismiss it but take it for what it is. Yet another piece of evidence.
Well, thanks for the debt. limit info. Appreciated. I still sense an apocalyptic wacko energy to your post that I don't want to respond to. Suffice it to say, I think out government needs to be pruned a bit, but is otherwise ok. The bigger government countries (Canada, UK, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Germany, etc.) are not seeming like terrible places to me. I've been there, and they don't scare me. The libertarian, Jeffersonian ideal you are seeking is fine, except I have never seen it anywhere in the history of the planet. Give an example, if you like.
Quote:
Public debt:
59.3% of GDP (2010 est.)
56.8% of GDP (2009 est.)
That would be the top 15 countries external debt. In case you don't notice they' represent the West. That means that the most indebted countries in the world are the West.
And you want more and more freebies?
Meanwhile, back on the ranch:
Quote:
GENEVA — The world needs $1.9 trillion in green technology investments a year, with over half of that sum necessary for developing countries," the UN said Tuesday.
"Over the next 40 years, $1.9 trillion (1.31 trillion euros) per year will be needed for incremental investments in green technologies," the UN Economic and Social Affairs body said in its annual survey.
"At least one-half, or $1.1 trillion per year, of the required investments will need to be made in developing countries to meet their rapidly increasing food and energy demands through the application of green technologies," it added.
The whole international system—as constructed following WWII—will be revolutionized. Not only will new players—Brazil, Russia, India and China— have a seat at the international high table, they will bring new stakes and rules of the game.
The unprecedented transfer of wealth roughly from West to East now under way will continue for the foreseeable future.
Unprecedented economic growth, coupled with 1.5 billion more people, will put pressure on resources—particularly energy, food, and water—raising the specter of scarcities emerging as demand outstrips supply.
The potential for conflict will increase owing partly to political turbulence in parts of the greater Middle East.
NIC 2025 Project (http://www.dni.gov/nic/NIC_2025_project.html - broken link)
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.
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.
