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.
This is a spurious conclusion, which cannot safely be drawn from the set of data. The reason we are in so much toruble in this world is because ordinary people, even reasonably well-educated, do not understand the basic principles of logic. They are easily led astray by those would allege that carefully selected facts are proof of a desired conclusion.
In other words, the OP is twisting things to suit his own needs because he has no clue
I really don't put much stock in the concept of 'smart' or 'dumb' as it relates to politicians. It's hard to say that any of these people are dumb per se.
Look at the pedigrees of politicians who have had limited success, at best. It's hard to make the link between Elite Education, Test Scores, IQ and effectiveness as a public servant. W (Yale ugrad, HBS), Spitzer (Princeton, HLS, perfect LSAT scores), Frank (Harvard ugrad and HLS), Granholm (HLS), Kerry (Yale ugrad), Schumer (Harvard ugrad and near perfect SAT scores), Bernanke (Princeton ugrad, MIT PhD with near perfect SAT score), Deval Patrick (Harvard ugrad and HLS), Hank Paulson (D-mouth ugrad, HBS and CEO of Goldman, thougn neither he nor Bernanke were elected). The list goes on.
I think that there are instances in which an elite education and experience only in Politics and Academia can be a hindrance. Many such people are more ideological than practical.
Obama, for example, is an intelligent person with great academic credentials. I would never call him stupid. That said, I don't think many of the policies he campaigned on would benefit the country (raising the top two marginal taxs rates, raising capital gains and dividends taxes, eliminating the ceiling on FICA taxes for those above $250K, raising estate taxes, refusing to lower corporate taxes, windfall profits tax, cap and trade, minimal off shore drilling if any, futher government control of Healthcare and others).
I really don't pay much attention to which candidate is 'smarter' than the other. IMO, it doesn't predict who will govern more effectively.
This is a spurious conclusion, which cannot safely be drawn from the set of data. The reason we are in so much toruble in this world is because ordinary people, even reasonably well-educated, do not understand the basic principles of logic. They are easily led astray by those would allege that carefully selected facts are proof of a desired conclusion.
Some unreported stats about the 2008 election
Professor Joseph Olson of Hemline University School of Law, St. Paul , Minnesota , points out some interesting facts concerning the 2008 Presidential election:
-Number of States won by: Democrats: 20; Republicans: 30
-Square miles of land won by: Democrats: 580,000; Republicans: 2,427,000
-Population of counties won by: Democrats: 127 million; Republicans: 143 million
-Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by: Democrats: 13.2; Republicans: 2.1
Professor Olson adds: "In aggregate, the map of the territory Republican won was mostly the land owned by the taxpaying citizens. Democrat territory mostly
encompassed those citizens living in rented or government-owned tenements and living off various forms of government welfare..."
Olson believes the United States is now somewhere between the "complacency and apathy" phase of Professor Tyler's definition of democracy, with some forty
percent of the nation's population already having reached the "governmental dependency" phase.
Numbers like these make it kind of hard to argue that it is the liberals who are standing around looking for a hand out.
On average, Republican communities have lower incomes and less education than Democratic communities. And those differences are growing as people migrate.
Some unreported stats about the 2008 election
Professor Joseph Olson of Hemline University School of Law, St. Paul , Minnesota , points out some interesting facts concerning the 2008 Presidential election:
-Number of States won by: Democrats: 20; Republicans: 30
-Square miles of land won by: Democrats: 580,000; Republicans: 2,427,000
-Population of counties won by: Democrats: 127 million; Republicans: 143 million
-Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by: Democrats: 13.2; Republicans: 2.1
Professor Olson adds: "In aggregate, the map of the territory Republican won was mostly the land owned by the taxpaying citizens. Democrat territory mostly
encompassed those citizens living in rented or government-owned tenements and living off various forms of government welfare..."
Olson believes the United States is now somewhere between the "complacency and apathy" phase of Professor Tyler's definition of democracy, with some forty
percent of the nation's population already having reached the "governmental dependency" phase.
As a public service to this forum, I have to let forum-readers know that Rosinante is willfully and maliciously spreading false information. This is the second time I have posted the following to Rosinante's deliberately misleading "information" above.
"From Professor Olson's own bio on the Hamline website:
"DISCLAIMER: There is an e-mail floating around the internet dealing with the 2008 Obama/McCain election and the 2000 Bush/Gore election, remarks of a Scottish philosopher named Alexander Tyler, etc. Part of it is attributed to me. It is entirely BOGUS as to my authorship. I've been trying to kill it since December 2000. For details see: http://www.snopes.com/politics/quotes/tyler.asp. "
Aside from the factoids I presented above, it is clear that the assertion that democrats are smarter than republicans is partially based on the fact that school teachers and college instructors usually vote for democrats because they are not capable of holding real jobs. You know the old saying : Those who can, do; those who can't, teach.
I don't know if you know any teachers, but teaching is a real job. It is a very challenging and important one as well. I really get disappointed when people get down on teachers. I guess everyone could just home school their own kids, but then we would end up with a whole new batch of idiots.
I don't know if you know any teachers, but teaching is a real job. It is a very challenging and important one as well. I really get disappointed when people get down on teachers. I guess everyone could just home school their own kids, but then we would end up with a whole new batch of idiots.
Very well said. When I think about all of the great teachers I had as a kid, I can't even think about casting them all away like that.
I guess that if someone hates teachers, they must hate information and questioning the world. On top of that, I think you'd have to be pretty mean-spirited too.
Some people think that everything we need to know is in the Bible. Incredible, but true.
the fact that school teachers and college instructors usually vote for democrats because they are not capable of holding real jobs. You know the old saying : Those who can, do; those who can't, teach.
I find that to be a startling comment, as if teaching is not only a real job but one that is vitally important to the society. Interesting.
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.