I saw this and Laughed

[D_Barbi_Queue]

Jay- I think you're under the impression that I am trying to say that the smarter people voted for Bush. That isn't my goal. My intention from posting the CNN data was to show that Bush voters in general aren't idiots like we are so commonly referred to.

I'm trying to see the point that you are making. Are you putting the "Some College" educated into the "less intelligent and poorer educated" group?

As I remember in your original post, you implied that among college educated Bush captured the majority of the vote: 52 to 46%. This is not the case, and that was the point I was making.

It is indeed the case, the figures are right there. I personally am considering the "some college educated" as higher educated. Also, I realize there is a difference between "some college educated" and those that are "college grads".

Of the entire voting population, 74% of them had at least some college education. Of that 74%, (if I did my calculations right) about 50% voted for Bush and 49% for Kerry. I do realize however, that more of those with Post-Grad study voted for Kerry, but even then...that's a real small minority of the voting population: 55% of 16% - about 8% of the voting population if I figured that out right. That I understand. But, that also still leaves a very large portion of educated people voting for Bush.

Again, my point wasn't to try to say that Bush supporters were smarter than Kerry supporters...only that the overall numbers are closer than everyone would like to believe. The "educated" people were pretty much split down the middle when it came to the election.

 

[jonb]

Originally posted by aloofman@May 16 2005, 06:37 PM
This is almost surely a legacy law that's been left on the books. For a long time almost every state's rape law had a marital exception: a wife was assumed to consent to sex from her husband at any time. As far as I know, no state has tried to enforce such a measure in decades, even the ones that still technically keep it as a law.

[post=311900]Quoted post[/post]​

Yeah, but the fact that blue states actually do something about pedophilia while red states keep ranting about homos (and fallaciously connecting that to pedophilia) should tell you something.

 

[13788]

hung_big: Damn, this wasn't supposed to turn into an actual conversation!

 

[jonb]

So it has come to this

 

[jay_too]

Originally posted by TexAssgirl@May 17 2005, 07:55 PM
i]Post-Grad study [/i]Again, my point wasn't to try to say that Bush supporters were smarter than Kerry supporters...only that the overall numbers are closer than everyone would like to believe. The "educated" people were pretty much split down the middle when it came to the election.

[post=312155]Quoted post[/post]​

However, the figures that you quoted: 52 to 46% did not imply this...now do they? Quoting 49 to 49% would be a split down the middle.....now wouldn't they?

About "some college" I do not remember mentioning this category. However, you might be on to something. Some college includes those who enrolled but never completed a course; those who dropped out after one, two, three, or four years; those who accumulated 200 hours but never found a degree; and of course, those that flunked out. On the other hand, some high school grads in four years or so work themselves into responsible support positions. So who has attained more education the dropout or the worker bee? This is a delicate issue for demographers and statisticians.

jay

 

[jay_too]

Originally posted by jonb@May 18 2005, 02:38 AM
So it has come to this

[post=312255]Quoted post[/post]​

So where do I apply for a passport?

jay

 

[jonb]

Oh, it's aboot 50 kilometres north of Vancouver, eh.

 

[jay_too]

Cyber..

I do not know the precise methodology in which they inferred state IQ's from ACT and SAT scores. However, if one had access to student IQ scores and ACT and SAT scores in several large high schools, regression analyis [multiple] would lead to an equation such as:
IQ = A*ACT + B*SAT
where A and B are constants arising from regression
Assuming that state education agencies collect from the companies administering the ACT and SAT the average scores, then "calculating/estimating" state IQ's is possible.

It is not possible to know the accuracy of the regression analysis since r-square [the coefficient of determination] is not given. Assuming a large sample and few widely dispersed data, I would assume very good predictability.

jay

 

[D_Barbi_Queue]

Originally posted by jay_too@May 17 2005, 10:57 PM
About "some college" I do not remember mentioning this category. However, you might be on to something. Some college includes those who enrolled but never completed a course; those who dropped out after one, two, three, or four years; those who accumulated 200 hours but never found a degree; and of course, those that flunked out. On the other hand, some high school grads in four years or so work themselves into responsible support positions. So who has attained more education the dropout or the worker bee? This is a delicate issue for demographers and statisticians.

jay

[post=312266]Quoted post[/post]​

True...but don't forget that "some college" also includes those that are still in. In fact, I think I voted in the last Clinton election during that time frame in my life.

The 52% - 46% referred only to the "college graduate" group - which you referred to as "college educated" in post #19. When I did the average of those two groups plus the Post Grad group, it came out to be 50% to 49%, hence my split down the middle among those with at least some college education. By the way...you were the first to quote those figures. Not me...I never implied that those specific figures included all of the educated voting population. I did however, mix up the "college grad" group w/the "some college education" group in Post #21. I'm sorry for that.

 

[jonb]

I should point out that deriving IQ from SAT scores like deriving blood sugar level from height: They measure different things. (The authors of The Bell Curve did something similar with the AFQT.)

 

[D_Barbi_Queue]

Actually I would say that they measure the same thing: intelligence, just different types of intelligence. I think SAT measures intelligence that is acquired from schooling (the skills basically needed to attend college) and that IQ is the measure of a person's cognitive abilities in relation to their own age group.

 

[jonb]

But that's not the definition of "intelligence". You can acquire intelligence via mental exercise. This can include reading, games which require some mental exercise, theaters, or museums. Contrary to popular belief, even sports can improve one's tactical intelligence.

And of course, SAT scores only measure verbal and math, not strategic, visuospatial, temporal, or other forms of intelligence, or even common sense.

 

[steve319]

Traditional IQ tests, as flawed and skewed as they are, were developed with the intention of measuring potential intelligence, but even then only a very narrow definition/category of "intelligence."

It's a tool that might have to be considered a necessary evil, I think. It's a vital, if unreliable, component in the process of diagnosing learning disabilities.

 

[hung9mike]

I read this thread with some interest because I remembered having read something several months ago which addressed the issue of college education and how people voted in 2004. Unfortunately, I couldn't remember or find the source, so I've reconstructed the data myself. I'm including my sources so you can check them out for yourself.

This table comes from the U.S. Census Bureau. It lists the percent of people 25 and over who have completed a Bachelor's Degree, by state, in 2003 (the most recent data available, as far as I can tell). The District of Columbia is also included and turns out to be #1 on the list.

This graphic by CNN shows the results of the presidential election by state.

Comparing the two, you'll see that of the top 22 states (and DC) in terms of college graduates, Kerry won 17. Kerry only won 20 states (counting DC as a state). The other three states Kerry won fell at numbers 29, 32, and 35 on the list. Bush won 31 states, including the lowest 16 states on the list.

What does this mean? Perhaps nothing. After all, TexAssgirl observed that on a national level:

Originally posted by TexAssgirl@May 16 2005, 07:22 AM
Notice that Bush had the majority of the "H.S. Graduate", "Some College" & "College Graduate ". Kerry had the majority of the "No High School" and "Post Grad Study"

[post=311607]Quoted post[/post]​

Of course, you have to put some faith in the reliability of exit polls to believe that argument. But I wouldn't put a lot of faith in the state-by-state analysis yet either. You could easily argue that the cards were stacked in Kerry's deck. The Northeast, which Kerry swept, is usually good to Democrats and many of the nation's large urban centers are there. And cities, in general, have larger proportions of college graduates.

But a result this dramatic is bound to suggest something. The Democrats would be well advised to figure out what that something is.