IQ and Voting

[13788]

Javierdude22: Funny article in this weeks Economist.

It's hardly a methodologically correct conclusion, but funny nonetheless. Apparently states that voted for Bush in majority have significantly lower IQ's than states that voted for Gore.

Cincinnati tops the list with an average of 113 voting for Gore, versus Missisipi with 85 and voting for Bush. Also Utah and Idaho have 87, Wyoming 89, and Alabama, Oklahoma, Montana, and Louisiana have 90 and voted for Bush.

NJ, MS, NY, RI, Hawaii, Maryland, NH, Illnois, and Delawarev all stay far above the 100 and voted for Gore.

I find it pretty weird by the way that there can be such a difference between states in average IQ. Of course it correlates with the prestige and quantity of universities, but still, that much?

And an IQ of below 80 means 'backwarded' right? hm...

Btw, don't mean to offend anyone who voted for Bush..

 

[B_RoysToy]

THANK YOU, Javier! I love such statistics backing up my thinking!

Luke

 

[Pecker]

I've lived in Virginia since 1959 and I've yet to be tested for my IQ in this state.

I dare say the same probably applies to the majority of U.S. voters. How the hell can this fargin' bastitch fool so many ice-holes with his 'stats'; where'd he get the boils to state this as fact anyhow?

Certainly he didn&#39;t get them from the majority. <_<

Pecker

 

[mindseye]

I&#39;m certainly suspicious of the methodology as well. I&#39;m certain the difference isn&#39;t that pronounced.

Furthermore, IQ is a suspect measurement as well -- many IQ tests still in use date from 75-80 years ago and have a pronounced class bias today. Given the difference in educational and economic status between Cincinnati and Mississippi (why are they comparing a city with a state anyway?), any IQ comparison between the two is likely to be skewed.

That said, there are valid studies out there that show that people with a college degree are more likely to vote against an incumbent than people without -- that (apparently) the more you know, the more dissatisfied you are with how the current government is doing.

 

[13788]

Javierdude22: My fault...I meant Connecticut..

Of course the methodology is highly debatable...but I can see the humour in it (from my point of view). I do wonder why a prestigious magazine like the Economist would print it though...

Javier

 

[jonb]

Only someone with an IQ less than 70 would think Cincinnati was a state.

 

[madame_zora]

Aww, dammit, I&#39;m from Cincinnati and was getting all puffed up thinking we were smart&#33; lol. Although I do not put much credence on IQ tests (being a Psych major, I&#39;ve taken over 20 of them), I&#39;m sure the stats they would be using would just be from the ones taken in grade schools, which many states give. The illusion that IQ tests can accurately measure a person&#39;s intellectual potential is preposterous, more often they measure education, if anything at all. That being said, I don&#39;t think ol&#39; George W is a thinking man&#39;s president. Hilarious topic&#33;

 

[D_Humper E Bogart]

What about the people who wont vote? I think only someone who thinks "a little too much" would realise the whole futility of the idea.

 

[13788]

Javierdude22:

Originally posted by ORCABOMBER@May 19 2004, 07:45 AM
What about the people who wont vote?

They have the IQ of the average wintertemperature in Minnesota...

in centigrades...

 

[madame_zora]

Well said, javierdude&#33; People who don&#39;t vote, nomatter their intellectualized ideas, have no right to bitch about the system. Our government is far from perfect, certainly, but if I didn&#39;t feel it was the best thing going, I am free to move to wherever I think it&#39;s better (notice, I&#39;m still here). I think not voting is just an elitist way of not taking responsibility, or even more likely- being lazy.

 

[D_Humper E Bogart]

Hey&#33; I don&#39;t vote, but if you wanted to check my posts, I&#39;m probably one of the least bitchiest people here.

After all, do I really think that "party y" is going to get into power?

I find it more amusing that the people that voted for Bush/Blair etc start moaning so badly when they voted for him, at least my conscious is clear on that point.

Maybe all this voter apathy is because, at the end of the day, the UK and Us are two-party systems, so what&#39;s the point if you wanted a new angle? The far right are seen as millitants, the far left are seen as loons, the communists and the "pro government zombies" are probably phone tapped. Everyone in the middle is blanked.

It&#39;s not like in India where people can vote and go YES, I&#39;M MAKING A DIFFERENCE&#33; It&#39;d be more like, "So, I hate this liar, I&#39;ll replace him with another?" WTF is that? Do I need to care so much about the personalities, sex lives and backgrounds of the candidates? Do I need to know that "yes, they will lower taxes" and then start crying like a sliced pig when he double-crosses?

Reminds me of an advert where one man keeps moaning about something and the other just answers "politics," yes, the reason I&#39;m single and looking for a job 25 miles away from home is due to some dickhead passing a bill for a law that doesn&#39;t effect me. NOT&#33;

I ain&#39;t blaming the system, as far as I&#39;m concerned, one vote either way doesn&#39;t matter.

Of course, I wont argue the laziness point. After all, I do not contribute to society.

 

[B_DoubleMeatWhopper]

Of course, there is another point of view about not voting: if God wanted us to vote, He&#39;d give us real candidates. That said, I do vote. Often it&#39;s a choice of the lesser of two evils.

 

[jonb]

Originally posted by madame_zora@May 18 2004, 07:36 PM
Aww, dammit, I&#39;m from Cincinnati and was getting all puffed up thinking we were smart&#33; lol. Although I do not put much credence on IQ tests (being a Psych major, I&#39;ve taken over 20 of them), I&#39;m sure the stats they would be using would just be from the ones taken in grade schools, which many states give. The illusion that IQ tests can accurately measure a person&#39;s intellectual potential is preposterous, more often they measure education, if anything at all. That being said, I don&#39;t think ol&#39; George W is a thinking man&#39;s president. Hilarious topic&#33;

Well, IQ was one of those reifications. The degree of reification is obvious with the case of one Charles Spearman, who argued for a g factor, short for "generic intelligence". No neurologist could find a process responsible for g, so Spearman said that it must be a vitalistic force.

 

[madame_zora]

ORCABOMBER, not voting AND not bitching makes you a true concientious objector, in my humble opinion, which is one of our rights here in this country. I just happen to have a big mouth, and want my voice to be heard, however faintly that may be. I sometimes vote for independant runners, knowing they have no chance, just in hopes of their gaining some small momentum. It is true that our last few elections have been the lesser of two evils, but sometimes (like now) the evil looms large enough for me to want to do what I can to prevent it. As for generic intelligence, I don&#39;t want to believe in the idea that one person is superior to another on the basis of a God-given gift. I want to think that each person&#39;s ideals contribute to the greater good of the whole in a civilized society. Utopian philosophy? You bet, also one of my rights as a free American.

 

[D_Humper E Bogart]

You have a big mouth? *Refuses to mention silly jokes* :lol:

I&#39;ve been thinking heavily over this sort of matter, I&#39;m not American, I&#39;m from the 51st State (aka UK) and I have thought about what my "value" on a whole is. And frankly, I&#39;m greed motivated but without stomping on other people. As far as voting goes, you have a perfectly valid and just reason for why you would, I see no fault with that at all. For me, I tend to feel that &#39;lies and damned lies&#39; are part of the whole game.

UK politics really disgusts me the way they argue issues, it&#39;s like a bunch of gorillas or small children moaning and groaning over issues that may/may not effect me.

I thought I consider, is say I voted for the next Gandhi, all it takes it the other million right wing people (who are in the majority) to vote against and I might as well have not.

It doesn&#39;t mean that I don&#39;t have any views, you could possibly trace most of them through LPSG if you were that bored, more along the lines that either people in power can work it out themselves, or (more likely), they&#39;re too stupid to notice.

Either way...whatever.

As a sidepoint, I would say that my stance is closer to http://www.voterapathyparty.tk/
Altough they&#39;ve gone through a "spoof gothic" stage.

 

[madame_zora]

I have a very big mouth, and I love to use it- apply whatever inferences you may&#33; lol. I think apathy is a resonable reaction to unreasonable circumstances. I know there&#39;s very little value in my vote, other than the feeling it gives me that I&#39;m participating. I know very little about politics in the UK, but if it&#39;s anything like here, it&#39;s easy to feel "lost in the system". Perhaps it is my own illusion that I am voting for.....I too have given this a lot of thought.

I hate George Bush and everything he stands for. I will vote against him nomatter who runs to try to accomplish this goal. I find it humiliating to have a moron in the Whitehouse, it diminishes our image worldwide, as if we haven&#39;t done that to ourselves via the press with the whole Clinton scandal non-event. I want the right to bitch if that bastard gets re-elected, so that&#39;s what I&#39;m buying with my vote.

Thanks for the stimulating and thought provoking conversation, here I thought I was just in for cheap thrills&#33;&#33; Big brains AND a big pecker? You&#39;re quite a package (?) Orcabomber&#33;

 

[D_Humper E Bogart]

Well, you learn something new everyday, Zora.

I dunno about US politics, it seems to be based too much on image, shouldn&#39;t it be based on who people think is actually better, then again, most people tend to be pretty shallow about this sort of thing.

That reminds me, speaking of IQs, in the Uk, the show "test the nation" was on, where they do a IQ test for people to play at home and find out what the score is.

I realy do not want to be reminded it&#39;s 23 or something. :wub:

 

[Mr. Big Stuff]

The anger against Bush is rampant on this forum. I have a question for everyone: Do you hate the man, or the policies he stands for?

I find that although I do not see eye to eye with Bush, I definitely respect him in many ways. First of all, he stands up for what he believes in. Now, I will readily admit that it seems that he stands up for what his corporate backers believe in, but then again, that is EVERY politician. Not to mention, he does seem to have a sense of loyalty about him, which I also share. Lastly, He does seem to be strong in his faith, which is refreshing. (I am not endorsing a particular reason, just find it nice that our leaders believe in something greater than themselves).

Now I do disagree with SOME of his policies. Namely tax cuts (in a war, I believe in them in times of piece and prosperity) Underfunding key programs such as the no child left behind act, and his using Sept. 11 as a campaign ploy (he doesnt have to do that, I believe most remember his leadership during that time). I even disapprove of the WAY he is running the war on terror. I hated Saddam with a passion, but if he doesnt have WMDs....

Although I am a registered democrat, I am not certain yet who I am voting for. I feel closely aligned with Kerry, (and right now he has my vote) but I must admit I respect some of his qualities.

Ken

 

[13788]

Javierdude22:

Originally posted by Mr. Big Stuff@May 24 2004, 06:31 PM
Do you hate the man, or the policies he stands for?

I find that although I do not see eye to eye with Bush, I definitely respect him in many ways. First of all, he stands up for what he believes in. Now, I will readily admit that it seems that he stands up for what his corporate backers believe in, but then again, that is EVERY politician. Not to mention, he does seem to have a sense of loyalty about him, which I also share. Lastly, He does seem to be strong in his faith, which is refreshing. (I am not endorsing a particular reason, just find it nice that our leaders believe in something greater than themselves).

Now I do disagree with SOME of his policies. Namely tax cuts (in a war, I believe in them in times of piece and prosperity) Underfunding key programs such as the no child left behind act, and his using Sept. 11 as a campaign ploy (he doesnt have to do that, I believe most remember his leadership during that time). I even disapprove of the WAY he is running the war on terror. I hated Saddam with a passion, but if he doesnt have WMDs....

Although I am a registered democrat, I am not certain yet who I am voting for. I feel closely aligned with Kerry, (and right now he has my vote) but I must admit I respect some of his qualities.

Ken

I hate very few people, actually none. The word is too strong.

I just think Bush should be working the counter at Mc Donalds, and not be running a country with a history of manipulation and an internal mandate for it.

About loyalty, a dog is loyal as well, it doesnt make him a leader. He stands up for what he believes in, something I have heard WAY too often from Bush supporters. But did America ever stop to think what exactly it is he stands for? Without making things up, he stands for tax cuts for the rich, lies (Niger, WMDs), war (two), economic growth funded by a huge debt that will bite the US in the ass eventually, torture of prisoners (Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib), a total disregard for any international treaty (International Court, Kyoto, Geneva Conventions), lóóóng holidays on his ranch or summerhome, a country in ruins (Iraq), and a blind support for Israel.

I wouldnt wanna put that on my resume.

But obviously people see things differently, we are all unique. The pro-Bushies will turn it around which of course is not at all hard if you have a big imagination, low moral standards, and a touch of chauvinism to add on that.

I am not a hardcore liberal, not at all even, I am a liberal conservative Christian environmentalist and Bi (thats between us). So I don&#39;t automatically dislike any Republican or rightist politician there is.

Bush however is the first person I can really see NO added value in as leader of the (at the moment) most powerful country in the world. He lacks vision, ethics, and knowledge, he is a flagrant liar on countless things. My personal opinion, and everyone&#39;s entitled to their own.

Javier

 

[jay_too]

Mr. Big Stuff asks: "Do you hate the man, or the policies he stands for? "

How could I hate someone that I do not know and has not injured either a friend or a member of my family?

On occasion, I have been know to criticize a Bush policy or position. I opposed the Iraq War because there was no compelling danger to the safety of the U.S. I ridiculed the evidence for WMDs. I believed that the &#036;1 trillion that we would spend on the war and reconstruction could be better spent on education, infastructure, science and technology, health care, etc. Since we made a mess of Iraq, I have supported the sums required to rebuild and to stablize the country.

Within the past month, I saw an ad saying that Dubya made America safer. How so? The Patriot Act allows the feds to throw you in the slammer without charges, conduct sneak-and-peek searches, and telephone taps without judicial review of cause/need. So I guess the mantra of the Justice Department is "We are here to protect you." Hmmp&#33; The end run around the constitution and treaty obligations regarding human and civil rights by the retards in Justice and Defense have resulted in inflaming a couple of billion muslims and shaming most Americans. Do I think Americans will be fair game on travel overseas? You betcha&#33;

jay