Are republican voters generally more stupid than democrats in the USA?

[Kadagar_AV]

A Swedish newspaper just wrote about the reception of Todd Akins quote on women, rapes and duck anatomics.

According to that survey, 49% thought he should drop out, 28% think he should go on... So far so good, that is statistics I can accept.

However, 8% of the US population actually agreed with Akins. Now that SCARES me. Not only have they heard something and assumed it was true, they must have heard something, assumed it was true, and then 8 out of every 100 people completely missed the backlash.

THAT is what scares me. Not that people assume things they hear from politicians are true, but that they are completely unaware when a whole damn world backlash against it, the overwhelmingly vast majority of their own population as well.


So why did I jab at republicans in my title then?

Well, according to the same source, not 8%, but 13% of republican voters agree with Todd Akins.

Logically for me, that must mean that the notion that Todd Akin might be right is way-y-y-y-y-y-y-y-y-y stronger in the republican line than in the democratic line.

This is not the first time I hear about reality disagreements between the US political blocks... I recall some old poll from some year after the second Saddam war where a STUPID amount of republican voters believed they had found WMD in Iraq, and that Saddam had ties to OBL.



So I wonder... When it comes to factual things, that anyone can prove... How come that American Republicans seem to be way more out of sync with what the world at large believe is "true", than democratic voters?

Are the republican news channels bad at news reporting, or is the somewhat more disturbing notion more true, that the republican channels do propaganda?

[rvg]

This is a loaded question. You need to rephrase it.

[Kadagar_AV]

This is a loaded question. You need to rephrase it.

It is a loaded question, that's how you generally get people interested in what you have to say.

I have presented some statistics, gave my thoughts on some possible reasons, and opened up for discussion. If you feel strongly about republicans actually having the right idea of things, then by all means state your case and defend your position.

However, if you have a school system that cover these things (like human and duck plumbing) and any sort of access to media channels, and yet STILL can not get a clear picture in your head... I don't know, you tell me. Stupidity? Propaganda? Something else ("American Spirit" comes to mind)?

[rvg]

It is a loaded question, that's how you generally get people interested in what you have to say.
Not if you actually expect to get an answer. Your question pre-supposes that democratic leaning voters are stupid and republican leaning voters are stupider. You won't get very far with a question like that.

[Kadagar_AV]

Not if you actually expect to get an answer. Your question pre-supposes that democratic leaning voters are stupid and republican leaning voters are stupider. You won't get very far with a question like that.

I pre-suppose that democratic voters are stupid?

I think you read a little too much into the title there... You wouldn't, by any chance, feel like being OT?

[rvg]

OT?

[Kadagar_AV]

Republican?

[Papewaio]

50% of people have a below average IQ.

The bell curve is what would be interesting in this. It is possible to have a higher percentage at both extremes. So whilst there may be a higher percentage at the low end there can be more at the high end and still have the same average IQ in both sets of voters.

When we elect we should be going for the higher functional IQ/EQ etc set. So the group that is generating better politicians will get more votes.

End of the day you are voting for better politicians, you are not voting for your fellow voters. A functioning democracy is enhanced with smart informed active voters, it just doesn't rely on that... As long as who they elect make up for the voting pools deficiencies.

[Strike For The South]

Your people make terrible meatballs

[Kadagar_AV]

50% of people have a below average IQ.

The bell curve is what would be interesting in this. It is possible to have a higher percentage at both extremes. So whilst there may be a higher percentage at the low end there can be more at the high end and still have the same average IQ in both sets of voters.

When we elect we should be going for the higher functional IQ/EQ etc set. So the group that is generating better politicians will get more votes.

End of the day you are voting for better politicians, you are not voting for your fellow voters. A functioning democracy is enhanced with smart informed active voters, it just doesn't rely on that... As long as who they elect make up for the voting pools deficiencies.

I get that.

That is not what scares me. The Akins duck as an example... My point is that somehow, somewhere, there has to be a factor explaining how it comes that republican voters have a whole other perspective on actual facts than the rest of the world.

What interests me, is what that factor is. Stupidity is, imho, a much to simple explanation, as I think, and science support me in this, that Americans percentage wise have roughly the same amount of stupid people as they have in, say, France.

[Strike For The South]

You seem to be equating stupidity with "culture that isn't Swedish"

Of course there are the same amount of stupid people in France, they just support people like Le Pen instead of Akin

Now back to the slopes Johanssen

[Kadagar_AV]

You seem to be equating stupidity with "culture that isn't Swedish"

Of course there are the same amount of stupid people in France, they just support people like Le Pen instead of Akin

Now back to the slopes Johanssen

That post of yours would have absolutely killed the debate, if we were debating differences between nations. As it is though, we debate differences on appreciation of facts between two different political parties residing in the US of A.

And if you go after me, at least do it right. If you want to mock me for skiing you should use my AUSTRIAN heritage (Hitler alone should give you plenty of resources). Admittedly you would still be a few years late, but then, it's not the slowest you've been accused of being, now is it?

[Strike For The South]

What interests me, is what that factor is. Stupidity is, imho, a much to simple explanation, as I think, and science support me in this, that Americans percentage wise have roughly the same amount of stupid people as they have in, say, France.

Now I am going to hold your hand through this, perhaps up the font a peg or two so it will really sink in.

You don't understand why some people would support Akins outlandish comments
You don't think stupidity is a valid answer, you are correct.
However you fail to see why. So you ask, in your usual style, if all the stupid people vote GOP.
I can't understand what would lead you to that conclusion other than some sort of pat on the back circle jerk.

In America there is still ongoing debate about abortion. The crux of this issue has to do with at what point life begins. Many in America believe it to be conception. The 8% of people is probably made up of people who 1. truly believe the termination of any fetus is murder 2. refuse to give ground due to partisan politics 3. Cognitive dissonance among pro lifers who don't like to deal with what are admittiley a very small number of abortions.

While this may seem foreign to you, parts of the Swedish zetigiest seem foreign to us.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

You seem to be equating stupidity with "culture that isn't Swedish"

Sometimes, that seems like a reasonable conclusion, especially when comparing with America.


Of course there are the same amount of stupid people in France, they just support people like Le Pen instead of Akin

The issue with Akin isn't the pro-life bit, it's the "women can't get pregnant from rape" bit. That 13% of Republicans believe that is scary.


Now back to the slopes Johanssen

Actually, that would be "Johansson", or "Johnsson" in my case.

[Strike For The South]

I would put forth it is part cognitive dissonance combined with an unwillingness to compromise on the abortion debate.

It's like saying English people are stupid for still having a king

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I would put forth it is part cognitive dissonance combined with an unwillingness to compromise on the abortion debate.

It's like saying English people are stupid for still having a king

Except that we've repeatedly said that the main reason we still have a King is that we don't like our politicians having swollen heads, like yours. It's because, when it comes to governance, the English detest principles.

[Strike For The South]

And the main reason people back Akin is an unwillingness to give an inch on the abortion debate.

[Papewaio]

Can't even give an inch, sounds like they're hung like a duck too. :smoking:

[Beskar]

Depends on your measurement of intelligence.

[Papewaio]

I wouldn't call someone who is intellectually handicapped stupid.

I would call someone who is normal or better stupid if they ignore the facts.

As such even if a person had a genius IQ, Dr of Science, Theology and Baking. They are still a roaring idiot if they state the sun rises in the west.

So people who believe contrary to all evidence that woman can shut down pregnancy in rape are a bunch of stupid idiots. They might be good, caring genius neighbors or family members who get to vote. But they are on this topic stupid.

[Lemur]

You know, the American electorate has been polled, tested, sliced, diced and poked from every imaginable direction. There are probably some polls out there that might address your question in some way. Google is your friend.

[PanzerJaeger]

Is it any more intelligent to believe America can opt out of free trade and the Rust Belt will suddenly spring back to life? Both sides have their crazies.

[Kadagar_AV]

Now I am going to hold your hand through this, perhaps up the font a peg or two so it will really sink in.

You don't understand why some people would support Akins outlandish comments
You don't think stupidity is a valid answer, you are correct.
However you fail to see why. So you ask, in your usual style, if all the stupid people vote GOP.
I can't understand what would lead you to that conclusion other than some sort of pat on the back circle jerk.

In America there is still ongoing debate about abortion. The crux of this issue has to do with at what point life begins. Many in America believe it to be conception. The 8% of people is probably made up of people who 1. truly believe the termination of any fetus is murder 2. refuse to give ground due to partisan politics 3. Cognitive dissonance among pro lifers who don't like to deal with what are admittiley a very small number of abortions.

While this may seem foreign to you, parts of the Swedish zetigiest seem foreign to us.

Parts of the Swedish zeitgeist seem foreign to Swedes too.

There is, however, one whooping difference...

In the USA, you will find that 8% has a foreign view that women are like ducks.
In Sweden, you could (possibly, but hardly?!) find 8% who think there should be a law for men to sit down on public toilets.

In the USA, you have a party where this lunatic viewpoint is more common than in other partys.
In Sweden, we have a party where this lunatic viewpoint is more common than in other partys.

In USA, the person behind the quote is running for president in the worlds surviving super power, for a party that have roughly 50% of the votes.
In Sweden, the person behind the quote is some backwater local politician whos party have about 5% of the votes.


Do you now understand what I see might be problematic?

And yes, I am fully aware of the abortion issues you have over there... But you should also be aware that the thinking people of the world get kind of nervous witnessing the anti-intellectual tendencies you seem to have got going for you.

I'm not scared that Americans will have proper information but decide to act in evil ways. People don't suddenly turn evil.

What I am afraid of is people being completely miss lead, trying to do good.

Or to put it even more blunt:

The world got scared when you attacked Iraq because of non-existant WMDs.
The world got absolutely TERRIFIED when big blocks of your population also polled that WMDs had been found.

And that is what this thread is about. It's not about evil americans being evil, it's about people all over the world needing correct information to make decisions. And from what I see, there seem to be a movement who deliberately spreads false information, and quite successfully so.

And yes, that scares me.

[Major Robert Dump]

I think for every retard who agreess with Todd and thinks Dinosaurs were on Noahs Arc, there are an equal number of retards on the other side of the fence.

Fortunately, most of my RL conservative friends are very intelligent people. Unfortunately, most of my RL Liberal friends are not, either being ignorant or uneducated or outright dumb. This tends to happen when you bundle all the victim classes together. Republican ignorance, on the other hand, tends to stem from inbreeding and cutting off the flow of oxygen while speaking in tongues.

[CBR]

Maybe a book like The Republican Brain: The Science of Why They Deny Science and - Reality (http://www.amazon.com/The-Republican-Brain-Science-Science-/dp/1118094514/ref=la_B001IU4QGA_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1346386983&sr=1-1) will answer (some of) your questions. Some people are more open to new experiences than others. The more closed they are, the better they are at rejecting facts that go against their opinions. Everyone is capable of that of course, but research suggest that one finds more of it among "conservative" people.

Maybe something to do with a bigger amygdala (http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-human-beast/201104/conservatives-big-fear-brain-study-finds) and therefore more fear and anxiety in their lives. Which could also explain the need for more closure and a more black and white view of things.

Fox News does seem to have either a detrimental effect or maybe it just attracts people of a certain persuasion, as several studies have found that the more people watched Fox News the less they knew (http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2011/11/22/374434/fox-news-viewers-misinformed-study-jon-stewart/).

[SoFarSoGood]

Just because some idiots support a Party doesn't mean that all it's supporters are idiots.

[Sarmatian]

Also, it's important to note how much people actually held those views even before that nonsense was spouted and how many people from those 13% think that any abortion is just plain wrong regardless of the circumstances.

[rory_20_uk]

Are Republicans agreeing with what is said, or refusing to denigrate a Republican candidate?

~:smoking:

[Major Robert Dump]

False equivalency

[Fisherking]

I think this is an example of “people will believe most anything they are told” or in the words of P.T. Barnum “there is a sucker borne every minute“. (something he didn’t actually say)

Most of you believe Napoleon was short and many of you believe Germany started WWI.

A lot of you think that making alcohol from corn (maze) will impact food supplies or that hemp should be banned because people can get high smoking it.

Where dose that leave you?

All of these were politically motivated lies people still believe. Maybe a few people are latching on to it because they want to believe it but most likely it is just to support their man and truth is ignored. In a year maybe 2% will still say they believe it.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I think this is an example of “people will believe most anything they are told” or in the words of P.T. Barnum “there is a sucker borne every minute“. (something he didn’t actually say)

Most of you believe Napoleon was short and many of you believe Germany started WWI.

A lot of you think that making alcohol from corn (maze) will impact food supplies or that hemp should be banned because people can get high smoking it.

Where dose that leave you?

All of these were politically motivated lies people still believe. Maybe a few people are latching on to it because they want to believe it but most likely it is just to support their man and truth is ignored. In a year maybe 2% will still say they believe it.


About 50% of those are true though.

Napoleon was short compared to other European aristocrats and we have ample evidence that certain varieties of Hemp were grown by medieval farmers as much as a drug as a fibre for rope.

[Major Robert Dump]

Yes, and those medieval farmers and their blasted farms then try to move to New York State and give some of that devil weed to our young white women so they start dating black jazz singers and stop buying Hearst paper for their homework that they never plan on doing because they are so stoned

[Fisherking]

About 50% of those are true though.

Napoleon was short compared to other European aristocrats and we have ample evidence that certain varieties of Hemp were grown by medieval farmers as much as a drug as a fibre for rope.


Nappy was 5’7” which was above average height. He was 5.2 French feet which was 1/3 of a meter.

And plants don’t need copious amounts of drugs in them to be of medical value. For those properties they usually used broom anyway. The last time I checked broom was still a legal substance. But then broom has no real commercial properties.

[drone]

The crux of the problem is that mainstream American news sources are crap. They range from incredibly biased, to purveyors of pop culture pap. Corporate-controlled, for-profit enterprises will naturally try to maximize profits over anything else. So they will generally target a segment of the population and tell them what they want to hear. We do not have an informed populace.

If the Aussies would have killed Murdoch when they had the chance, we might not be in this situation. :tongue:

Regarding the question in the OP, I'm surprised the percentages aren't higher.

[HoreTore]

8% of the US population are apparently idiots.

5.7% of the swedish population voted for the swedish democrats. So, at least 5.7% of the Swedish population are idiots.

It seems that Sweden wins this idiot contest. However, there may be more people who support SD, but didn't vote, so there may yet be more idiots in Sweden than in the US.

Also:

How do you sink a Swedish sub? You knock on the hatch...

[Lemur]

Not to derail a thread by being overly philosophical but ...

... to decide who is "stupid," first you have to define "intelligence," which I have always found to be a slippery beast. There are many, many different forms of intelligence (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_multiple_intelligences).

[The Lurker Below]

How upset will you be if Akin gets elected? When the 8% extremist pro-life voters team up with the 43% who will vote for anybody before allowing Claire to go back to Washington, this guy could actually move from the House science committee to the Senate science committee.

[Kadagar_AV]

8% of the US population are apparently idiots.

5.7% of the swedish population voted for the swedish democrats. So, at least 5.7% of the Swedish population are idiots.

It seems that Sweden wins this idiot contest. However, there may be more people who support SD, but didn't vote, so there may yet be more idiots in Sweden than in the US.

Also:

How do you sink a Swedish sub? You knock on the hatch...

From my perspective, 94,3% of the Swedish population are idiots. I voted SD. Head over to my rampant feminazi thread and you will start to get why.

And this reminds me. Back in the good old days when we made war, You remember? When we kicked Norwegian behinds left to right and took control of your country (only to hand it back because we really couldn't be bothered some decades later)... I remember one old tale from that time.

It was a dug in situation, and absolutely nothing happened. After a while though, a Swedish corporal came up with an idea. He called in a sharpshooter squad on standby, and went:
"Öivind!!"
And 4 heads popped up: "Yeah?" - To be shot down.
"Erland!!" - again some heads pop up with a big retarded smile and and a question on their lips. To be shot down.
The Swedes tries again: "Stian!!" And again, Pop Pop Pop Pop Pop....

By now, the absolute epitome of Norwegian thinking abilities goes to work, snickering to himself. he has finally seen through the Swedes cunning plan.
He shouts: "Kadagar_AV!!"
Kadagar_AV replies: "Who's asking"
HoreTore pops up: It's me, HoreTore!!

[Kadagar_AV]

On a more serious note...

Am I the only one scared that the biggest news channel, in what is the sole surviving super power, claiming to be the bastion of freedom, having access to nuclear arms... Is actively spreading disinformation?

I for one think that is, like, a major threat to the world and stuff. You know, stupid Euro thinkin'.... Could some American pretty please explain why as to this could possibly be a GOOD idea?

[Sasaki Kojiro]

I think that's backwards G-cube. The networks are the way they are because electing the best person is not something people truly care about, or care to think about. We are simply not that practically minded a species.

People vote for a variety of "irrational" reasons and the news networks reflect that. Some are political fans, the equivalent of sports fans or celebrity fans, who want glowing reports on how their guy is doing (not new to obama fans like it was pretended), and gossip about other "celeb" politicians. Others have found a fix for their existential depression in devoting themselves to a cause which can give them vicarious happiness through its success. This can be good but leads to wackiness as well, one cause for example is the idea of America's mission in the world. Other people are very ideological and they care so much about their sacred principles not being threatened that they will vote based on things that are terribly insignificant. Libertarians are the worst offenders in this category, and they have a long history of delusion and conspiracy theory in this country. Others are obsessed with reform, and are only happy if their imagined path to a utopia or a purer country is being tread consistently (liberals and religious people mostly). The most practical are those who vote from blind self interest unfortunately, and as they are often the most reliable source for politicians we are deep in debt. This is the way most people are, or else they are indifferent and swayed by random things like "who is favored to win" or gas prices, or because they want to fit in with their friends who vote a certain way. It's human nature, and it effects the people who make up the media too. Witness:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=03dx68qs2z4&feature=related

:laugh4:


By the way, this is too often true of academics as well. Philosophy is quite often written with an aim other than the truth, and history books are as well and have the additional limitation of having to rely on other history books for support, so that even good historians can have their view distorted by a school of thought about an era. The standard interpretations of the American revolution are absurd for example, and the critiques of it from liberals keep the basic myth but throw in a few bits of whatever leftist theory is current at the time about power or racism, etc.

This is why, despite the liberal obsession about wanting to think their iq is higher, intelligence has little to do with how smart someone is. The motivation for truth is just not that strong by nature, and without it greater intelligence too often just has a stupefying effect.

CYNICISM IS THE ONLY ANTIDOTE <-- AND IT WON'T WORK BECAUSE THAT SENTENCE IS CONTRADICTORY <--PARADOXICAL LOOP

[Ironside]

From my perspective, 94,3% of the Swedish population are idiots. I voted SD. Head over to my rampant feminazi thread and you will start to get why.

For curiousity, voting them to increase their influence on some issues or actually wanting them in power? For their stance on feminism isn't that it's gone to far on some issues, rather that is shouldn't exist at all. Their old party issue (that the new one is a toned down version of) had 3 out of context attacks on feminism for example.

[Kagemusha]

From my perspective, 94,3% of the Swedish population are idiots. I voted SD. Head over to my rampant feminazi thread and you will start to get why.

And this reminds me. Back in the good old days when we made war, You remember? When we kicked Norwegian behinds left to right and took control of your country (only to hand it back because we really couldn't be bothered some decades later)... I remember one old tale from that time.

It was a dug in situation, and absolutely nothing happened. After a while though, a Swedish corporal came up with an idea. He called in a sharpshooter squad on standby, and went:
"Öivind!!"
And 4 heads popped up: "Yeah?" - To be shot down.
"Erland!!" - again some heads pop up with a big retarded smile and and a question on their lips. To be shot down.
The Swedes tries again: "Stian!!" And again, Pop Pop Pop Pop Pop....

By now, the absolute epitome of Norwegian thinking abilities goes to work, snickering to himself. he has finally seen through the Swedes cunning plan.
He shouts: "Kadagar_AV!!"
Kadagar_AV replies: "Who's asking"
HoreTore pops up: It's me, HoreTore!!

Was this back when you still had Finish troops to fight your wars? As i seem to recall, that after loosing Finland to Russia. The Swedish wars kind of ended all together.:on_harhar:

[Kadagar_AV]

Was this back when you still had Finish troops to fight your wars? As i seem to recall, that after loosing Finland to Russia. The Swedish wars kind of ended all together.:on_harhar:

You know.... It, like, REALLY isn't very nice to jump into a discussion between Norway and Sweden claiming your obvious superiority.

I always pictured Finland like Sweden. Only with working immigration, more feminine girls, cheaper alcohol and and, oh, of course the abundance of knives. Ok so the last bit scare the **** out of me.

[Kagemusha]

Sorry, just could not resist the urge to get involved in light hearted neighbor row.~;)