Acmlm's Board - I2 Archive - World Affairs / Debate - MTSU Survery Confirms: Bush Supporters Illiterate
| User | Post |
drjayphd
Posts: 727/1477 |
Originally posted by Gavin
Originally posted by Kefka
What's odd is, I actually found that line funny.
and it's funny for me because you just took 3 minutes of your time arguing that yes, there are literate Bush supporters, and some illiterate Kerry supporters. And because i just don't fucking care. Now go away 
In other more fun political news, I was watching Govenor Mike Huckabee on CNN with Wolf Blitzer. When asked about Kerry Campaign officials' chances in Arkansas, (R) Huckabee replied they, "Would have a harder time selling Kerry than Ashlee Simpson would have selling a live album these days."
I'm certainly for Kerry and all, but damn, I like this guy. Poking fun at Ashlee Simpson's SNL lipsyncing debacle, weaving current american entertainment news into political analogies. Get this guy a desk and a microphone, he needs his own show.
You mean like Alan Keyes? Although that's more Michael Savage-style train/car/place crash (all in the same spot, mind ye) entertainment. |
Gavin
Posts: 274/799 |
Originally posted by Kefka
What's odd is, I actually found that line funny.
and it's funny for me because you just took 3 minutes of your time arguing that yes, there are literate Bush supporters, and some illiterate Kerry supporters. And because i just don't fucking care. Now go away
In other more fun political news, I was watching Govenor Mike Huckabee on CNN with Wolf Blitzer. When asked about Kerry Campaign officials' chances in Arkansas, (R) Huckabee replied they, "Would have a harder time selling Kerry than Ashlee Simpson would have selling a live album these days."
I'm certainly for Kerry and all, but damn, I like this guy. Poking fun at Ashlee Simpson's SNL lipsyncing debacle, weaving current american entertainment news into political analogies. Get this guy a desk and a microphone, he needs his own show. |
Kefka
Posts: 2314/3392 |
Originally posted by Gavin
hey Kefka, read much? :
What's odd is, I actually found that line funny. |
Gavin
Posts: 269/799 |
Originally posted by Kefka
"OMG! They are Republican! Therefore, it must mean they can't read!"
Seriously, this is a bunch of bullshit. If 96%+ of the nation is literate, and 43%+ of the voters in the nation are supporting Bush, how is it possible that they all can't read? Also, many rich people are Republican. Rich people usually have superior education to poor and middle class people. Rich people therefore can read most of the time. You know, I'm sure there are some Kerry supporters that can't read, either. However, both them and Bushies who can't read all fall into a ridiculously negligible group. Therefore, you can't hold the disabilities of a small few against an entire population, in this case, of Bush supporters.
hey Kefka, read much? :
Originally posted by Gavin, thanks for reading all the posts in this thread
it was more a joke than anything. i was only intending to report the study in a more humurous fashion than just posting a link.
|
alte Hexe
Posts: 1550/5458 |
Originally posted by hhallahh
Originally posted by Ziffski
In politics this is what we call creative bias, like what Jon Stewart does.
Confirmation bias.
/nitpick, unless you're really talking about something else
Creative (inplace of confirmation) bias is something that got thrown around the campaign office alot when our candidate's past was used in stastics that didn't really make a whole lot of sense, but were humorous...We used it inplace of a whole arseload of statistical terms. It saves time, and confusion.
Plus, I like to use it because it denotes a more comical term than such esoteric jargon that most politicians tend to use. Albeit said jargon is essential in confusing your opponent, the average citizen doesn't want to hear constitutional debates wherein all of the laws and regulations in Canadian parliament and legislation are taken into account...aka, every four minutes there is a sub-amendment voted for in order to ratify this or that. |
hhallahh
Posts: 408/607 |
Originally posted by Ziffski
In politics this is what we call creative bias, like what Jon Stewart does.
Confirmation bias.
/nitpick, unless you're really talking about something else |
alte Hexe
Posts: 1549/5458 |
Personally, I found it a funny anecdote relating to how many Bush supporters still believe the Iraqi Crusades are justified by those WMDs that don't exist.
In politics this is what we call creative bias, like what Jon Stewart does. |
Kefka
Posts: 2312/3392 |
"OMG! They are Republican! Therefore, it must mean they can't read!"
Seriously, this is a bunch of bullshit. If 96%+ of the nation is literate, and 43%+ of the voters in the nation are supporting Bush, how is it possible that they all can't read? Also, many rich people are Republican. Rich people usually have superior education to poor and middle class people. Rich people therefore can read most of the time. You know, I'm sure there are some Kerry supporters that can't read, either. However, both them and Bushies who can't read all fall into a ridiculously negligible group. Therefore, you can't hold the disabilities of a small few against an entire population, in this case, of Bush supporters. |
hhallahh
Posts: 406/607 |
Well.. okay. Just a general thing, then, because I've heard dozens of times people citing these kinds of studies as showing some kind of amazing ignorance among Republicans. Granted, there's probably some amazing ignorance.. but one could probably make an equally-biased survey that would shame Democrats as well. "Was Saddam Hussein connected to any terrorists?" That kind of thing. |
Gavin
Posts: 267/799 |
Originally posted by hhallahh
It must be nice to live in a world where you can just label anyone who disagrees with you as illiterate.
The problem with these kinds of studies is that it's the outcome is obviously biased by the question. This isn't a general-knowledge question like, "Who is the Speaker of the House?", it's a question which obviously would be influenced by one's political orientation in addition to one's general knowledge. If you really want to paint Bush supporters (in general) as ignorant, find a general knowledge study that says as much. Don't draw such conclusions from this study, though. All it shows is a well-known psychological information bias.
it was more a joke than anything. i was only intending to report the study in a more humurous fashion than just posting a link. |
hhallahh
Posts: 404/607 |
It must be nice to live in a world where you can just label anyone who disagrees with you as illiterate.
The problem with these kinds of studies is that it's the outcome is obviously biased by the question. This isn't a general-knowledge question like, "Who is the Speaker of the House?", it's a question which obviously would be influenced by one's political orientation in addition to one's general knowledge. If you really want to paint Bush supporters (in general) as ignorant, find a general knowledge study that says as much. Don't draw such conclusions from this study, though. All it shows is a well-known psychological information bias. |
Gavin
Posts: 266/799 |
MTSU Survery and Analysis.
http://www.pipa.org/OnlineReports/Pres_Election_04/Report10_21_04.pdf
I was linked to this a few days ago from electoral-vote.com, and was reminded of it again today when the owner of the site mentioned the Washington Post picking up the story.
"In recent months the American public has been presented reports by the Senate Intelligence Committee, and the heads of the Iraq survey group David Kay and Charles Duelfer (chosen by the president), concluding that before the war Iraq had neither weapons of mass destruction nor even a significant program for developing them. Nontheless, 72% of Bush supporters continued to hold the view that Iraq had actual WMD..."
you know, for the longest time i could never figure it out. But now i finally understand why Bush supporters still follow their man. I mean honestly, how can someone completely disregard the Official Bi-Partisan report conducted by the president's own handpicked man? Can people seriously be that disillusioned??
Then, sipping my morning coffee and finding this link, the pieces all fit so perfectly well together: Bush supporters simply can't read. They can't research issues for themselves and they actually believe and cling blindly to political rhetoric in place of facts.
(this post is for humor only, i meant to convey that with the "i approved this message" blurb, but i realize that wasn't very clear at all)
Hi, I'm Gavin and i approved this message. |
|
