Comparing voting outcomes to this poll to debunk the poll doesn’t really work because of the country’s low voter turnout. There isn’t a 50/50 split. Conservatives are less than half, maybe 35-40%. If voter turnout was 100%, there would hardly be any republicans in office because non-voter values align more with the Dems. It’s why Republicans essentially want to put up barriers to voting and don’t really care about low turnout.
Interesting point, GB. What do you attribute to low left leaning/ Dem voter turn out?
Not being able to get off work is a big one for urban low income families.
Its not just the voting polls. I can't find a single article that places the number of overall libs higher than cons in this country. But according to this poll it isn't even close.
When I googled number of liberals and conservatives, every one put the number of conservatives higher. I actually thought it was essentially equal, but reading through the first several sources they all quoted conservatives as a higher number. https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/there-are-more-liberals-but-not-fewer-conservatives/ that was like the 7th article down and I stopped looking after that.
So you don't find it odd that every source reports the overall number of conservatives higher, except for this poll? That doesn't make you question the source and motives of this poll and how they classified people as conservative or liberal?
Its not just the voting polls. I can't find a single article that places the number of overall libs higher than cons in this country. But according to this poll it isn't even close.
When I googled number of liberals and conservatives, every one put the number of conservatives higher. I actually thought it was essentially equal, but reading through the first several sources they all quoted conservatives as a higher number. https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/there-are-more-liberals-but-not-fewer-conservatives/ that was like the 7th article down and I stopped looking after that.
So you don't find it odd that every source reports the overall number of conservatives higher, except for this poll? That doesn't make you question the source and motives of this poll and how they classified people as conservative or liberal?
I'm confused. This poll asks about our education level, not our political alignment.
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
Comparing voting outcomes to this poll to debunk the poll doesn’t really work because of the country’s low voter turnout. There isn’t a 50/50 split. Conservatives are less than half, maybe 35-40%. If voter turnout was 100%, there would hardly be any republicans in office because non-voter values align more with the Dems. It’s why Republicans essentially want to put up barriers to voting and don’t really care about low turnout.
Interesting point, GB. What do you attribute to low left leaning/ Dem voter turn out?
Not being able to get off work is a big one for urban low income families.
I don't buy that. Aren't most polls open like 12 hours on big elections? And then what about early/mail in ballots? Anyone who wants to vote can very easily do so.
Comparing voting outcomes to this poll to debunk the poll doesn’t really work because of the country’s low voter turnout. There isn’t a 50/50 split. Conservatives are less than half, maybe 35-40%. If voter turnout was 100%, there would hardly be any republicans in office because non-voter values align more with the Dems. It’s why Republicans essentially want to put up barriers to voting and don’t really care about low turnout.
Interesting point, GB. What do you attribute to low left leaning/ Dem voter turn out?
Not being able to get off work is a big one for urban low income families.
I don't buy that. Aren't most polls open like 12 hours on big elections? And then what about early/mail in ballots? Anyone who wants to vote can very easily do so.
Fine. If it doesn't make a difference then let's move it to a Saturday.
Not trying to grind one. I was just responding to the comment, or article posted. I just didn't think their numbers added up and therefore wasn't a valid article to make that claim. No one seemed to question the article or the claim, but to me the numbers didn't add up, to me it seemed like there was some clear bias and fudging of some labels to make that statement. Just calling the article out for what I saw in it.
You asked GB to explain low voter turnout, and I just don't buy his explanation of work. It is incredibly easy to vote. I just think anyone who has a remote interest in doing so can with little difficulty.
The comment about protesters wasn't meant to target anyone, for all I know they all voted. I just think it would be an interesting study to see if they actually did, and why they didn't if they didn't.
Its not just the voting polls. I can't find a single article that places the number of overall libs higher than cons in this country. But according to this poll it isn't even close.
When I googled number of liberals and conservatives, every one put the number of conservatives higher. I actually thought it was essentially equal, but reading through the first several sources they all quoted conservatives as a higher number. https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/there-are-more-liberals-but-not-fewer-conservatives/ that was like the 7th article down and I stopped looking after that.
So you don't find it odd that every source reports the overall number of conservatives higher, except for this poll? That doesn't make you question the source and motives of this poll and how they classified people as conservative or liberal?
I'm confused. This poll asks about our education level, not our political alignment.
Someone posted an article linking political alignment to education. I was responding to that. Didn't mean to help derail the thread if that is what happened.
Not trying to grind one. I was just responding to the comment, or article posted. I just didn't think their numbers added up and therefore wasn't a valid article to make that claim. No one seemed to question the article or the claim, but to me the numbers didn't add up, to me it seemed like there was some clear bias and fudging of some labels to make that statement. Just calling the article out for what I saw in it.
You asked GB to explain low voter turnout, and I just don't buy his explanation of work. It is incredibly easy to vote. I just think anyone who has a remote interest in doing so can with little difficulty.
The comment about protesters wasn't meant to target anyone, for all I know they all voted. I just think it would be an interesting study to see if they actually did, and why they didn't if they didn't.
That was not GB's explanation, mace. More coffee!
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
I don't drink coffee. When I do I have a family recipe of 1/3 coffee, 1/3 sugar, 1/3 cream. Then I have to microwave it for 1 minute so it's warm. I had to cut back because its like drinking a warm milkshake in the mornings.
The article I posted is not the first one linking higher education level with more liberal attitudes; that’s been a common finding for years. If you object to what you assume to be the methodology, why not look up the methodology and see if you are correct, rather than guessing and casting aspersions based in your guesses.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
Well it's obvious to me anyway. It's interesting to see if people's social and political views can be linked to their level of educational attainment. It's a very common area of study in statistics
The less analytical you are the more conservative you are. I made a thread recently in here with a study...
The more education someone has, the more likely they are to be liberal. Maybe that inspired the thread?
So I'll admit I haven't read your link yet....but I also wonder if it's really education or financial stability. For some, they just want all the $ themselves. But for many, if you are financially stable and feel you have more than enough to live, you tend to be willing and wanting to help. And, if you have a college degree you are likely to be earning more $ and be more financially stable.
Of course though, going to college also means being exposed to a lot more people different from yourself and that will drive that behavior as well. If you live in the same town your whole life and don;t have $ to travel, if an issue doesn't effect you directly you can't understand it (or really don't try).
Oh - and professors certainly try to pass on their opinions of things. I had a lawyer teaching an Environmental law course that was a pretty solid activist...it certainly made the curriculum different than someone else. It's not all based on fact, it's based on fact and then someone's interpretation of other things.
I don't think the standard 4-year+ college is right for everyone. I do think that some extended job training really should be. Whether it be a technical school, apprenticeship, whatever. But something that hones a skill and critical thinking. All the while exposed to different points of view.
This topic comes up every couple of months, and I usually question the studies. I'm sure financial stability plays a major role. Also, the younger generation leans more left and also is more likely to go to college and graduate school. So it makes sense education would lean some to the left. But I don't think it is as big of a gap as most studies make it out to be. I didn't see how this particular study defined liberal or conservative, but I have seen many other studies where the definition was skewed in a way to favor one or the other. To me something doesn't add up with these findings right off the bat. If voting even remotely represented these findings, every election would be a landslide. Whatever parameters were used, liberals make up 35% of the total population while conservatives make up 27%. In any election that would be a landslide. The number of conservatives stays essentially the same, changing by just 3-4% throughout. the number of conservatives and liberals for HS or less is exactly the same, 26% for each group. So in no category do conservatives outnumber liberals. How can this be possible when the country is essentially divided if liberals so overwhelmingly favor education? If the point many are trying to make is that liberals are more educated, shouldn't conservatives dominate the HS and some school categories then? But they even lose or tie in those. In most categories the "mixed" makes up the largest group. My guess, and it's only a guess, is that whatever parameters used to define this study did not correctly identify the "mixed" group. I've seen it done before, it is easy to manipulate statistics like this by asking just a couple identifying questions (For example I've seen "do you believe in no exception abortion laws?" and if they answer "yes" they are conservative and if they answer "no" they are liberal, when in fact nearly all conservatives/pro-lifers do believe in exceptions. This is just used to misidentify groups). If the mixed group was truly mixed, and voting even remotely represented these findings, every election would be a landslide and there would be no republicans in office. In reality I would predict that the difference is small, probably 3-5%, and that would be accounted for the newer generation leaning left and having more education available/required.
As you you can see, a range of questions were asked to get an idea of what they call consistency of liberal or conservative ideological positions. So no, it isn’t at all based on one knock out question on abortion.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
BS - Political Science. University of Wisconsin. MA - Urban and Regional Planning. University of Iowa.
Why did I feel the need to share that? Some educated people certainly like to wear it on their sleeves and I guess I am guilty. And I am also guilty of idealizing the college experience...not the jobs you can get because of it, but transitional period between youth and adulthood. I'm glad I had it and I don't feel bad that I lived "the life" for four years (and two more in grad school, though that was much more of a grind).
That said, it's not for everyone. For me, even though I did not know what I wanted to do for a career when I was 18 (something that should not be frowned upon) I did know that traditional formal education was the direction I wanted to go. And I would not regret it even if I was flipping burgers today. I am aware that the average four-year-only graduate makes less money than the average trade school graduate. And that's fine; but I was not meant to be a tradesman.
Too many people idealize their own experiences: "I went to a two-year school for two years to save money. Be like me." "I went to trade school so I could make good money without having to take classes that don't have anything to do with the job I want. Be like me." "I went to college to explore options and pick up intangible skills. Be like me." Most people choose what's right for them. But too many of them project it as what's right for all.
But people like to brag about their education. And the blowback is that others like to tear it down. I know that every now and then you'll see a bill in some state legislature for free tuition at a state university. And inevitably someone will say "what about trade schools." I happen to think that's a good point. Only including bachelors degree paths is narrow and based on this ideal that if you don't go to college you've failed. However, what they'll usually say is "what about trade schools where someone can learn a useful skill rather than spending four years drinking and reading European poetry and getting out with no useful skills." So add educational path as one more way we're becoming divided.
1995 Milwaukee 1998 Alpine, Alpine 2003 Albany, Boston, Boston, Boston 2004 Boston, Boston 2006 Hartford, St. Paul (Petty), St. Paul (Petty) 2011 Alpine, Alpine 2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin
Well it's obvious to me anyway. It's interesting to see if people's social and political views can be linked to their level of educational attainment. It's a very common area of study in statistics
The less analytical you are the more conservative you are. I made a thread recently in here with a study...
The more education someone has, the more likely they are to be liberal. Maybe that inspired the thread?
So I'll admit I haven't read your link yet....but I also wonder if it's really education or financial stability. For some, they just want all the $ themselves. But for many, if you are financially stable and feel you have more than enough to live, you tend to be willing and wanting to help. And, if you have a college degree you are likely to be earning more $ and be more financially stable.
Of course though, going to college also means being exposed to a lot more people different from yourself and that will drive that behavior as well. If you live in the same town your whole life and don;t have $ to travel, if an issue doesn't effect you directly you can't understand it (or really don't try).
Oh - and professors certainly try to pass on their opinions of things. I had a lawyer teaching an Environmental law course that was a pretty solid activist...it certainly made the curriculum different than someone else. It's not all based on fact, it's based on fact and then someone's interpretation of other things.
I don't think the standard 4-year+ college is right for everyone. I do think that some extended job training really should be. Whether it be a technical school, apprenticeship, whatever. But something that hones a skill and critical thinking. All the while exposed to different points of view.
This topic comes up every couple of months, and I usually question the studies. I'm sure financial stability plays a major role. Also, the younger generation leans more left and also is more likely to go to college and graduate school. So it makes sense education would lean some to the left. But I don't think it is as big of a gap as most studies make it out to be. I didn't see how this particular study defined liberal or conservative, but I have seen many other studies where the definition was skewed in a way to favor one or the other. To me something doesn't add up with these findings right off the bat. If voting even remotely represented these findings, every election would be a landslide. Whatever parameters were used, liberals make up 35% of the total population while conservatives make up 27%. In any election that would be a landslide. The number of conservatives stays essentially the same, changing by just 3-4% throughout. the number of conservatives and liberals for HS or less is exactly the same, 26% for each group. So in no category do conservatives outnumber liberals. How can this be possible when the country is essentially divided if liberals so overwhelmingly favor education? If the point many are trying to make is that liberals are more educated, shouldn't conservatives dominate the HS and some school categories then? But they even lose or tie in those. In most categories the "mixed" makes up the largest group. My guess, and it's only a guess, is that whatever parameters used to define this study did not correctly identify the "mixed" group. I've seen it done before, it is easy to manipulate statistics like this by asking just a couple identifying questions (For example I've seen "do you believe in no exception abortion laws?" and if they answer "yes" they are conservative and if they answer "no" they are liberal, when in fact nearly all conservatives/pro-lifers do believe in exceptions. This is just used to misidentify groups). If the mixed group was truly mixed, and voting even remotely represented these findings, every election would be a landslide and there would be no republicans in office. In reality I would predict that the difference is small, probably 3-5%, and that would be accounted for the newer generation leaning left and having more education available/required.
As you you can see, a range of questions were asked to get an idea of what they call consistency of liberal or conservative ideological positions. So no, it isn’t at all based on one knock out question on abortion.
Brian asked what axe I have to grind. I wouldn't call it that, but here it is. It seems anything pro-liberal is never questioned, and many take every opportunity to criticize everything from the conservative side (not all, but several). Since no one can post anything pro-conservative without someone relating them to Hitler (again, not all, but there are definitely some who make it a daily routine to belittle anyone who disagrees with them), I wanted to point out the issues I had with this article, since I doubt anyone else will. That was all.
I never claimed that article did. Just that it is easy to skew that data and it is done very often. I actually read that source as well, all I saw was"based on an analysis of their opinions about the role and performance of government, social issues, the environment and other topics" as the guide for lib or cons. Sounds very vague to me. I still have no idea what that criteria was with government, environment and "other" issues. And still does not change the fact that the poll lists 35% of the total population as liberal while 27% as conservative. That is not close to accepted values I have seen anyone else report, so that is why I say the numbers don't add up. Most sources have it almost flipped. That is why I believe there was wiggle room with their criteria.
If I did the same study with men and women and reported that more men have graduate level education than women, but reported the total population as 65% men and 35% women, does that not raise red flags with my study? 65% of our population is not men, just like liberals and conservatives are not 35% and 27% as reported by this study. So that leads me to the conclusion that their criteria for labeling someone as liberal or conservative is different than everyone else's. That makes me question the results.
Well it's obvious to me anyway. It's interesting to see if people's social and political views can be linked to their level of educational attainment. It's a very common area of study in statistics
The less analytical you are the more conservative you are. I made a thread recently in here with a study...
The more education someone has, the more likely they are to be liberal. Maybe that inspired the thread?
So I'll admit I haven't read your link yet....but I also wonder if it's really education or financial stability. For some, they just want all the $ themselves. But for many, if you are financially stable and feel you have more than enough to live, you tend to be willing and wanting to help. And, if you have a college degree you are likely to be earning more $ and be more financially stable.
Of course though, going to college also means being exposed to a lot more people different from yourself and that will drive that behavior as well. If you live in the same town your whole life and don;t have $ to travel, if an issue doesn't effect you directly you can't understand it (or really don't try).
Oh - and professors certainly try to pass on their opinions of things. I had a lawyer teaching an Environmental law course that was a pretty solid activist...it certainly made the curriculum different than someone else. It's not all based on fact, it's based on fact and then someone's interpretation of other things.
I don't think the standard 4-year+ college is right for everyone. I do think that some extended job training really should be. Whether it be a technical school, apprenticeship, whatever. But something that hones a skill and critical thinking. All the while exposed to different points of view.
This topic comes up every couple of months, and I usually question the studies. I'm sure financial stability plays a major role. Also, the younger generation leans more left and also is more likely to go to college and graduate school. So it makes sense education would lean some to the left. But I don't think it is as big of a gap as most studies make it out to be. I didn't see how this particular study defined liberal or conservative, but I have seen many other studies where the definition was skewed in a way to favor one or the other. To me something doesn't add up with these findings right off the bat. If voting even remotely represented these findings, every election would be a landslide. Whatever parameters were used, liberals make up 35% of the total population while conservatives make up 27%. In any election that would be a landslide. The number of conservatives stays essentially the same, changing by just 3-4% throughout. the number of conservatives and liberals for HS or less is exactly the same, 26% for each group. So in no category do conservatives outnumber liberals. How can this be possible when the country is essentially divided if liberals so overwhelmingly favor education? If the point many are trying to make is that liberals are more educated, shouldn't conservatives dominate the HS and some school categories then? But they even lose or tie in those. In most categories the "mixed" makes up the largest group. My guess, and it's only a guess, is that whatever parameters used to define this study did not correctly identify the "mixed" group. I've seen it done before, it is easy to manipulate statistics like this by asking just a couple identifying questions (For example I've seen "do you believe in no exception abortion laws?" and if they answer "yes" they are conservative and if they answer "no" they are liberal, when in fact nearly all conservatives/pro-lifers do believe in exceptions. This is just used to misidentify groups). If the mixed group was truly mixed, and voting even remotely represented these findings, every election would be a landslide and there would be no republicans in office. In reality I would predict that the difference is small, probably 3-5%, and that would be accounted for the newer generation leaning left and having more education available/required.
As you you can see, a range of questions were asked to get an idea of what they call consistency of liberal or conservative ideological positions. So no, it isn’t at all based on one knock out question on abortion.
Brian asked what axe I have to grind. I wouldn't call it that, but here it is. It seems anything pro-liberal is never questioned, and many take every opportunity to criticize everything from the conservative side (not all, but several). Since no one can post anything pro-conservative without someone relating them to Hitler (again, not all, but there are definitely some who make it a daily routine to belittle anyone who disagrees with them), I wanted to point out the issues I had with this article, since I doubt anyone else will. That was all.
I never claimed that article did. Just that it is easy to skew that data and it is done very often. I actually read that source as well, all I saw was"based on an analysis of their opinions about the role and performance of government, social issues, the environment and other topics" as the guide for lib or cons. Sounds very vague to me. I still have no idea what that criteria was with government, environment and "other" issues. And still does not change the fact that the poll lists 35% of the total population as liberal while 27% as conservative. That is not close to accepted values I have seen anyone else report, so that is why I say the numbers don't add up. Most sources have it almost flipped. That is why I believe there was wiggle room with their criteria.
If I did the same study with men and women and reported that more men have graduated education than women, but reported the total population as 65% men and 35% women, does that not raise red flags with my study? 65% of our population is not men, just like liberals and conservatives are not 35% and 27% as reported by this study. So that leads me to the conclusion that their criteria for labeling someone as liberal or conservative is different than everyone else's. That makes me question the results.
Never mind then
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
Comparing voting outcomes to this poll to debunk the poll doesn’t really work because of the country’s low voter turnout. There isn’t a 50/50 split. Conservatives are less than half, maybe 35-40%. If voter turnout was 100%, there would hardly be any republicans in office because non-voter values align more with the Dems. It’s why Republicans essentially want to put up barriers to voting and don’t really care about low turnout.
Interesting point, GB. What do you attribute to low left leaning/ Dem voter turn out?
I think big ones are the lack of feeling represented by the people running for office, and also liberals tend to have a ambivilant or mixed feelings about the people and the issues. Conservatives tend to rally around a few core issues that a majority of them agree on, and they will then rally around the politician who embodies these.
each side only tends to give a shit if they perceive their issues to be in peril. after 8 years of obama and all the progress.....the left got complacent. people were announcing the death of the republican party and the political right.
Comparing voting outcomes to this poll to debunk the poll doesn’t really work because of the country’s low voter turnout. There isn’t a 50/50 split. Conservatives are less than half, maybe 35-40%. If voter turnout was 100%, there would hardly be any republicans in office because non-voter values align more with the Dems. It’s why Republicans essentially want to put up barriers to voting and don’t really care about low turnout.
Interesting point, GB. What do you attribute to low left leaning/ Dem voter turn out?
I think big ones are the lack of feeling represented by the people running for office, and also liberals tend to have a ambivilant or mixed feelings about the people and the issues. Conservatives tend to rally around a few core issues that a majority of them agree on, and they will then rally around the politician who embodies these.
I tend to think that ambivalence is unfortunately a result of boomer aging, maybe aging in general- it becomes easy to make excuses for staying home. And, generally, many people tend to become more conservative as they age.
What I wish more more than anything is for people to drop the notions of "conservative" (root word is "conserve") and "liberal" (a rather ambivalent term anyway) and do what makes sense in order to care for a balanced, healthy planet. Such a simple and naive sentiment, true, but it's what makes sense to me.
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
I think it's true, but I'm curious to know what others think about what Brian said. That many tend to become more conservative as they age. I am particularly interested in this because it's not at all true for me personally. I am becoming more and more liberal as I age... So why do a lot of people become more conservative in their older years?? I have considered the possible reasons, but none of them really make sense to me at the end of the day, besides the ones related to much older people who start getting that whole fearful old person thing going on, and so are more susceptible to right wing fear mongering.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
Twenty years ago I would have told you that a 2 year college was either a waste of time or for those who didn't want to excel beyond being a common blue collar laborer. I was 18 and basing it off of what I knew growing up in a low income farming family where I saw my dad struggle between a night shift job and farming for years. The man was a jack-of-all trades and could pretty much fix or repair anything, but that didn't equate to much income. He welded all of our broken implement equipment, built an add-on to the house from scratch, roofed the house, etc. You name it, I watched him do it and helped where I could. I learned a lot from him and gained the work ethic I have today.
There wasn't a lot of concern over food, since we raised a lot of our own and never issues of clothing, but I was a kid, so I really didn't care that much about those things since they were provided. We got 3 TV channels (5 on a good day with the antenna pointed the right way) and I had a Nintendo so everything was right in my world. I lived in the country and broke my back shoveling shit, picking rock and tossing hay bales all summer long. It was just how life was, but I knew it wasn't what I wanted my future to be. I was fortunate to follow in my sister's footsteps as first generation college grads from a 4 year institution. It was hard for me to fit in at a 4 year with all the city kids, but it was one of the best experiences of my life. I used loans and worked my ass off by getting a job with the university late in my junior year so I was able to get half of my classes covered as a benefit while I worked overnights my senior year. I made key friends that I still have to this day and advanced my career options with a BA in Criminal Justice and a minor in Pyschology (I really wanted the psych degree, but didn't want to add the years to my schooling). I didn't stick out grad school, which I regret because it is the only thing holding me back from a lot of positions beyond my current leadership role.
One of the best experiences I have had is working at a 2 year tech college. The trades are invaluable to the economy and everyday life. Having worked here, I think anyone who is unsure about their career field should start in a tech college to save the money. It is definitely something I will be advising my kids to do even if they know they want a 4 year degree. As long as the general credits are transferable, it's a win-win and gives you the flexibility to decide what's right for you.
I don't think that everyone needs to go to college or that it is right for everyone. I do think that it can be very limiting for future jobs and advancements without any degree or trade skill, but everyone has to find their own way. Overall, not going to college or even choosing not to finish high school does not mean that someone shouldn't or can't be well versed in current events or knowledgeable. No one should ever be judged for their education or lack of.
I think it's true, but I'm curious to know what others think about what Brian said. That many tend to become more conservative as they age. I am particularly interested in this because it's not at all true for me personally. I am becoming more and more liberal as I age... So why do a lot of people become more conservative in their older years?? I have considered the possible reasons, but none of them really make sense to me at the end of the day, besides the ones related to much older people who start getting that whole fearful old person thing going on, and so are more susceptible to right wing fear mongering.
It also soesn’t apply to me personally, but Psychology Today theorizes that it’s based on three areas: slower brain processing speed which leads us to economize our thinking and rely on black and white views. The second is being less open to new experiences. The third is familiarity and we become more predictable as we age. I suppose the payoff for this is fewer risks helps up maintain what we have in out life.
I have a doctorate as part of my three mathematics based degrees, but I am not sure I am necessarily a frequent user here? I was a research scientist for a while, but sadly I have fallen back to some part-time teaching.
So I agree with the saying 'a PhD and $4 will get you a cup of coffee.'
I would like to add that 99.9% of my commenting on this site is done after drinking way too much Scotch, whereas alcohol was only heavily involved in my qualification getting about 50% of the time. So that may muddy the waters further on the relationship, or lack of, between commenting and academic level.
I have a doctorate as part of my three mathematics based degrees, but I am not sure I am necessarily a frequent user here? I was a research scientist for a while, but sadly I have fallen back to some part-time teaching.
So I agree with the saying 'a PhD and $4 will get you a cup of coffee.'
I would like to add that 99.9% of my commenting on this site is done after drinking way too much Scotch, whereas alcohol was only heavily involved in my qualification getting about 50% of the time. So that may muddy the waters further on the relationship, or lack of, between commenting and academic level.
I sometimes drink and post...shit is hilarious lol.
I think it's true, but I'm curious to know what others think about what Brian said. That many tend to become more conservative as they age. I am particularly interested in this because it's not at all true for me personally. I am becoming more and more liberal as I age... So why do a lot of people become more conservative in their older years?? I have considered the possible reasons, but none of them really make sense to me at the end of the day, besides the ones related to much older people who start getting that whole fearful old person thing going on, and so are more susceptible to right wing fear mongering.
I honestly think kids make a lot more people conservative. Not that I am a republican in any way but it happened to me and a lot of my high school and college friends (i'm 40 like you Allie). A lot of our views on different topics went more to the right. In a way I think a lot of younger adults identify being liberal because they think they are going to save the world, turns out that is not the case lol. I don't know Allie, it's a tough call and hard to explain.
Well it's obvious to me anyway. It's interesting to see if people's social and political views can be linked to their level of educational attainment. It's a very common area of study in statistics
The less analytical you are the more conservative you are. I made a thread recently in here with a study...
The more education someone has, the more likely they are to be liberal. Maybe that inspired the thread?
Yeah. Check out that study I posted in here.
Adelaide 17/11/2009, Melbourne 20/11/2009, Sydney 22/11/2009, Melbourne (Big Day Out Festival) 24/01/2014
Comments
When I googled number of liberals and conservatives, every one put the number of conservatives higher. I actually thought it was essentially equal, but reading through the first several sources they all quoted conservatives as a higher number.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/there-are-more-liberals-but-not-fewer-conservatives/
that was like the 7th article down and I stopped looking after that.
So you don't find it odd that every source reports the overall number of conservatives higher, except for this poll? That doesn't make you question the source and motives of this poll and how they classified people as conservative or liberal?
And then what about early/mail in ballots?
Anyone who wants to vote can very easily do so.
I was just responding to the comment, or article posted. I just didn't think their numbers added up and therefore wasn't a valid article to make that claim. No one seemed to question the article or the claim, but to me the numbers didn't add up, to me it seemed like there was some clear bias and fudging of some labels to make that statement. Just calling the article out for what I saw in it.
You asked GB to explain low voter turnout, and I just don't buy his explanation of work. It is incredibly easy to vote. I just think anyone who has a remote interest in doing so can with little difficulty.
The comment about protesters wasn't meant to target anyone, for all I know they all voted. I just think it would be an interesting study to see if they actually did, and why they didn't if they didn't.
http://www.people-press.org/2016/04/26/a-wider-ideological-gap-between-more-and-less-educated-adults/
As you you can see, a range of questions were asked to get an idea of what they call consistency of liberal or conservative ideological positions. So no, it isn’t at all based on one knock out question on abortion.
MA - Urban and Regional Planning. University of Iowa.
Why did I feel the need to share that? Some educated people certainly like to wear it on their sleeves and I guess I am guilty. And I am also guilty of idealizing the college experience...not the jobs you can get because of it, but transitional period between youth and adulthood. I'm glad I had it and I don't feel bad that I lived "the life" for four years (and two more in grad school, though that was much more of a grind).
That said, it's not for everyone. For me, even though I did not know what I wanted to do for a career when I was 18 (something that should not be frowned upon) I did know that traditional formal education was the direction I wanted to go. And I would not regret it even if I was flipping burgers today. I am aware that the average four-year-only graduate makes less money than the average trade school graduate. And that's fine; but I was not meant to be a tradesman.
Too many people idealize their own experiences: "I went to a two-year school for two years to save money. Be like me." "I went to trade school so I could make good money without having to take classes that don't have anything to do with the job I want. Be like me." "I went to college to explore options and pick up intangible skills. Be like me." Most people choose what's right for them. But too many of them project it as what's right for all.
But people like to brag about their education. And the blowback is that others like to tear it down. I know that every now and then you'll see a bill in some state legislature for free tuition at a state university. And inevitably someone will say "what about trade schools." I happen to think that's a good point. Only including bachelors degree paths is narrow and based on this ideal that if you don't go to college you've failed. However, what they'll usually say is "what about trade schools where someone can learn a useful skill rather than spending four years drinking and reading European poetry and getting out with no useful skills." So add educational path as one more way we're becoming divided.
2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin
I never claimed that article did. Just that it is easy to skew that data and it is done very often. I actually read that source as well, all I saw was"based on an analysis of their opinions about the role and performance of government, social issues, the environment and other topics" as the guide for lib or cons.
Sounds very vague to me. I still have no idea what that criteria was with government, environment and "other" issues.
And still does not change the fact that the poll lists 35% of the total population as liberal while 27% as conservative. That is not close to accepted values I have seen anyone else report, so that is why I say the numbers don't add up. Most sources have it almost flipped. That is why I believe there was wiggle room with their criteria.
If I did the same study with men and women and reported that more men have graduate level education than women, but reported the total population as 65% men and 35% women, does that not raise red flags with my study? 65% of our population is not men, just like liberals and conservatives are not 35% and 27% as reported by this study. So that leads me to the conclusion that their criteria for labeling someone as liberal or conservative is different than everyone else's. That makes me question the results.
what a ugly ass wake up call that was.
www.headstonesband.com
loved university.
There wasn't a lot of concern over food, since we raised a lot of our own and never issues of clothing, but I was a kid, so I really didn't care that much about those things since they were provided. We got 3 TV channels (5 on a good day with the antenna pointed the right way) and I had a Nintendo so everything was right in my world. I lived in the country and broke my back shoveling shit, picking rock and tossing hay bales all summer long. It was just how life was, but I knew it wasn't what I wanted my future to be. I was fortunate to follow in my sister's footsteps as first generation college grads from a 4 year institution. It was hard for me to fit in at a 4 year with all the city kids, but it was one of the best experiences of my life. I used loans and worked my ass off by getting a job with the university late in my junior year so I was able to get half of my classes covered as a benefit while I worked overnights my senior year. I made key friends that I still have to this day and advanced my career options with a BA in Criminal Justice and a minor in Pyschology (I really wanted the psych degree, but didn't want to add the years to my schooling). I didn't stick out grad school, which I regret because it is the only thing holding me back from a lot of positions beyond my current leadership role.
One of the best experiences I have had is working at a 2 year tech college. The trades are invaluable to the economy and everyday life. Having worked here, I think anyone who is unsure about their career field should start in a tech college to save the money. It is definitely something I will be advising my kids to do even if they know they want a 4 year degree. As long as the general credits are transferable, it's a win-win and gives you the flexibility to decide what's right for you.
I don't think that everyone needs to go to college or that it is right for everyone. I do think that it can be very limiting for future jobs and advancements without any degree or trade skill, but everyone has to find their own way. Overall, not going to college or even choosing not to finish high school does not mean that someone shouldn't or can't be well versed in current events or knowledgeable. No one should ever be judged for their education or lack of.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/mr-personality/201410/why-are-older-people-more-conservative%3famp
So that may muddy the waters further on the relationship, or lack of, between commenting and academic level.
I honestly think kids make a lot more people conservative. Not that I am a republican in any way but it happened to me and a lot of my high school and college friends (i'm 40 like you Allie). A lot of our views on different topics went more to the right.
In a way I think a lot of younger adults identify being liberal because they think they are going to save the world, turns out that is not the case lol.
I don't know Allie, it's a tough call and hard to explain.