Which Political Party Is Violent?
Comments
-
um, no you didn't. how do you separate the two but link the two directly? how does the question become "what causes..." right afterCM189191 said:HughFreakingDillon said:
@CM189191 ?HughFreakingDillon said:
saying there is a correlation to red states having a higher incidence of violent crime is the same as data showing a correlation to higher crime rates in states with higher minority populations. would you agree?CM189191 said:
Isn't the point of an election to elect persons that represent the population?HughFreakingDillon said:so we're drawing conclusions on which states have a higher percentage of violence based on party choice, when the voter turnout is typically less than 50%? and no one sees anything wrong with this test sample?
For example, if 50% of the people vote, and it's a 60 / 40 split for Republican / Democrat. Then it is safe to assume the total population falls along that same 60 / 40 split.
Sure, a smaller test sample leads to a higher margin of error. But I would hardly call 4 separate studies, examining 4 different criteria, across all 50 states a 'small test sample'. There is a very clear correlation here.
if so, while those two facts might coexist, they show no relation to each other without knowing who is actually committing those crimes.
again, correlation does not equal causation.
I was very clear at separating correlation and causationCM189191 said:So we agree, "There is a high correlation between right-leaning states and higher crime rates"
So then the question becomes, "What causes right-leaning states to have higher crime rates than their left-leaning counterparts?"
Do you really think Texas skews towards #46 in safety because of it's big cities; when New York, Illinois and California sit at #2, #20 & #23?
"there is a high correlation....". that's directly linking correlation and causation. it's a massive leap that cannot legitimately be made. you can't ask the question of what causes one group to act a certain way before you have determined they actually do.Your boos mean nothing to me, for I have seen what makes you cheer0 -
ftfa: "These crime rate findings hold despite the fact that blue states have a higher population of residents in urban areas, which tend to have higher crime rates than rural areas."PJPOWER said:
Do all states have this?CM189191 said:
There is a lot of farmland outside of Texas, same problems happening in IL, IA, ND, SD, MN, MO.... One of the potential factors the study specifically points to is income. States identified with higher crime rates also correlate to lower per capita incomes. Conservative states have a lower average income per capita. "Which political party is more violent?" It appears conservative policies in conservative states driven by conservative voters correlate with increase crime rates in those states. I have yet to see anything that indicates otherwise....show me something!PJPOWER said:
Or weather, or interstate crime, or demographics, gang proliferation or or or or. At least you are beginning to narrow it slightly by mentioning one other causal factor...just need to realize that there are a thousand more out there.CM189191 said:
How so? There were 4 different studies indicating conservative states have higher crime rates. It's either their policies or their people who are creating criminals. Given the strength of correlation, it's probably both.tbergs said:
Nope, and neither do youCM189191 said:
so you got nothin' then?tbergs said:
The data does not indicate who is committing the crime in these states. You are drawing a conclusion based on what you think. Could that correlation be made, yes, but it also could be argued that there is higher crime for several other reasons that couple in with that data.CM189191 said:
...by all means...show me information to the contrary...PJPOWER said:
A better sample in regards to political officiation vs violence would be to compare voting records to those with violent criminal records...but once again, you still are only getting a small sample of the population...voters.CM189191 said:
Isn't the point of an election to elect persons that represent the population?HughFreakingDillon said:so we're drawing conclusions on which states have a higher percentage of violence based on party choice, when the voter turnout is typically less than 50%? and no one sees anything wrong with this test sample?
For example, if 50% of the people vote, and it's a 60 / 40 split for Republican / Democrat. Then it is safe to assume the total population falls along that same 60 / 40 split.
Sure, a smaller test sample leads to a higher margin of error. But I would hardly call 4 separate studies, examining 4 different criteria, across all 50 states a 'small test sample'. There is a very clear correlation here.
Until then, I'll hang my hat on the data that actually exists.
In Texas, for instance, there were huge issues with meth related property crimes. Why more in Texas? It was actually due to the availability of agricultural products/chemicals used to produce the drug...Farmers are still having to deal with meth heads trying to get into their ammonia tanks...so many factors!
https://www.dps.texas.gov/administration/crime_records/pages/txCriminalAlienStatistics.htm
And refer to page 4 of this link:
http://www.dps.texas.gov/crimereports/15/execSummary.pdf
As you can see, the high percentages of violent crimes comes from the large cities, which tend to be liberal leaning. I feel that these stats dig way deeper into the issue than what you provided. Check out Houston and San Antonio!!!
And btw, violent crime actually reduced quite a bit in New York City under a republican mayor, so I'm not sure your logic holds up there either.0 -
“There are, to be sure, many other variables to be considered other than partisanship when examining the different rates of crime between states.“CM189191 said:
ftfa: "These crime rate findings hold despite the fact that blue states have a higher population of residents in urban areas, which tend to have higher crime rates than rural areas."PJPOWER said:
Do all states have this?CM189191 said:
There is a lot of farmland outside of Texas, same problems happening in IL, IA, ND, SD, MN, MO.... One of the potential factors the study specifically points to is income. States identified with higher crime rates also correlate to lower per capita incomes. Conservative states have a lower average income per capita. "Which political party is more violent?" It appears conservative policies in conservative states driven by conservative voters correlate with increase crime rates in those states. I have yet to see anything that indicates otherwise....show me something!PJPOWER said:
Or weather, or interstate crime, or demographics, gang proliferation or or or or. At least you are beginning to narrow it slightly by mentioning one other causal factor...just need to realize that there are a thousand more out there.CM189191 said:
How so? There were 4 different studies indicating conservative states have higher crime rates. It's either their policies or their people who are creating criminals. Given the strength of correlation, it's probably both.tbergs said:
Nope, and neither do youCM189191 said:
so you got nothin' then?tbergs said:
The data does not indicate who is committing the crime in these states. You are drawing a conclusion based on what you think. Could that correlation be made, yes, but it also could be argued that there is higher crime for several other reasons that couple in with that data.CM189191 said:
...by all means...show me information to the contrary...PJPOWER said:
A better sample in regards to political officiation vs violence would be to compare voting records to those with violent criminal records...but once again, you still are only getting a small sample of the population...voters.CM189191 said:
Isn't the point of an election to elect persons that represent the population?HughFreakingDillon said:so we're drawing conclusions on which states have a higher percentage of violence based on party choice, when the voter turnout is typically less than 50%? and no one sees anything wrong with this test sample?
For example, if 50% of the people vote, and it's a 60 / 40 split for Republican / Democrat. Then it is safe to assume the total population falls along that same 60 / 40 split.
Sure, a smaller test sample leads to a higher margin of error. But I would hardly call 4 separate studies, examining 4 different criteria, across all 50 states a 'small test sample'. There is a very clear correlation here.
Until then, I'll hang my hat on the data that actually exists.
In Texas, for instance, there were huge issues with meth related property crimes. Why more in Texas? It was actually due to the availability of agricultural products/chemicals used to produce the drug...Farmers are still having to deal with meth heads trying to get into their ammonia tanks...so many factors!
https://www.dps.texas.gov/administration/crime_records/pages/txCriminalAlienStatistics.htm
And refer to page 4 of this link:
http://www.dps.texas.gov/crimereports/15/execSummary.pdf
As you can see, the high percentages of violent crimes comes from the large cities, which tend to be liberal leaning. I feel that these stats dig way deeper into the issue than what you provided. Check out Houston and San Antonio!!!
And btw, violent crime actually reduced quite a bit in New York City under a republican mayor, so I'm not sure your logic holds up there either.
Did you forget that part?Post edited by PJPOWER on0 -
That may be true. That does not nullify the thesis of the article, though: Red States Have Higher Crime Rates Than Blue StatesPJPOWER said:
“There are, to be sure, many other variables to be considered other than partisanship when examining the different rates of crime between states.“CM189191 said:
ftfa: "These crime rate findings hold despite the fact that blue states have a higher population of residents in urban areas, which tend to have higher crime rates than rural areas."PJPOWER said:
Do all states have this?CM189191 said:
There is a lot of farmland outside of Texas, same problems happening in IL, IA, ND, SD, MN, MO.... One of the potential factors the study specifically points to is income. States identified with higher crime rates also correlate to lower per capita incomes. Conservative states have a lower average income per capita. "Which political party is more violent?" It appears conservative policies in conservative states driven by conservative voters correlate with increase crime rates in those states. I have yet to see anything that indicates otherwise....show me something!PJPOWER said:
Or weather, or interstate crime, or demographics, gang proliferation or or or or. At least you are beginning to narrow it slightly by mentioning one other causal factor...just need to realize that there are a thousand more out there.CM189191 said:
How so? There were 4 different studies indicating conservative states have higher crime rates. It's either their policies or their people who are creating criminals. Given the strength of correlation, it's probably both.tbergs said:
Nope, and neither do youCM189191 said:
so you got nothin' then?tbergs said:
The data does not indicate who is committing the crime in these states. You are drawing a conclusion based on what you think. Could that correlation be made, yes, but it also could be argued that there is higher crime for several other reasons that couple in with that data.CM189191 said:
...by all means...show me information to the contrary...PJPOWER said:
A better sample in regards to political officiation vs violence would be to compare voting records to those with violent criminal records...but once again, you still are only getting a small sample of the population...voters.CM189191 said:
Isn't the point of an election to elect persons that represent the population?HughFreakingDillon said:so we're drawing conclusions on which states have a higher percentage of violence based on party choice, when the voter turnout is typically less than 50%? and no one sees anything wrong with this test sample?
For example, if 50% of the people vote, and it's a 60 / 40 split for Republican / Democrat. Then it is safe to assume the total population falls along that same 60 / 40 split.
Sure, a smaller test sample leads to a higher margin of error. But I would hardly call 4 separate studies, examining 4 different criteria, across all 50 states a 'small test sample'. There is a very clear correlation here.
Until then, I'll hang my hat on the data that actually exists.
In Texas, for instance, there were huge issues with meth related property crimes. Why more in Texas? It was actually due to the availability of agricultural products/chemicals used to produce the drug...Farmers are still having to deal with meth heads trying to get into their ammonia tanks...so many factors!
https://www.dps.texas.gov/administration/crime_records/pages/txCriminalAlienStatistics.htm
And refer to page 4 of this link:
http://www.dps.texas.gov/crimereports/15/execSummary.pdf
As you can see, the high percentages of violent crimes comes from the large cities, which tend to be liberal leaning. I feel that these stats dig way deeper into the issue than what you provided. Check out Houston and San Antonio!!!
And btw, violent crime actually reduced quite a bit in New York City under a republican mayor, so I'm not sure your logic holds up there either.
Did you forget that part?0 -
But that was not your conclusion, was it? You concluded that must mean conservatives are committing the crimes. The article clearly states that there are other veriables to consider when considering partisanship. You concluded what the study you presented disclaimed. That nullified your conclusion as it is in direct opposition to the exact study that you used to draw that conclusion.CM189191 said:
That may be true. That does not nullify the thesis of the article, though: Red States Have Higher Crime Rates Than Blue StatesPJPOWER said:
“There are, to be sure, many other variables to be considered other than partisanship when examining the different rates of crime between states.“CM189191 said:
ftfa: "These crime rate findings hold despite the fact that blue states have a higher population of residents in urban areas, which tend to have higher crime rates than rural areas."PJPOWER said:
Do all states have this?CM189191 said:
There is a lot of farmland outside of Texas, same problems happening in IL, IA, ND, SD, MN, MO.... One of the potential factors the study specifically points to is income. States identified with higher crime rates also correlate to lower per capita incomes. Conservative states have a lower average income per capita. "Which political party is more violent?" It appears conservative policies in conservative states driven by conservative voters correlate with increase crime rates in those states. I have yet to see anything that indicates otherwise....show me something!PJPOWER said:
Or weather, or interstate crime, or demographics, gang proliferation or or or or. At least you are beginning to narrow it slightly by mentioning one other causal factor...just need to realize that there are a thousand more out there.CM189191 said:
How so? There were 4 different studies indicating conservative states have higher crime rates. It's either their policies or their people who are creating criminals. Given the strength of correlation, it's probably both.tbergs said:
Nope, and neither do youCM189191 said:
so you got nothin' then?tbergs said:
The data does not indicate who is committing the crime in these states. You are drawing a conclusion based on what you think. Could that correlation be made, yes, but it also could be argued that there is higher crime for several other reasons that couple in with that data.CM189191 said:
...by all means...show me information to the contrary...PJPOWER said:
A better sample in regards to political officiation vs violence would be to compare voting records to those with violent criminal records...but once again, you still are only getting a small sample of the population...voters.CM189191 said:
Isn't the point of an election to elect persons that represent the population?HughFreakingDillon said:so we're drawing conclusions on which states have a higher percentage of violence based on party choice, when the voter turnout is typically less than 50%? and no one sees anything wrong with this test sample?
For example, if 50% of the people vote, and it's a 60 / 40 split for Republican / Democrat. Then it is safe to assume the total population falls along that same 60 / 40 split.
Sure, a smaller test sample leads to a higher margin of error. But I would hardly call 4 separate studies, examining 4 different criteria, across all 50 states a 'small test sample'. There is a very clear correlation here.
Until then, I'll hang my hat on the data that actually exists.
In Texas, for instance, there were huge issues with meth related property crimes. Why more in Texas? It was actually due to the availability of agricultural products/chemicals used to produce the drug...Farmers are still having to deal with meth heads trying to get into their ammonia tanks...so many factors!
https://www.dps.texas.gov/administration/crime_records/pages/txCriminalAlienStatistics.htm
And refer to page 4 of this link:
http://www.dps.texas.gov/crimereports/15/execSummary.pdf
As you can see, the high percentages of violent crimes comes from the large cities, which tend to be liberal leaning. I feel that these stats dig way deeper into the issue than what you provided. Check out Houston and San Antonio!!!
And btw, violent crime actually reduced quite a bit in New York City under a republican mayor, so I'm not sure your logic holds up there either.
Did you forget that part?
0 -
PJPOWER said:
But that was not your conclusion, was it? You concluded that must mean conservatives are committing the crimes. The article clearly states that there are other veriables to consider when considering partisanship. You concluded what the study you presented disclaimed. That nullified your conclusion as it is in direct opposition to the exact study that you used to draw that conclusion.CM189191 said:
That may be true. That does not nullify the thesis of the article, though: Red States Have Higher Crime Rates Than Blue StatesPJPOWER said:
“There are, to be sure, many other variables to be considered other than partisanship when examining the different rates of crime between states.“CM189191 said:
ftfa: "These crime rate findings hold despite the fact that blue states have a higher population of residents in urban areas, which tend to have higher crime rates than rural areas."PJPOWER said:
Do all states have this?CM189191 said:
There is a lot of farmland outside of Texas, same problems happening in IL, IA, ND, SD, MN, MO.... One of the potential factors the study specifically points to is income. States identified with higher crime rates also correlate to lower per capita incomes. Conservative states have a lower average income per capita. "Which political party is more violent?" It appears conservative policies in conservative states driven by conservative voters correlate with increase crime rates in those states. I have yet to see anything that indicates otherwise....show me something!PJPOWER said:
Or weather, or interstate crime, or demographics, gang proliferation or or or or. At least you are beginning to narrow it slightly by mentioning one other causal factor...just need to realize that there are a thousand more out there.CM189191 said:
How so? There were 4 different studies indicating conservative states have higher crime rates. It's either their policies or their people who are creating criminals. Given the strength of correlation, it's probably both.tbergs said:
Nope, and neither do youCM189191 said:
so you got nothin' then?tbergs said:
The data does not indicate who is committing the crime in these states. You are drawing a conclusion based on what you think. Could that correlation be made, yes, but it also could be argued that there is higher crime for several other reasons that couple in with that data.CM189191 said:
...by all means...show me information to the contrary...PJPOWER said:
A better sample in regards to political officiation vs violence would be to compare voting records to those with violent criminal records...but once again, you still are only getting a small sample of the population...voters.CM189191 said:
Isn't the point of an election to elect persons that represent the population?HughFreakingDillon said:so we're drawing conclusions on which states have a higher percentage of violence based on party choice, when the voter turnout is typically less than 50%? and no one sees anything wrong with this test sample?
For example, if 50% of the people vote, and it's a 60 / 40 split for Republican / Democrat. Then it is safe to assume the total population falls along that same 60 / 40 split.
Sure, a smaller test sample leads to a higher margin of error. But I would hardly call 4 separate studies, examining 4 different criteria, across all 50 states a 'small test sample'. There is a very clear correlation here.
Until then, I'll hang my hat on the data that actually exists.
In Texas, for instance, there were huge issues with meth related property crimes. Why more in Texas? It was actually due to the availability of agricultural products/chemicals used to produce the drug...Farmers are still having to deal with meth heads trying to get into their ammonia tanks...so many factors!
https://www.dps.texas.gov/administration/crime_records/pages/txCriminalAlienStatistics.htm
And refer to page 4 of this link:
http://www.dps.texas.gov/crimereports/15/execSummary.pdf
As you can see, the high percentages of violent crimes comes from the large cities, which tend to be liberal leaning. I feel that these stats dig way deeper into the issue than what you provided. Check out Houston and San Antonio!!!
And btw, violent crime actually reduced quite a bit in New York City under a republican mayor, so I'm not sure your logic holds up there either.
Did you forget that part?
...sigh...I'll leave this here...again...CM189191 said:So we agree, "There is a high correlation between right-leaning states and higher crime rates"
So then the question becomes, "What causes right-leaning states to have higher crime rates than their left-leaning counterparts?"
0 -
I think crime, or the type of crime we seem to be talking about, is generally determined by socio-economic factors (and FWIW, I think weather/climate really does have an impact on that, lol). So, if that is true, I figure that at least tells us that red states do worse socio-economically.... and I think we all know that isn't really up for debate.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata0 -
Time to get out of that quote box nightmare.
The data that is being discussed is from 2009 and based on the 2008 uniform crime report so lets focus on that election information.
In comparison here is @CM189191 graphs:
Maybe this has something to do with it?
Interesting timeline of crime based on the UCR report from 2004 - 2013. Some states have stayed and some have changed significantly.
It's a hopeless situation...0 -
maybe you're on to something there
States With Highest Divorce Rates
Divorce Statistics by StateBy comparing the 2015 numbers in a report by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention that lists divorce rates by state, with NPR's list that shows how states voted, it becomes evident that the states with the top five highest divorce rates were mostly Republican, while the states with the lowest number of divorces were almost evenly divided between Republicans and Democrats.State Divorce Rate (per 1,000 residents) 2016 Voting Record Alaska 4.1 Republican Arkansas 4.8 Republican Nevada 4.6 Democrat Oklahoma 4.4 Republican Wyoming 4.1 Republican States With Lowest Divorce Rates
State Divorce Rate (per 1,000 residents) 2016 Voting Record Iowa 1.2 Republican Illinois 2.2 Democrat Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Texas, and Wisconsin 2.6 Republican Maryland and Massachusetts 2.6 Democrat New York 2.7 Democrat
http://divorce.lovetoknow.com/Divorce_Statistics_Republicans_vs._Democrats
0 -
Wow, what's up with Alaska and divorce I wonder?
Post edited by PJ_Soul onWith all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata0 -
too many disagreements on whether they can see Russia from their house.PJ_Soul said:Wow, what's up with Alaska and divorce I wonder?Your boos mean nothing to me, for I have seen what makes you cheer0 -
They need their space, I guess.PJ_Soul said:Wow, what's up with Alaska and divorce I wonder?my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf0 -
Maybe they get lonely during the long, dark winter, get married so cure the boredom, and then when it becomes almost perpetual daylight in the summers they get all squirrely and hyperactive and have to divorce before it comes to blows. Or the opposite... locked inside with the same damn person all winter... by the end of it they're about ready to strangle each other, lol.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata0 -
Arkansas and Nevada for the win... Inbreeding and moonshine vs hookers and blow. I am a bit surprised by Alaska as well. Are we sure that it is divorces and not a spouse just getting eaten by a bear?CM189191 said:maybe you're on to something thereStates With Highest Divorce Rates
Divorce Statistics by StateBy comparing the 2015 numbers in a report by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention that lists divorce rates by state, with NPR's list that shows how states voted, it becomes evident that the states with the top five highest divorce rates were mostly Republican, while the states with the lowest number of divorces were almost evenly divided between Republicans and Democrats.State Divorce Rate (per 1,000 residents) 2016 Voting Record Alaska 4.1 Republican Arkansas 4.8 Republican Nevada 4.6 Democrat Oklahoma 4.4 Republican Wyoming 4.1 Republican States With Lowest Divorce Rates
State Divorce Rate (per 1,000 residents) 2016 Voting Record Iowa 1.2 Republican Illinois 2.2 Democrat Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Texas, and Wisconsin 2.6 Republican Maryland and Massachusetts 2.6 Democrat New York 2.7 Democrat
http://divorce.lovetoknow.com/Divorce_Statistics_Republicans_vs._Democrats0 -
PJPOWER said:
Arkansas and Nevada for the win... Inbreeding and moonshine vs hookers and blow. I am a bit surprised by Alaska as well. Are we sure that it is divorces and not a spouse just getting eaten by a bear?CM189191 said:maybe you're on to something thereStates With Highest Divorce Rates
Divorce Statistics by StateBy comparing the 2015 numbers in a report by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention that lists divorce rates by state, with NPR's list that shows how states voted, it becomes evident that the states with the top five highest divorce rates were mostly Republican, while the states with the lowest number of divorces were almost evenly divided between Republicans and Democrats.State Divorce Rate (per 1,000 residents) 2016 Voting Record Alaska 4.1 Republican Arkansas 4.8 Republican Nevada 4.6 Democrat Oklahoma 4.4 Republican Wyoming 4.1 Republican States With Lowest Divorce Rates
State Divorce Rate (per 1,000 residents) 2016 Voting Record Iowa 1.2 Republican Illinois 2.2 Democrat Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Texas, and Wisconsin 2.6 Republican Maryland and Massachusetts 2.6 Democrat New York 2.7 Democrat
http://divorce.lovetoknow.com/Divorce_Statistics_Republicans_vs._DemocratsAlaska has the highest male/female ratio: 108.9 men for every 100 women. Lots of options for women if your first hubby doesn't work out.0 -
And Iowa? Are they really that happy, or can they just not be bothered?
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf0 -
When you can escape to the Field of Dreams every once in a while, you're able to decompress and go home nice and chilloftenreading said:And Iowa? Are they really that happy, or can they just not be bothered? It's a hopeless situation...0 -
Oklahoma is not surprising. Wyoming is a bit perplexing. Kinda surprised that New York and Illinois are on the low end...Wonder how these states differ in regards to divorce laws from the highest rated. I'm betting average age of people getting married is a significant factor as well in some states.Post edited by PJPOWER on0
Categories
- All Categories
- 149K Pearl Jam's Music and Activism
- 110.1K The Porch
- 278 Vitalogy
- 35.1K Given To Fly (live)
- 3.5K Words and Music...Communication
- 39.2K Flea Market
- 39.2K Lost Dogs
- 58.7K Not Pearl Jam's Music
- 10.6K Musicians and Gearheads
- 29.1K Other Music
- 17.8K Poetry, Prose, Music & Art
- 1.1K The Art Wall
- 56.8K Non-Pearl Jam Discussion
- 22.2K A Moving Train
- 31.7K All Encompassing Trip
- 2.9K Technical Stuff and Help