Why does a persons education level matter how they voted?

Again, if it hasn't been explained or taught to you.....we are not a Democracy. We are a Republic. The majority on the coasts does not run roughshod over the people that inhabit over 3/4's of the land. That is our Constitution. America is not mob rule.

 

It seems at least a bit inconsistent to me to argue that

(1) the Presidency should be elected by popular vote, not the Electoral College, and

(2),almost half the country are uneducated drooling racist dolts who, by implication, are too uneducated to make a valid decision about who should rule them. Surely the logic of "more educated people vote for the candidates endorsed by Al Sharpton" argues for, or at least suggests, a restriction of the franchise to the college-educated (with, of course, some exceptions made to get the right diversity).

 

You fail to understand why the popular vote would not work, even today. This is a republic, not a true democracy. You would end up with civil war, as the middle states, run by New York and California, would revolt because they failed to have a good vote. This was the same compromise so that the union could be created in the first place, that small states had a say as well as big states. Your way would have failed the USA 20 years after it was created. Again, you didn't read what is behind us calling this the UNITED STATES, not the UNITED PEOPLE of AMERICA. Sit and think about it. It is democracy of the STATES, not the democracy of the people.

And the uneducated masses are the reason the United States still exists. Education simply teaches you things, experience teaches you wisdom. They had the wisdom.

 

Read my post again. I wasn't arguing against the Electoral College (or in favor of it, for that matter).

I was pointing out that people who don't like the electoral college system -- and who, implicitly, favor election of the President by direct popular vote -- also, usually, go on about how their side (the Democrats, or liberals in general) are the educated people, whereas their opponents (Republicans, conservatives) are not.


But if this is true, given that Trump got nearly half the popular vote -- despite repelling some unknown number of Republicans and conservatives (like me) who would have voted for someone of better character -- then surely these pro-popular-vote people ought not to be so enthusiastic about the popular vote.

It's sort of similar to the paradox of people who believe that (1) the Federal Government is led by someone who is the American Hitler, and (2) this same Federal Government, led by proto-Hitler, should take away all our guns.

Seems contradictory to me, but maybe I haven't had enough college.

 

Your premise is yours, of course.

Level of education is just one of many demographic metrics that can be revelatory of voting patterns - age, race, gender, wealth, geography, etc. without assigning a qualitative distinction to any.

All are factors in determining an individual's voting preferences.

Recognition that less-educated, older, rural white males shifted their traditional Democratic allegiance to Trump is not "PC" according to some folks, but it's an empirical reality, and if better-educated, younger, suburban white women transfer their political allegiance to Democratic candidates in significant numbers in November, that will be be yet another noteworthy shift within the American electorate.

For purposes of statistical analysis, values judgments concerning level of academic achievement, age, race, personal wealth, regional locale, etc. are irrelevant. Everyone's vote is equal. There is no implied superiority/inferiority, just revelatory distinctions as such objective profiles shed light upon the perceived self-interests and priorities of a diverse electorate.

 

Very true. BUT ... some metrics are measuring things which we admire: intelligence, knowledge, willingness to sacrifice for the common good, kindness ... .. although the metric is usually for something that is a proxy for these things: educational level, military service, level of giving to charities, etc.

So when one side in the political war finds that one of these desirable qualities correlates positively with support for their side, they like to play it up: SEE! SMART/BRAVE/CHARITABLE etc. people vote for US!!!

I think the proper response to this is ... "Oh? Very interesting? More Marines supported Trump than supported Hilary? Very interesting. More PhD's in neuroscience supported Hilary than supported Trump? Very interesting. And ...?"

 

In your mind, some demographic factors may be proxies. You need not impose your personal interpretations upon any.

Demographers compile statistical data free of such value judgments such as "young is better than old", "male is better than female", "white is better than black", "well-educated is better than less-educated", etc.

Such empirical data is revelatory of the factors and trends that determine voting patterns in a diverse, changing electorate.

 

I stand corrected on understanding what you were exactly saying. thanks for setting me straight on your intent.

 

No problem! I'm frequently misunderstood, probably due to the length of my posts -- what I think our French friends call a déformation professionnelle.

 

I think the most effective stats is how many illegal aliens and just plain cheating votes are cast more than anything else. People are blind to the scam and they think because the government never seems to find any illegal voting, that it doesn't exist, even though some counties in California and Florida, had more votes cast for the democrat candidate that all the registered voters in the counties. Get a clue people, we need to fix this with (again), no internet voting, no absentee ballots (except for Active military and active overseas government support personnel), all paper voting. When you register, you must have your thumb print on your registration card, and again when you show up before you vote to print a match. THAT would make SOME of the voting more honest, and cameras on the polling places to make sure the ballot box is not stuffed.

 

Yes, we are the UNITED STATES, like 50 faux countries that joined together for mutual protects. Each "country state" votes it's votes for president. Democrats are just emitting sour grapes because the Clinton Mafia didn't get elected and we saved our county from a true 3rd world leader.

 

You are going to believe what you want to believe.

 

It is NOT a belief. How did these counties end up with more votes for the democrat candidate than the county had registered voters. Someone here on another thread posted the information on the "overvote".

Let me guess, you are a democrat?

 

While every legal American should vote, the lazy drones will vote democrat because democrats buy their votes by promising them free schidt. That has been going on since the time of FDR. It isall part of the democrat plantation where they harvest votes for democrats.

 

What is your source? Where did it allegedly happen? Why is your Kris Kobach or others of his ilk not bringing legal charges to whomever certified the votes?

 

Natty, your coming to the party a little late, but thank you for posting. You are 100% correct and I clarified in a later post in this thread that I understand the need for a persons education for statistical information, but the is not what I'm talking about.

I'm talking about the belief that a person's education level makes them better to understand/debate a topic than a person of lower education. There are 1000s of millionaires that have only a high school education and many billionaires with only that. Not many would argue that any of those people are "dumb". There are also 1000s of bar tenders with college degrees. For some reason though the bar tender with the college degree is seen as a more capable person than the high school graduate when simply looking at the pieces of paper. Why?

 

Whose belief is that?

What do you consider the value of being well-educated?

 

The belief is based upon many, many, many posts that I have seen on this forum since before the 2016 Presidential election, from both sides. It did pick up after the election when "data" came out about voters.

The value of being well educated for the purposes of discussing topics on this forum is small. Research skills on the internet and critical thinking skills are more important in many cases and many topics that are discussed here.

 

"A system of general instruction, which shall reach every description of our citizens from the richest to the poorest,
as it was the earliest, so will it be the latest of all the public concerns in which I shall permit myself to take an interest."
Thomas Jefferson​

I think that education in the US is widely recognized, despite resentment from some quarters, as contributing to the overall betterment of the individual, her community, and the nation. Its positive impact goes far beyond the insignificant aspect of "discussing topics on this forum." It has been acknowledged as essential to the success of a democratic republic as Jefferson repeatedly emphasized. For him, it meant engendering an enlightened electorate, not creating an intellectual elite.

Education affords a means by which Americans can fulfill their varied personal potentials and thereby contribute to the commonweal.

"I must study politics and war, that our sons may have liberty to study mathematics and philosophy.
Our sons ought to study mathematics and philosophy, geography, natural history and naval architecture,
navigation, commerce and agriculture in order to give their children a right to study
painting, poetry, music, architecture, statuary, tapestry and porcelain.”
John Adams​

 

What has more bearing on how you vote is do you believe in Santa if so you vote Democrat.

 

Natty......your trying really hard to make a mountain out of a mole hill.

I am in no way belittling an education, but I am also not saying it is required to be an intelligent person. The scope of my question is this.......why when discussing a matter on this forum or anywhere is a persons level of education even taken into consideration, when clearly the intelligence or ability of a person to understand is not determined by their level of education.

 

An education beyond high school exposes students to subjects other than politics, economics, or foreign affairs and my point is that these advanced courses teach students how to think and organize their thoughts, and also helps greatly in socialization. It is certainly much better than no education or a high school education. Nobody should compare themselves to billionaires or millionaires because the chances of joining those groups are negligible.
College students who work in the service industry have a better chance to find work than those with a high school education, especially if you are a high school drop-out.

 

We agree.

I don't see how it is.

Is level of education a statistical factor in voting patterns and other metrics such as income? Clearly.

 

This one sounded like like yet another phony meme being parroted by the usual suspects.

Is the following what was faked to serve the partisan agenda? If so, it's pretty obvious why the matter was not pursued by the Kobachs whose fake claims keep fizzling.

 

It's important to know that well educated people vote liberal. That way we know how badly our education system is failing.