Why does a persons education level matter how they voted?

Lol, no.

I have a genius IQ but am dumb as a rock.

IQ literally means nothing, I only took the stupid test because I got credit for doing it.

When they gave me my results I asked them what it meant......they said I was intelligent.....and I'm like....."and"?

They were like, "nothing, that's it".

I was really hoping for super powers or something...yeah, didn't happen.

 

Just as conservatives want to believe that only stupid people vote for Democrats. Make no mistake....BOTH sides play this ridiculous lazy-a$$ thinking game.

 

We might have crossed paths.

I'm surprised how many PF members unfortunately live in the Hermit Kingdom of California and live in the L.A. County, OC or the Inland Empire.

 

I read it...worth to take the time to read it.

 

This post explains why blacks, Hispanics and Asians vote for democrats.
Hmm, funny Asians have high IQs.

 

Ah, the highly intelligent words of a completely non-racist conservative. You should pass these wise words along to the president:
https://twitter.com/realDenaIdTrump

Donald Trump‏ @realDenaIdTrump 7 июн. 2016 г.
If I was racist towards judge who can't be fair cause he's Mexican and I'm building a wall would I love taco bowls?!

 

Do you believe this this true for all fields of study and do you think college graduates are better at critical thinking than a non college graduate?

 

It doesn't matter. Trump won the HS or less 51-46 over Hillary, Obama also won HS or less 52-47 over Romney. College Grads went to Hillary 49-44 over Trump, college grads went to Romney 51-47 over Obama. Same groups of voters which went different ways in different elections.

So if HS or less are stupid and college grads smart, then Obama won reelection on the stupid vote as the smart folks voted for Romney. These groups switched for 2016 with the stupid vote going to Trump and the smart vote to Clinton.

Yes, I seen that portrayed on this site quite often. Each individual votes the way they do for reasons that are important to them regardless of education. Who's to say one person's reason is stupid while another's isn't?

 

Democrat voters vote on security and emotion, Republicans vote of science, Libertarians vote on reality and an understanding of history.
Men vote aggressively
Women vote emotionally and for security.

 

My dad taught me critical thinking. In college, it was all emotional disruption and a feeling that life was a free lunch if you wanted it.

 

I don't think it depends on your field of study at all, its the overall experience of college.

I've spent as much work writing a humanism paper as I have a political science or biology one. Its the fact that you have to do research, form arguments and defend them in your writings, reading what other critical thinkers have found.....all of it makes a person more well rounded educationally.

Its a higher level of study then HS or below.

That's not to say that there aren't some brilliant people who've never gone to college, certainly there are, but in general I believe college grads are a bit better.

 

If politics were like a Mensa puzzle, then voters' education level and/or IQ would be critical. And we could get a good society just be restricting the vote to one of the 'High-IQ' societies. I can promise you that that would be a terrible idea. High IQ does not necessarily mean high common sense, or, more important, high-concern-for-the-general-welfare. (Yes, I know it correlates strongly with personal success in life.)

But politics is not like a Mensa puzzle. There are tons of complicated issues -- what should the Fed set as the discount rate, should we subsidize research into fusion power, should we retire the A10, etc etc etc ... and of course the more intelligent and educated you are, the easier it will be for you to understand the questions involved.

But ... politics basically is about self-interest. People ultimately vote for their self-interest. This doesn't have to be narrow me-me-me self interest, but it's the final motivation. The slave-owners of the South were far more educated than their slaves, but that was not why they supported slavery, and it's not why the slaves opposed it.

Being highly intelligent doesn't mean you stop being self-interested.

In a democratic society, everyone has the right to pursue their self interest, provided they play by the rules we set up which, we hope, lets us do this without too much damage to other people's interests.

A group with a lower IQ than another, higher-IQ group may also have legitimate interests which are different from the interests of the higher-IQ group.

It's ironic that it's usually people on the Left who bring up the education level (always education level, since IQ is a touchy, indeed taboo subject for Leftists in the US at the moment) argument: if college kids are for it, it must be good.

The irony is that, historically, and on a world scale, voting is usually over economic issues (where it's not, it's over ethnic questions, and where that's the case, it's almost always a bad thing). And the economic issues separate out higher-income people from lower-income. Income historically correlates with education. Lower income people have less education, and historically have supported the Left. The USA, in the last generation or so, has been a partial exception, due to 'cultural' issues. But as the Left wins on these issues, as it has been, they will move off the map of people's concerns, and it will be back to economics.

The college kid today, living in the 'soft world', will tomorrow be earning money and paying taxes. We'll see how his enthusiasm for 'socialism' survives that shocking change in his circumstances.

 

Because Trump loves poorly educated people and his love cannot be manifest until they expose themselves.

 

Nice quote here: "While there is a lower class, I am in it, while there is a criminal element, I am of it, and while there is a soul in prison, I am not free." Not by Trump, but those who sneer at the poorly-educated, should also sneer at the person who uttered this sentiment.

 

The college educated have proved slavery is not dead.

Do you remember the show called Frazier? It is pretty much the truth. The old cop on the beat was a lot smarter and have more common sense than a phycologist.

Education is simply "book learning", and lacks experiences that life delivers.

 

It's also inaccurate. These statistics only care about college education. They don't care about tech schools, some of which I went to were far harder than any college courses on the same subject.

 

Some really dumb people have a college degree. A degree in fine arts only says you wasted 4 years of your life, have a huge college loan, went to a lot of parties, and drank a lot of beer. Big deal.

 

Business that are hiring that need to chose between a college degree, and a high IQ, need to go with the high IQ!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Thank you, but College education had nothing to do with the proof that slavery is not dead; I just had to know that I had $30,000 extra household debt behind my back and that under the law I was only a “consumer” for purposes of debt collection under FAIR DEBT COLLECTION PRACTICES.

“You have probably caught that Visa credit card commercial in which a wily wife hides her many shopping sprees under the bed and up in the attic, all out of sight from her clueless husband.
The punch line is that she could have won all that stuff she rung up on the plastic. But the reality behind such behavior is hardly a laughing matter.” (Rene a. Guzman, San Antonio Express-News Jan. 12, 2005 12:00 AM)

College education says that slavery is good because you must abuse your domestic partner.

End of slavery:
“The Federal Reserve's rule told credit card companies that they no longer can consider household income when assessing the creditworthiness of an individual who applies for his or her own card. Under the rule, only an individual's own salary or other income -- rather than combined household income -- can be considered.”
Read more: http://www.creditcards.com/credit-c...cards-household-income-1282.php#ixzz3WiwAm9JK

Slavery reinstituted:
“U.S. Reps. Carolyn Maloney, D-NY, and Louise Slaughter, D-NY, both among the principal authors of the CARD Act, said the rule ‘goes beyond the intent’ of the law and ‘represents a serious risk for women in abusive domestic partnerships.’"
Read more: http://www.creditcards.com/credit-c...cards-household-income-1282.php#ixzz3Wivmh5r8

The FED testified (in FED speak) before Congress (on C-Span), around the time of the “credit crunch,” that Banks rely upon such irresponsible debt slavery, household debt behind the back of the other partner, to subsidize small business loans.

College education says slavery is good for small business, but I didn’t need college to watch C-Span or understand FED speak.

 

My father was a college professor who never finished high school, he went into the Army before Pearl Harbor at 16 years old, after having worked at 12 years old on a farm given to a family by FDR, and for the WPA at 14. One professor complained my father didn't even have a high school diploma and they all were made to take a test, my Father score was higher than all of them.

May 1, 1935: "To the extent necessary to carry out the provisions of this Executive Order the Administrator is authorized to acquire, by purchase or by the power of eminent domain, any real property or any interest therein and improve, develop, grant, sell, lease (with · or 'without the privilege of purchasing), or otherwise dispose of any such property or interest therein."
Read more at the American Presidency Project: Franklin D. Roosevelt: Executive Order 7027 Establishing the Resettlement Administration. http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?p...#ixzz1WF7IYFdf

Pine Mountain Valley Resettlement Project
http://georgiainfo.galileo.usg.edu/...ris/pine-mountain-valley-resettlement-project

“This Timberline Lodge marks a venture that was made possible by W.P.A., emergency relief work, in order that we may test the workability of recreational facilities installed by the Government itself and operated under its complete control.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timberline_Lodge#Film_history

I once took a Pre Calculus class and read a problem to my father, he did it on his imaginary blackboard, all in his mind and gave me the correct answers, that was years after he retired. He had met some guy in India during WWII that taught him to do math in his head.

 

It is indoctrination, not education. Elitists like to tout low well their indoctrination through public education is going. They like to snub those that get educated independently of their indoctrination program. There are a great many that have independently educated themselves in Civics, History and political Science. Public and University education has done a real job in glorifying Socialism given the evidence that so many embrace it but few can intelligently discuss it's virtues or workability.

 

Same thing I pointed out to another poster that was bashing on the Democrats. Not sure what this has to do with my post.
If you have a valid opinion as to why among some groups the educational level of a person matters for understanding and/or learning about a political subject of which most college graduates never had a class on, please do.

 

WE put too much faith in schooling, and not enough in REAL education. I passed the Ohio Bar exam about 4 years ago. You needed only 60% to pass, I scored an 80 (I have a certificate). Could I get a law license? NOPE. Because I had not paid the colleges protection money for faux learning. I have an engineering degree, and 40 years of applications, which include extensive law knowledge required as a PE, with law as a hobby, as I am always interested on how the constitution gets twisted or ignored, when it should not be rewritten by judges, but amended. I got my interests in law starting the 10th grade and have read everything I could for 40 years about law.
I gained book knowledge in college, but there are many many people much smarter than I am who never went to college, my dad being one. He could design and build anything, and he taught us 3 boys how to do it too. Book learning is fine, but practical application is everything.
There should NEVER be a requirement for college in a degree, professions should be awarded by meeting test standards by anyone. It robs professions like law of looking at things from a different angle, rather than just the "law school" way. The reality is it creates a closed society and protects the fortunes of law degrees and the cash flow for them. I saw medics in Nam that had more skills than most doctors, and brought our boys home alive as good or better than any mash unit.

 

I absolutely agree with this.

With the internet and digital technology in general, there is no longer the necessity -- there may be the desirability -- to sit in a classroom.

Why shouldn't a young person in Nairobi be able to study an objective subject like mathematics via on-line learning methods, and/or private tuition, and then sit a series of internationally-recognized exams to get a BSc in Mathematics?

 

Look at the huge debt load college student have. I have little debt, huge savings and a credit rating about 820. They don't teach personal finance in high school or college, and there are many lawyers and doctors that die dead broke. Great knowledge, maybe, but no financial sense. My parents of depression era upbringing showed all us kids how to budget, finance, and my father could write the "Dave Ramsey's book on finance". The only thing you should buy on time is a home (I paid cash for my last new truck and home) and you should pay it off as quickly as possible. Credit cards are to be treated as poisonous snakes. I passed this onto my children and they all have avoided heavy debt, and have prospered. MANY teachers have backbreaking debt, they of all people should know better and lead by example.