It's the stupider states that voted for Bush

B

Brooker

Anjin
Messages
369
Reaction score
25
Points
0
Location
Seattle, Washington
Ethnic group
Mainly: Italian, German, Scottish, Irish
This is interesting and it kind of reinforces what I was already thinking. I don't know how accurate it is or how you would go about collecting this data, but... here's who the states voted for and the correlation to the IQ of the people in that state...

http://chrisevans3d.com/files/iq.htm
 
What surprises me is that people in 31 states have an IQ under 100, which is considered the normal average.

The IQ seem to correlate well with the GSP/capita too.]

However, there are discrepancies between the 2 IQ links (California, Hawaii...)
 
The states are ranked pretty differently there. Thanks for the link. :balloon: The second link is different though because IQ isn't a factor.

The areas that voted for Kerry were mainly urban areas where people tend to have more education, are more open-minded about things and better informed, and are more aware of the world around them. Coincidence? Is being stupid and closed-minded a pre-requisite for supporting Bush? :D
 
well the second one has to do with highschool it seems not university/college or any of the people who moved/live there after graduating. so mostly people who cant vote...
 
There's enough statistics about this floating around to support any of a multitude of opinions. I've seen some that show that the majority of educated people (both with High School and College Educations) voted for Bush and that the majority of people who didn't finish High School voted for Kerry. Whichever side you're on, poke around for data and take your pic.

The election is over. Bush really won this time and now it's time for those who oppose him to move on and think about how to salvage things between now and 2008.
 
Well, at least Virginia is at the top of the 'stupid' states... :p :eek:kashii:
 
Fantt said:
There's enough statistics about this floating around to support any of a multitude of opinions. I've seen some that show that the majority of educated people (both with High School and College Educations) voted for Bush and that the majority of people who didn't finish High School voted for Kerry. Whichever side you're on, poke around for data and take your pic.

The election is over. Bush really won this time and now it's time for those who oppose him to move on and think about how to salvage things between now and 2008.
Click to expand...


HEAR, HEAR!! I agree completely!!!
Although I was a big Kerry-Edwards supporter, and really hoped that Kerry was to become President, I don't want to look at the different statistics to prove that people with higher IQ voted for Bush or Kerry, and the other theory that only rednecks voted for Bush (which sadly isn't true, as many others also voted for him, proven by the results and analysis). One can find a biased reason for the result depending on the media; e.g. Fox, C-Span, CNN etc...
We all have to deal with it now....
Instead, I think it is more important to look at what the Democrats' new strategy is for 2008, as they seriously received a slap in the head in this election with Bush winning big this time.
How about Wesley Clarke?? Has he retired completely? I think they should have a southener next time like him, this would probably help with the greater popular vote.
 
Miss_apollo7 said:
Instead, I think it is more important to look at what the Democrats' new strategy is for 2008, as they seriously received a slap in the head in this election with Bush winning big this time.
How about Wesley Clarke?? Has he retired completely? I think they should have a southener next time like him, this would probably help with the greater popular vote.
Click to expand...

Hehe, I am with you there miss apollo. I was surprised that Gen Clack didn't do so good in the primary, maybe cuz he entered late, but I was rooting for him. He was NATO supreme commander, and he knows his stuff when it comes to dealing with the Europeans. Plus him being a military man would seem to be a good factor to his appeal to the general public since they like strong leaders who don't flip flop :eek:kashii:
 
Miss_apollo7 said:
HEAR, HEAR!! I agree completely!!!
Although I was a big Kerry-Edwards supporter, and really hoped that Kerry was to become President, I don't want to look at the different statistics to prove that people with higher IQ voted for Bush or Kerry, and the other theory that only rednecks voted for Bush (which sadly isn't true, as many others also voted for him, proven by the results and analysis). One can find a biased reason for the result depending on the media; e.g. Fox, C-Span, CNN etc...
We all have to deal with it now....
Click to expand...
Yeah, neither party could survive without a reliable block of poorer, less educated voters as part of their base who don't always vote their own convictions or out of their own best interest. Unless you can somehow make the argument that these southern states were any more intelligent or educated to have voted for Clinton in '92 and '96, or were reasonable to have felt a personal identification with him but stupid to have judged Bush that way ? :eek:kashii:
 
Be careful what conclusions you try to draw from data like this.

Let me give you an example. In New York City the Upper East Side has a high concentration of highly educated, successful people, and that area consistently votes Republican. However, they are outnumbered by less educated people in other areas (Bronx, etc) which usually vote Democrat.

In other words, trying to portray all the people of even a single city as being homogenous, is probably using much too wide a brush. If this doesn't make sense you might want to read How to Lie with Statistics by Darrell Huff.
 
Brooker said:
This is interesting and it kind of reinforces what I was already thinking. I don't know how accurate it is or how you would go about collecting this data, but... here's who the states voted for and the correlation to the IQ of the people in that state...

http://chrisevans3d.com/files/iq.htm
Click to expand...
These scores were most likely compiled by someone in Mass to put themselves nearly at the top. There's no way you are going to find more than a 25 point spread between something as artificial as state boundaries, even 2-3 points across borders with nearly identical demographics (such as Vermont & NH) which also isn't going to reflect new residents much less capture the IQ of all the current voting cohorts. Particularly as m477, the variability within demographically mixed states and regions (states with high levels of immigration, poverty) is going to produce such extreme error variance between these Democratics and higher educated/income voters as to be nearly meaningless in comparison to the outside variable, Republicans.

Income and educational levels are much more powerful and exact (in relation to actual voters) predictors of voter behavior, through which IQ can be inferred.
 
That's a very interesting relation indeed :D
However, I think that the second link is more reliable, so let's see how it looks there:

1. Massachusetts - Kerry
2. Connecticut - Kerry
3. Vermont - Kerry
4. New Jersey - Kerry
5. Wisconsin - Kerry
6. New York - Kerry
7. Minnesota - Kerry
8. Iowa - Bush
9. Pennsylvania - Kerry
10. Montana - Bush
...

Not much different, only places 8 and 10 in the Top 10 of the Education State Rankings voted for Bush.
 
Miss_apollo7 said:
Instead, I think it is more important to look at what the Democrats' new strategy is for 2008, as they seriously received a slap in the head in this election with Bush winning big this time.
How about Wesley Clarke?? Has he retired completely? I think they should have a southener next time like him, this would probably help with the greater popular vote.
Click to expand...

My understanding is that Gen. Clark was pretty much frowned upon after having accepted the nomination of Michael Moore.

cicatriz esp said:
Here's another one which claims to measure intelligence rather than IQ:
Click to expand...

IQ is a measure of intelligence, i.e. Intelligence Quotient. Also, from the second study:

the article said:
States received negative points for high drop-out rates and physical violence.
Click to expand...

That's not an accurate measurement of intelligence. My friend dropped out of high school, and he clocks in from 130-140.

Fantt said:
There's enough statistics about this floating around to support any of a multitude of opinions. I've seen some that show that the majority of educated people (both with High School and College Educations) voted for Bush and that the majority of people who didn't finish High School voted for Kerry. Whichever side you're on, poke around for data and take your pic.
Click to expand...

And here is an example of it going the other way (well, actually, it seems to be fairly balanced as far as data go, but the author seems to be republican) that was linked to from the original "data." It seems as though the myth was easily debunked.
 
Lina Inverse said:
That's a very interesting relation indeed :D
However, I think that the second link is more reliable, so let's see how it looks there:

1. Massachusetts - Kerry
2. Connecticut - Kerry
3. Vermont - Kerry
4. New Jersey - Kerry
5. Wisconsin - Kerry
6. New York - Kerry
7. Minnesota - Kerry
8. Iowa - Bush
9. Pennsylvania - Kerry
10. Montana - Bush
...

Not much different, only places 8 and 10 in the Top 10 of the Education State Rankings voted for Bush.
Click to expand...
I'm from NJ! That means I am more smart! ;)
 
Miss Apollo wrote....
I think it is more important to look at what the Democrats' new strategy is for 2008, as they seriously received a slap in the head in this election with Bush winning big this time.
Click to expand...

Yes, the Dems need to think about their strategy, but I wouldn't say that Bush "won big". He got just over half the votes. Probably the only election that was closer than this one was the 2000 election. America is still divided.
 
Brooker said:
Miss Apollo wrote....


Yes, the Dems need to think about their strategy, but I wouldn't say that Bush "won big". He got just over half the votes. Probably the only election that was closer than this one was the 2000 election. America is still divided.
Click to expand...

from the web said:
On Election Day, November 8, Kennedy won the popular vote by the remarkably small margin of 120,000 votes
Click to expand...

If you feel you have reached this recording in error, please hang up and try your call again.
 
Brooker said:
Point was, it was not a "big win" for Bush, not that there hadn't been any close elections in the past. :souka:
Click to expand...

Then it might have been better not to include:
Brooker said:
Probably the only election that was closer than this one was the 2000 election.
Click to expand...

Your point could have been made just as well without it. I was just responding to what you said. The total vote in that 1960 election was about 63 million (give-r-take), so even if we double it to extrapolate it out to the 120 million (give-r-take) of the 2004 election, the margin comes out to 240,000....about a tenth of the margin that Bush racked up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

This thread has been viewed 1027 times.

Back
Top