So...how come Romney lost...?

The Off-Topic forum for anything non-LDS related, such as sports or politics. Rated PG through PG-13.
_Kevin Graham
_Emeritus
Posts: 13037
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 6:44 pm

Re: So...how come Romney lost...?

Post by _Kevin Graham »

ajax18 wrote:Perhaps enough in the 53% have found ways out of paying taxes that the 47% of takers didn't anger them as much as it otherwise would have. Voting to be generous with other peoples money probaby provided them some moral catharsis. I'm not saying my simple truth was the only reason, but rather the single biggest reason by far.


Care to back that up with evidence? Because you sound like a babbling moron who is too lazy to think for himself. You're just passing along the whiny talking points from FOX and all the bigots on Talk Radio who love to blame minorities for their own failures. There is simply not one shred of evidence that this was a reason at all, let alone the "biggest reason." It is just another example of a necessary Republican fantasy, created to make idiots feel better about themselves.

Why don't you go ahead and explain to us how the states with the highest percentage of non-tax payers, are in fact RED STATES. You know, those which went Romney's way. Incidentally, the states with the highest rates of illiteracy are also Red States. Go figure.

Here is a Graphic detailing Red State Socialism. Oh the irony! http://thecentristword.wordpress.com/20 ... op-dilema/

The ironic part of this welfare smear campaign is that in “reality”, the face of welfare isn’t anything like what the Republican spin machine wants us to believe. In reality (that magical place where statistics live), if welfare has a face, it is very white, rural and corporate. A vast majority of all ‘welfare’ goes to these three groups.

Which states receive the lion’s share of welfare? Again, it is not what the Republicans would like you to think. In fact, if you map the states that receive the most welfare on the map, it look remarkably similar to the 2008 presidential electoral map. The Red States receive far more welfare than they pay into the system. Who flips the bill? Blue states.
_EAllusion
_Emeritus
Posts: 18519
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 12:39 pm

Re: So...how come Romney lost...?

Post by _EAllusion »

Kevin Graham wrote: Incidentally, the states with the highest rates of illiteracy are also Red States. Go figure.


Romney won the college educated. He just barely won it as the education demographic party realignment continues, but he still won it. The illiterate inside of the red states, to the extent they vote at all, tend to vote Democrat. Reinstituting literacy tests for voting would hurt Democrats, not help them.

You're trying to make some inane point about red states being dumb/uneducated, but those states are red despite their illiterates, not because of them.
_MeDotOrg
_Emeritus
Posts: 4761
Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2012 11:29 pm

Re: So...how come Romney lost...?

Post by _MeDotOrg »

Kevin Graham wrote:
ajax18 wrote:Perhaps enough in the 53% have found ways out of paying taxes that the 47% of takers didn't anger them as much as it otherwise would have. Voting to be generous with other peoples money probaby provided them some moral catharsis. I'm not saying my simple truth was the only reason, but rather the single biggest reason by far.


Care to back that up with evidence? Because you sound like a babbling moron who is too lazy to think for himself. You're just passing along the whiny talking points from FOX and all the bigots on Talk Radio who love to blame minorities for their own failures. There is simply not one shred of evidence that this was a reason at all, let alone the "biggest reason." It is just another example of a necessary Republican fantasy, created to make idiots feel better about themselves.

Why don't you go ahead and explain to us how the states with the highest percentage of non-tax payers, are in fact RED STATES. You know, those which went Romney's way. Incidentally, the states with the highest rates of illiteracy are also Red States. Go figure.

Here is a Graphic detailing Red State Socialism. Oh the irony! http://thecentristword.wordpress.com/20 ... op-dilema/

The ironic part of this welfare smear campaign is that in “reality”, the face of welfare isn’t anything like what the Republican spin machine wants us to believe. In reality (that magical place where statistics live), if welfare has a face, it is very white, rural and corporate. A vast majority of all ‘welfare’ goes to these three groups.

Which states receive the lion’s share of welfare? Again, it is not what the Republicans would like you to think. In fact, if you map the states that receive the most welfare on the map, it look remarkably similar to the 2008 presidential electoral map. The Red States receive far more welfare than they pay into the system. Who flips the bill? Blue states.


I find it ironic that during the campaign, Republicans said that the 47% comment was taken out of context and was being used unfairly to paint Romney as a class warrior.

Now that the election is lost, the reason is the 47% that everyone wanted to forget about last month.

Saying that 47% of the population are lazy socialists isn't a winning formula for getting their votes, yet a lot of people can't let go of that reason as to why the Republicans lost.

Do they really think that half of our country is a bunch of lazy bums? Why should we vote for people who dismiss half our population as being hopeless?
"The great problem of any civilization is how to rejuvenate itself without rebarbarization."
- Will Durant
"We've kept more promises than we've even made"
- Donald Trump
"Of what meaning is the world without mind? The question cannot exist."
- Edwin Land
_Kevin Graham
_Emeritus
Posts: 13037
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 6:44 pm

Re: So...how come Romney lost...?

Post by _Kevin Graham »

Image

Yes, I'm sure this is ALL just a crazy coincidence. I'm just so sure all the uneducated people in those states listed above, were all Obama supporters who just happened to outnumber the educated in those states. Yes, I'm sure that's it! And I know Utah is among the highest educated states in the country, but we all know why Utah went Romney, and it had nothing to do with education.

"The higher the education level, the more likely they are to vote Democratic."

http://www.politifact.com/georgia/state ... endencies/

Is education level tied to voting tendencies?

With the presidential election upon us this week, PolitiFact Georgia decided to examine a statement about national voting trends.

In a recent Atlanta Journal-Constitution article, political analyst Larry Sabato commented on the constituency of the political parties, particularly among white voters. We already checked part of his statement that "Virginia’s educational level among whites is higher than Georgia (voters’ educational level)." We rated it true.

In the article, Sabato goes on to explain more of the characteristics of the political parties’ faithful. "... The higher the education level, the more likely they are to vote Democratic," he said in the story.

We decided to take a closer look to determine whether there were facts to bear this out. And if so, did this claim include voters nationwide? And what about Georgia, where conservative, white voters have been a solid base for the GOP?

We asked Sabato about the basis for his comments. Like his first statement, Sabato used CNN’s 2008 exit polls to substantiate his claim, according to his political analyst and media relations coordinator, Kyle Kondik.

Based on the 2008 exit polls of Georgia, Virginia (where Sabato works) and nationally, whites with a college degree supported Barack Obama at a higher rate than whites without a college degree, Kondik said.

Looking at CNN’s 2008 national election poll of almost 18,000 respondents, 44 percent identified as college graduates. Of those college graduates, Obama had an 8 percentage point advantage over then-Republican presidential nominee John McCain.

Of voters with a postgraduate degree, Obama had an 18-point advantage over McCain.

In Georgia, the GOP maintained a strong foothold. All white voters at each education level -- except of course, white Democrats -- overwhelmingly voted for McCain. The GOP nominee had a 48-point advantage over Obama among Georgia’s white college graduate respondents. At the postgraduate level, the margin between the candidates shrunk, but McCain still beat out Obama by 1 percentage point. (The postgraduate voters were not identified by race.)

The Pew Research Center released data in August 2012 about GOP gains among working-class white voters that found: "Lower-income and less educated whites also have shifted substantially toward the Republican Party since 2008."

Among whites without a college degree, the GOP now holds a 54 percent to 37 percent advantage among non-college whites, who were split about evenly four years ago. The partisanship of white college graduates, by contrast, has not changed, the analysis found.

Back in March of this year, political scientists and authors of the Monkey Cage blog examined the voting patterns of white voters in America. Their findings also support Sabato’s analysis.

When viewed in the context of educational attainment alone, without also examining income level, the blog authors concluded that high school graduates are more Republican than non-high school graduates. But after that, the groups with more education tended to vote more Democratic. At the very highest education level tabulated in the survey, voters with postgraduate degrees leaned toward the Democrats.

To reach the conclusions, the political scientists (professors at East Coast colleges such as George Washington University and Georgetown) used data from Annenberg pre-election polls for 2000 and 2004 and Pew pre-election polls for 2008.

With white, highly educated voters being a key demographic for the Democratic Party, political observers, such as conservative columnist Tim Carney of the Washington Examiner, are predicting Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney could carry several swing states if he can sway these voters to the GOP.

But the Democrats seem intent on keeping this voting bloc. Last week the Center for Information & Research on Civic Learning and Engagement (CIRCLE), which conducts research on civic education and on youth voting and political participation, published an analysis of about 1,110 young voters based on their educational experience.

CIRCLE, which is based at Tufts University and was founded in 2001 by a grant from the Pew Charitable Trusts, found that youths with college backgrounds were about three times more likely to have been contacted on behalf of the Obama campaign. The Romney campaign and supporters appeared to have contacted more non-college youths.

In Georgia, the numbers are harder to examine. The secretary of state does not keep statistics on voters’ education levels.

The GOP in the Peach State and in the Deep South in general still has a stronghold on the white voters, regardless of the education level, said Merle Black, a political science professor at Emory University and co-author of the book "The Rise of the Southern Republicans."

"In a state like Virginia where you have a lot of Northern migrants and people coming in from outside the state, things may be different," he said.

The GOP stronghold in Georgia is evidenced by the overwhelming number of Republicans in power at the state level, as well as the strong support for McCain four years ago and early polling data showing support for Romney this year.

Sabato said that "the higher the education level, the more likely [voters] are to vote Democratic." Sabato bases his claim on 2008 exit polls showing this national trend. Several polls and analysis done on data from presidential elections dating back at least a decade support Sabato’s claim.

Still, looking at data for Georgia, the trend remains for white voters -- regardless of educational level -- to vote Republican.

For many areas of the country, Sabato’s claim holds true. But in Georgia and the Deep South, the GOP is still firmly in control. We rate Sabato’s statement Mostly True.
_EAllusion
_Emeritus
Posts: 18519
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 12:39 pm

Re: So...how come Romney lost...?

Post by _EAllusion »

It's not a coincidence that more Red states tend to have higher levels of the uneducated. Red states are concentrated in the South and Appalachia, which tend to have poor public education systems and have historically had relatively poor education relative to the nation. It should be noted difference is marginal, but real.

The problem with your red = dumb analysis is that the poorly educated in those states tend to vote Democratic, not Republican. It's despite those populations that the states are as red as they are, not because of them. And it's only relatively recently that Democrats do as well as they currently do among the college educated. They used to get destroyed in that demographic until the rise of conservative populism.
But after that, the groups with more education tended to vote more Democratic.

Romney won the college educated. You'll notice he lost the general election. Hopefully you have enough basic math skills to figure out what that means. Your link just looks at whites for some utterly nonsensical reason. Turns out non-whites vote in elections. And non-whites tend to be less educated than whites in general and tend to vote more Democratic. So it completely skews their not so well thought out analysis. I can't figure out if your use of this analysis is racist or obtuse since it pretends that non-white people don't exist.
_Ceeboo
_Emeritus
Posts: 7625
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 1:58 am

Re: So...how come Romney lost...?

Post by _Ceeboo »

EAllusion wrote:It's not a coincidence that more Red states tend to have higher levels of the uneducated. Red states are concentrated in the South and Appalachia, which tend to have poor public education systems and have historically had relatively poor education relative to the nation. The difference is marginal, but real.

The problem with your red = dumb analysis is that the poorly educated in those states tend to vote Democratic, not Republican. It's despite those populations that the states are as red as they are, not because of them. And it's only relatively recently that Democrats do as well as they currently do among the college educated. They used to get destroyed in that demographic until the rise of conservative populism.
But after that, the groups with more education tended to vote more Democratic.


Romney won the college educated. You'll notice he lost the general election. Hopefully you have enough basic math skills to figure out what that means. You're link just looks at whites for some utterly nonsensical reason. Turns out non-whites vote in elections. And non-whites tend to be less educated than whites in general and tend to vote more Democratic. So it completely skews their not so well thought out analysis. I can't figure out if your use of this analysis is racist or obtuse since it pretends that non-white people don't exist.


Don't look now but I think the fog might be lifting!

Peace,
Ceeboo
_EAllusion
_Emeritus
Posts: 18519
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 12:39 pm

Re: So...how come Romney lost...?

Post by _EAllusion »

Dems probably will do better among the college educated in 2016 than their overall performance. It's been trending that way for over a decade what with the Sean Hannity's of the world appealing to the poorly educated and turning off the better educated. The difference will still be marginal enough that trying to make hay out of the fact that Dems do a few points better among those with college degrees to create a commentary on intelligence and political views will itself be incredibly stupid.

For now, however, the red state analysis ain't cuttin' it.
_Drifting
_Emeritus
Posts: 7306
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2011 10:52 am

Re: So...how come Romney lost...?

Post by _Drifting »

EAllusion wrote:And non-whites tend to be less educated than whites in general and tend to vote more Democratic. So it completely skews their not so well thought out analysis. I can't figure out if your use of this analysis is racist or obtuse since it pretends that non-white people don't exist.


As far as America (and perhaps the world) was concerned, until relatively recently, non-whites were considered not to exist. At least not in any meaningful way. Is American society fully moved on from it's discriminatory past? I'm not sure, I don't live there. But I would guess that pockets of discrimination still exist, as they do elsewhere in the world. (The debate might be about wether these pockets represent a majority of American thinking or not).

In Britain, far higher numbers of non whites are picked up and prosecuted by the police for wrong doing. Is this because non whites do far more wrongdoings than whites, or that the police just notice it and react with a higher frequency? I'm not sure how you'd differentiate.

I don't yet think American/World society has full accepted the equality regardless of skin colour principle. In that respect it is likely that, for whatever reason, non-whites don't have, or peceive that they don't have the same opportunities for education. Non white Americans probably live in poorer areas, less employment etc leading them less into education. I suspect Obama secured a proportion of his votes because of his skin colour, just as Lady Thatcher secured a proportion (female) of the Britich publics votes simply because she was a woman.

All that said, God should have been able to overcome these barriers and have Romney elected if He had wanted. So are we left to conclude that God didn't want Romney in the White House, or that He simply doesn't care anymore or that He no longer wishes to curse people with a skin of blackness and this is His way of showing it?
“We look to not only the spiritual but also the temporal, and we believe that a person who is impoverished temporally cannot blossom spiritually.”
Keith McMullin - Counsellor in Presiding Bishopric

"One, two, three...let's go shopping!"
Thomas S Monson - Prophet, Seer, Revelator
_ajax18
_Emeritus
Posts: 6914
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 2:56 am

Re: So...how come Romney lost...?

Post by _ajax18 »

So are we left to conclude that God didn't want Romney in the White House, or that He simply doesn't care anymore or that He no longer wishes to curse people with a skin of blackness and this is His way of showing it?


Drifting the Mormon leaders in Salt Lake did not even look upon Romney as anything more than another candidate. Yes, most Mormons do hold conservative values hence they fasted and prayed for Mitt Romney to win. And for many of us this defeat hurts very deeply and it will continue to hurt for many years as we pay back this insane debt. But the Brethren really didn't get caught up in it or make any bold predictions, nor do they have any apocalyptic view of it. This doesn't even mark a 2 on the shaken faith scale. The Church has seen far worse than this. You should know there's a lot more difficult cognitive dissonance problems that members have already come by and either managed to ignore or make intellectual piece with.
And when the confederates saw Jackson standing fearless as a stone wall the army of Northern Virginia took courage and drove the federal army off their land.
_Analytics
_Emeritus
Posts: 4231
Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2007 9:24 pm

Re: So...how come Romney lost...?

Post by _Analytics »

EAllusion wrote:It's not a coincidence that more Red states tend to have higher levels of the uneducated. Red states are concentrated in the South and Appalachia, which tend to have poor public education systems and have historically had relatively poor education relative to the nation. It should be noted difference is marginal, but real.

The problem with your red = dumb analysis is that the poorly educated in those states tend to vote Democratic, not Republican. It's despite those populations that the states are as red as they are, not because of them....

Yet the correlation is still there.

Does your claim that "the poorly educated in those states tend to vote Democratic" hold true if you control for race? I doubt it. In the South, blacks vote Democratic, and whites vote Republican. The big question is whether college-educated white southerners are more or less Republican that non-college-educated white southerners.
It’s relatively easy to agree that only Homo sapiens can speak about things that don’t really exist, and believe six impossible things before breakfast. You could never convince a monkey to give you a banana by promising him limitless bananas after death in monkey heaven.

-Yuval Noah Harari
Post Reply