Here's the facts from 2004's CNN exit polling. Those making under 15k a year supported Kerry 63-36 over Bush. 15-30k voters went Kerry 57-42. Bush and Kerry split 30k-50k (Kerry by a 50-49 margin) but from then on all Bush. 50-75k 56- 43 $75-100k 55- 45 $100-150k 57-42 $150-200k 58-42 $200,000+ 63-35 Weirdly there's a noticeable divergence between education and income. Bush and Kerry split the college grad vote 49-49 (with Kerry winning post grad voters 55-44). IMO it's pretty cool to see that there's a ton of Americans making bank without a sheepskin from some pink institution on the wall. Then again I'm not some elitest schmuck who assumes that a chick with an English lit degree is smarter than a guy making 2k a week operating a crane......
You equate making money with education and intelligence. LOL! Once again it takes so little for Past His Prime to reveal the reality that money can't buy class... Quite true that you are not an elitist schmuck, you are still the same old low class schmuck that you always have been...no amount of money can change that.
Pabst, you're kidding, right? Why do I get the impression that you only see out of your right eye? Characteristically, it has always been the Republicans that make it a point to misrepresent, misinterpret, take out of context or downright lie about what their Democrat adversaries have said or done. You know your politics fairly well (although your leanings are beyond my comprehension), so please don't deny it. And when a party has to resort to misrepresentation of the other side, that says a fair amount about the merit of their own positions, don't you think? It also says a lot about the true state of their "family values" and their "Christian decency." "Duplicitous, lying scumbag?" You want duplicitous, lying scumbags chronicled and documented in a fun and entertaining way, I suggest you have a look at Al Franken's books that I referred to earlier in this thread. Specifically, Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them, and The Truth (With Jokes). Franken doesn't hide his political leanings, but he chronicles the outrageous deceit in full context. No games.
Sorry TDog, this, imo, is absolutely wrong, patently false. Truth is, they both do it. BUT, since most media lean left, imo again, the Democrats have the lead on this sick practice too. Look at the recent ridiculous Newsweek article on Obama's team and similar junk on Time magazine - they sell millions of copies each week, simply written and targeted at the average American household. Same for the major newspapers like NYTimes, Washington Post, LA Times, etc etc. Also, count the networks that have openly been favoring him unfairly (to his opponents) and a priori, from the beginning, more or less: CBS, NBC, and their cable subsidiaries, not to mention PBS. It is clear that several big guys like Soros et al decided many moons ago that we need a black leftist president and they are making it happen. Of course, this can't be proven, but it is the only rational explanation of these extraordinary events and attack on the heart of our democratic system. (I'm sure that Hillary's faction agrees with this 100%.) So, let's move on and talk about something more palatable, or, at least, something we can quantify more objectively.
If you were trying to convince us that that small fraction of the population making >200K lean heavily toward the unsavory, and those more educated souls (Shall we say well-read?) lean toward the Democrats, it won't take much to do it. It seems we already knew that.
Stupid post. What do you mean by "equate'? One either is educated or not. It's not at all subjective. Intelligence is a different story. Education doesn't make one more intelligent. Education merely makes someone more.. educated. The education system likes to pride itself that education is the path to money. It isn't. Intelligence is the path to success. Intelligence can't be taught. The educated elite like to equate sophistication (another subjective) with intelligence. More nonsense. Can your buddy Krugman or T-Bird's buddy Franken (you libs love secular commie Jews ) rebuild an engine? Word warriors....like Obama. Bullshitters. Like you. Educated yet with the depth of a white mans condom.......
You know, this position that Obama stumbled into by accident and now they are all busy defending, the "I will sit down and talk without preconditions with any leader of any country, whether they are our friends or our mortal enemies or just a terrorist gang" doctrine, reminds me of a lesson in jiu jitsu I remember from my college days. Of course, jiu jitsu differs from Karate and Judo in that it is a street fighting system, when you are alone in the dark and facing multiple deadly opponents. Only experienced students of martial arts were allowed in the group. The first day, our instructor, ex marine and current police trainer, asked what we would do in such dire circumstances, alone, threatened by several mean, criminal-looking opponents, etc. Yes, you can start by offering them your wallet, but they are still coming. What then? The smartest looking and most affable buddy of mine suggested that he would reason with them, understand their motives, offer them an alternative to violence. To which the instructor responded by kicking him hard at the crotch. As my friend screamed and rolled a couple of times on the floor, and then tried to stand up, in pain, he (the instructor) approached him and said simply: OK, done that... now what? I don't mean to suggest that we should be quick to the trigger and kick or bomb everybody. Not at all, we should give peace every chance in all logical circumstances. But, there are some cases that this applies a lot less and we should be extra careful. North Korea and Syria may have a chance to return to the group of civilized nations, like Libya is trying to do, but Iran, under current leadership, is almost as bad as AlQaeda, we should be extremely cautious. Same with Hamas etc. Send an envoy or send ten, exchange information through third parties, fine - and, when there's enough common ground, then leaders may meet to confirm the agreements, not to start the negotiations. The world can be a very dangerous place and we need someone experienced at the helm, not a naive beginner who relishes being long on speeches and short on substance.
Sorry, Yannis, but I believe you're wrong. Also, and you may find this very surprising, but the media is actually slanted to the conservative side more so than the liberal side. Franken wrote about it in one of the two books I mentioned. At first, I thought it was a joke on his part, but then he proceeded to explain it, including the results of a study performed by a non-partisan organization, specifically, the Pew Charitable Trusts Project for Exellence in Journalism. The Pew Charitable Trusts are among the largest, most prestigious foundations in America and are totally mainstream. As Franken noted, their Project for Excellence in Journalism comes out of the Columbia School of Journalism and is considered to be one of the few media research organizations without a political axe to grind. But don't take my word for it. Check for yourself.
I didn't suggest that there was. I just disagreed with your characterization of Obama as compared to the moral decrepitude of the Republican modus operandi.