I can't help but notice that Bill Clinton, Al Gore, Robert Byrd, Harry Reid and Mary Landreau are all political products of the lesser degreed states.
Interesting. The 2004 census says: Black persons 57.7% Now as an African American, should I racially extrapolate something from that study? This would defeat the NCAA statement that "ALL" inner city students are at a major disadvantage also. If you count the majority African American community, does this skew the number downward or were they included in the study?
Some people are smart enough to get a proper education elsewhere.... Clinton was graduated from Georgetown University and in 1968 won a Rhodes Scholarship to Oxford University. He received a law degree from Yale University in 1973, and entered politics in Arkansas. Then it didn't take much to go back home and govern a bunch of hillbillies....
Some of those ten states have very good education through high school. California has absolute shit for education before the College level and is as blue as blue states get. This tells me that the blue states want two things from their education systems 1)educated liberal snobs to run things 2) dumb voters to make sure the snobs keep the money rolling in to the public sector.
I'm waiting for your response, even though I don't expect it to be very enlightening. I do find it ironic when stupid people post idiotic threads about the intellectual deficiencies of others.
How do you respond to the fact that most of your so-called "dumb" states were once Democratic strongholds? Oh but that's a well known fact, the dems lost those states when Lyndon Johnson signed The Civil Rights Act and ended legal discrimination against minorities. Is that supposed to make those states smart? Which came first, did they first become "dumb" and then switch alliances, or did they become "dumb" afterward. They were always "dumb", they switched alliances later when republicans figured out how to exploit their stupidity. They are dumb indeed but they are not trying to smarten up and they are not voting for politicians who honestly tell them that they are dumb. They just can't handle the truth, they vote for politicians who lie to them, flatter them and who they'd prefer to have a beer with. Then they complain that there are no honest politicians... Perhaps these folks just got sick and tired of pompous, elitist, liberals talking down to them. Perhaps they did, although the real reason was racism (see above). At any rate instead of voting for pompous elitists and liberals who actually do have their [economic] interests in mind they now vote for pompous and elitist oil, arms, insurance and health care billionaires who may not be talkng down to them but rip them off at the pump, make healthcare unaffordable, destroy unions representing their interests, oursource their jobs, refuse to pay their Katrina's insurance claims etc instead. They now vote for the people who use their religious faith in Jesus to get elected and invade foreign countries, screw the poor and destroy the environment - not exactly a Jesus agenda. In addition, there are three Red states on your list of "smart" states.... blah Actually the list of smart states includes four battleground states - VA, CO, NH and MN. Two (VA and CO) went for Bush, two went for Kerry. There are no true red states on the list and the remaining six states are very liberal.
The most educated state is also one of the most crime ridden so I guess you can conclude that Democrats are educated and commit a disproportionate amount of crime in the United States.
Per CNN's exit polling conducted on election day, 2004: Bush Kerry Some College (32%) 54% 46% College Graduate (26%) 52% 46% Income of$50,000 or More (55%) 56% 43% Married (63%) 57% 42% MARRIED WITH CHILDREN?(28%) 59% 40% Jewish (3%) 25% 74% GAY, LESBIAN OR BISEXUAL?(4%) 23% 77% White Men (36%) 62% 37% White Women (41%) 55% 44% Non-White Women (12%) 24% 75%
This thread is of course missing the point. The issue at hand, is what actually constitutes intelligence. Conservative, regressive, fundamentalist thinkers value conformity, religiosity, and traditionalism over new concepts, new ideas, etc. Is this an indicator of intelligence, to vote for religion having a greater role in government than secularist thinking? Is it an indicator of intelligence to prefer fundamentalist thinking, simply because that is the "tradition?" It really boils do to red staters thinking that regressive thought is superior to progressive thought. Given the arguments made by the conservatives are not an appeal to the intellect, but rather an appeal to fear, tradition, and status quo or reversion to a "better time" in America, one would have to conclude that intellectual curiosity, examining a variety of opinions to make decisions, abstract thinking, independent thought....are not the preferred method of the regressive and conservative redstaters...