Ziegler duplicates Obama voter poll results
posted at 9:12 am on December 3, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
When John Ziegler first launched his website, How Obama Got Elected, his poll showing that Obama voters appeared ignorant of the campaign issues touched off a heated controversy over the results. Ziegler offered a double-or-nothing challenge to anyone who wanted to fund another Zogby survey of McCain voters, but Zogby dropped out of the project instead. Now John is back with a new survey — and it verifies the first:
The 12 “Zogby” questions were duplicated, one on the Keating scandal was added for extra balance. The results from Obama voters were virtually IDENTICAL in both polls.
Here are the highlights:
- 35 % of McCain voters got 10 or more of 13 questions correct.
- 18% of Obama voters got 10 or more of 13 questions correct.
- McCain voters knew which party controls congress by a 63-27 margin.
- Obama voters got the “congressional control” question wrong by 43-41.
- Those that got “congressional control” correct voted 56-43 for McCain.
- Those that got “congressional control” wrong voted 65-35 for Obama.
John’s main thrust with these polls has been to show the effects of media bias on the election, and their effectiveness in informing voters. For that purpose, the new Wilson Strategies survey got structured to ask each respondent which media sources he or she used for information. The results here are fascinating. On what should have been the easiest and most non-partisan question of the poll — which party controls Congress — the media outlets showed a significant difference in how well-informed their consumers are:
- Those “exposed” to Fox News got “congressional control” correct 64-25 (+39)
- Those “exposed” to CNN got “congressional control” correct 48-38 (+10)
- Those “exposed” to Network news got “congressional control” correct 48-39 (+9)
- Those “exposed” to print media got “congressional control” correct 52-37 (+15)
- Those “exposed” to MSNBC got “congressional control” correct 55-35 (+20)
- Those “exposed” to talk radio got “congressional control” correct 61-29 (+32)
Talk radio listeners and Fox News viewers answered that correctly far more often than any of the others. MS-NBC viewers actually answered that better than CNN viewers, but network news consumers did the worst. CNN and network news viewers couldn’t even get a majority of their consumers educated enough to answer that fairly simple question.
I’d say that Ziegler gets his vindication. Be sure to read all of the data, including the crosstabs from Wilson Strategies.
Update: Once again, just to clarify, John’s point isn’t that Obama voters are stupid. It’s that they were ignorant of the campaign issues raised in the election, and that directly relates to the media that supposedly informs them. When over half of CNN’s viewers can’t identify which party controls Congress just after a national election, that speaks volumes about how well CNN informs the public on public affairs.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
How will America react to the obvious bias in the media?
*chirp… chirp… chirp*
Mojave Mark on December 3, 2008 at 9:16 AM
If you can’t get 75% right on the US citizenship test you should not be allowed anywhere near a voting booth.
liberrocky on December 3, 2008 at 9:16 AM
Fascinating. Go Ziegler!
latinchic on December 3, 2008 at 9:16 AM
The last election proves it’s easy to make idiot voters out of ignorant people. The gubbermint schools and the US media supplied the ignorants in prodigious quantity.
tarpon on December 3, 2008 at 9:17 AM
p.s. I still vote for a Basic Civics Test when registering to vote.
latinchic on December 3, 2008 at 9:17 AM
So, is the logical conclusion that an intentionally misinformed and uninformed voter population elected Barack Obama?
Quel surprise!
Next thing you’ll be saying is that the Main Stream Media was not subjective and had an agenda. /sarc off
kingsjester on December 3, 2008 at 9:25 AM
p.s. I still vote for a Basic Civics Test when registering to vote.
latinchic on December 3, 2008 at 9:17 AM
I would be happy with needing a verifiable I.D. and proof of citizenship.
Still, Obarfy is the 21st century equivalent of the SUX 6000 (ht: Robocop); everyone knew the guy was a dirtbag but enough people decided the nation just had to have the latest “thing” so we could appear cool to the world. Facts didn’t matter, witness Ayers.
Bishop on December 3, 2008 at 9:25 AM
The fundamental point to remember is that someone who knows the least about politicians will always vote for the politician who promises the most.
vinman on December 3, 2008 at 9:27 AM
This affirms my long-held theory that the vast majority of Democrats are either ignorant, or they vote that way for selfish reasons.
jgapinoy on December 3, 2008 at 9:28 AM
You’re main problem is that you’re operating under the assumption that most of the smears which the surveyor asked about are
A. Newsworthy.
B. True.
crr6 on December 3, 2008 at 9:29 AM
I have never seen a sitting President treated so disrespectfully as George W. Bush. The media has been willing accomplices for 6 of the last 8 years.
It is not surprising to me they have so blatantly supported BO. It really started by distorting what he really stands for.
Question #1. Will we ever see the opinion polls when BO approval ratings start dropping?
Answer: As soon as we see the Congress’ approval rating on Network news.
Question #2. How long will they blame “Bush” for everything that goes wrong?
Answer: As long as the willing media air it.
CinC on December 3, 2008 at 9:30 AM
Not sure how the results of this second poll vindicates anyone or anything. What does it prove? That the losers are smarter than the winners? Something’s wrong with that picture. I suppose it is a criticism of universal suffrage, if it’s anything.
JiangxiDad on December 3, 2008 at 9:30 AM
First you’re=your
crr6 on December 3, 2008 at 9:30 AM
Zogby’s reluctance to conduct a McCain duplicate speaks volumes.
whitetop on December 3, 2008 at 9:32 AM
I don’t know about you, but I will sleep much better knowing a majority of our electorate injest their intelligence from a biased media to shape this nation’s government.
Rovin on December 3, 2008 at 9:33 AM
Wow. That congressional control question is very telling.
juliesa on December 3, 2008 at 9:35 AM
The problem is that he focuses on ‘mccain voters knew more’ which turns into ‘mccain voters are smarter’, which sort of misses the point. The point is that every mccain and obama voter knew about Palin’s tanning bed, but most knew nothing about Obama. They still don’t.
Phoenician on December 3, 2008 at 9:35 AM
You’re main problem is that you’re operating under the assumption that most of the smears which the surveyor asked about are
Yah, those “who controls Congress” questions are chock full of smears, it’s a shame.
Bishop on December 3, 2008 at 9:38 AM
I don’t have time this morning to pour through the crosstabs, but I’m willing to bet that political ignorance is going to correlate with income. Poorer people (which will include a lot of minorities and lower, working class white folks) overwhelmingly supported Obama. My guess is they will also be less well-informed.
So all told, while I enjoy being able to beat liberals over the head with “your voters are dumber than our voters,” I’m not sure this survey really establishes that media bias influenced the election. Correlation doesn’t equal causation. So, is the Fox viewer someone who is better informed because Fox does a better job of informing viewers, or is the Fox viewer better informed because the Fox viewer is more interested in politics than the average bear?
But with that said, I think Ziegler’s on to something. There’s a lot of research on the “rationally ignorant voter” that, as I understand it, suggests that rationally ignorant voters are susceptible to media bias.
Outlander on December 3, 2008 at 9:39 AM
Rovin on December 3, 2008 at 9:39 AM
Prior to the election I read an article that predicted the dumbest among us would determine our fate for at least the next 4 years . . . it certainly was accurate.
rplat on December 3, 2008 at 9:40 AM
Ummmm, the question that the numbers refer to here is “which party controls Congress”. How is that a smear, how is it false, and how is that NOT newsworthy?
hawksruleva on December 3, 2008 at 9:40 AM
So much for the “intellectual” democratic party.
lodge on December 3, 2008 at 9:42 AM
Good point. So I.D. & passing a Basics Civics Test. It’s time, people!
latinchic on December 3, 2008 at 9:42 AM
Notice the word “most”.
crr6 on December 3, 2008 at 9:42 AM
Prior to the election I read an article that predicted the dumbest among us would determine our fate for at least the next 4 years . . . it certainly was accurate.
rplat on December 3, 2008 at 9:40 AM
Feels good to know that we are slowly being enslaved by the dumbest people in our nation, doesn’t it?
Exit question: Are dumb people less or more likely to be better shots than smart people? We will need to know this when the next revolution or civil war occurs.
Bishop on December 3, 2008 at 9:43 AM
Outlander, it’s easy to blame ignorance on income, but I know tons of college-educated folks with decent jobs who don’t follow politics at all. They just pick up the “conventional wisdom” from the networks and newspapers.
Added to that is the tendency for partisans to blindly support their candidates, and it’s easy to create ignorant voters in all income brackets. Your average Hollywood actor, for example, would probably not score too well.
hawksruleva on December 3, 2008 at 9:43 AM
How do the number of dead and duplicated “ACORN” voters factor into these percentaces?
Amazed on December 3, 2008 at 9:47 AM
Crr6, ok, let’s assume every other question in the survey is irrelevant. Knowing that Biden stepped out of a campaign for plagiarism. Knowing that Obama won his first election when his opponents were removed from the ballot. Who is this Bill Ayers guy. Who was involved in the Keating 5 scandal. Who said “I can see Russia from my house”.
Even if none of those matter, it’s important that folks know which party runs Congress. That’s pretty basic info. And the facts are clear. Folks who watched Fox news and/or listened to talk radio were more likely to get the answer right.
Are you arguing that it doesn’t MATTER if the press helps the public learn about the candidates, and about politics in general?
hawksruleva on December 3, 2008 at 9:48 AM
It won’t matter because they don’t think they will lose their 2nd.
thomasaur on December 3, 2008 at 9:49 AM
We’re living in Al Gore’s (Shaped) Information Society
vinman on December 3, 2008 at 9:49 AM
The fact that many Hollywood actors never graduated from high school could effect their “score”.
rplat on December 3, 2008 at 9:49 AM
Also
Before the “Make voting easier crowd took over, it was required here in Massachusetts to pass a basic Civics test to register to vote. And it had to be done in person, not by a phoney motor voter program.
We have given control of the country to the least informed among us.
Amazed on December 3, 2008 at 9:51 AM
crr6 on December 3, 2008 at 9:29 AM
Knowing which party controls congress is a smear?
No wonder you are a Democrat.
MarkTheGreat on December 3, 2008 at 9:53 AM
Of course not. I’m saying everything you mentioned other than the congressional control question is either of questionable veracity or isn’t really that newsworthy. So using it as some sort of damning study on media bias and voter knowledgeability is stupid. The fact that voters with post-graduate degrees voted overwhelingly for Obama kinda decimates the whole “Obama voters are stupid” meme anyway.
crr6 on December 3, 2008 at 9:53 AM
The amazing thing to me is that the liberals have such serious problems with reality, and the hate/anger thingy, about everything conservative, continues unabated. They are delusional, AND uninformed, to frightening levels.
It appears to be a systemic affliction for which there is no cure. Not even a successful campaign for the office of POTUS and congress is enough. They WILL begin to devour their own soon.
Yoop on December 3, 2008 at 9:55 AM
This is actually the most important part of the survey. If you were to be “exposed” to talk radio or to Fox news you would not know all that much about the Keating 5 or other McCain problems. And what we’re seeing in this data set is that people actively seek out positive information about their candidate and are less interested in investigating the minutia of negative information about their own side.
It’s also clear that anyone with access to a radio or to either CNN/MSNBC also has acccess to talk radio and Fox News. But individuals *made choices* about where they would get their information from, preceisely because they *know* which networks will give them the kinds of information they want to hear about their preferred candidate. One thing that’s been good about the “media bias” drama is that it really does allow people to choose what kind of information/slant they want. So to say that these consumer choices are people being “stupid” or “ignorant” is a little bit ridiculous.
And when you look at the exit poll data, Obama did extremely well among wealthy Americans and well educated Americans. Why is that poll data illegit and this poll data acceptable?
DeathToMediaHacks on December 3, 2008 at 9:57 AM
The sad truth is: Instead of information, the MSM dealt with supposition. Instead of being objective, they were subjective. Instead of being an observer, they became an advocate. For those people who only get their news from the MSM, this slanted viewpoint became theirs. They internalized it. That is how BDS and the Cult of Obama spread. That is how Obama got elected. Well, that and he spoke well and was clean (Thanks, VP Elect!).
kingsjester on December 3, 2008 at 9:57 AM
It’s sad that if you asked those same people the following question, 100% would get it correct:
What sport is played by teams in the NFL?
txsurveyor on December 3, 2008 at 9:58 AM
You’re main problem is that you’re operating under the assumption that most of the smears which the surveyor asked about are
A. Newsworthy.
B. True.
crr6 on December 3, 2008 at 9:29 AM
this idiotic post reflects a typical liberal maxim. “What is important for me to know is what I deem important for me to know.” It’s a lovely way to avoid taking responsibility for any of your shortcomings– also a typical child’s gambit.
max1 on December 3, 2008 at 9:58 AM
Read your post. Read mine again. Who comes off as having a greater problem with the “hate/anger thingy”?
crr6 on December 3, 2008 at 10:00 AM
Useless and stupid is the way the Democrats need the majority of the voting public. Cream rises to the top, and the Dems know they can’t keep a good man down; so they know the nation’s producers will continue to produce. They just need more idiots than producers in order to steal the nation’s wealth the producers create.
Nothing new.
saiga on December 3, 2008 at 10:03 AM
The people pulling the wagon have confidence in themselves along with self respect. The loosers riding in the wagon are stricken with self doubt and the knowledge they are flunkies. The flunkies naturally can’t take responsibility for themselves, so they blame others. There in lies the seeds of the victim mentality the dems rely so heavily upon.
saiga on December 3, 2008 at 10:06 AM
If this group of voters didn’t know the answers to these poll questions they are uninformed. If you wish to call them stupid so be it. I happen to know many people with post graduate degrees who don’t receive a well rounded amount of information making them uninformed on the subject of Barak Obama, Joe Biden and their political history. So, post grads are uninformed and the rest are just plain stupid.
thomasaur on December 3, 2008 at 10:07 AM
People, this confirms that we’re now living at the beginning of the end of this Constitutional Republic.
Good Ole’ Ben Franklin famously said, “A republic, if you can keep it.” It is obvious that Americans of this 21st century can’t. They probably don’t even know what Ben Franklin said in the first place!
May I suggest Conservatives that other options for self-governance are available and should be considered? I see a breakup of this nation in the future – and it won’t be pretty.
newton on December 3, 2008 at 10:08 AM
If you don’t pay taxes, you shouldn’t be able to vote. Representation without taxation = Obama Presidency
marklmail on December 3, 2008 at 10:09 AM
I’m one of the smart losers, and I’ve been licking my wounds and thinking about just what you both said.
The whole thing reminds me of Dave Grossman’s, I Only Hang With Sheepdogs story. If you haven’t read it, it’s a must.
The sheep (dumb voters) are the unwitting prey of the wolves, but it seems to me that by following Grossman’s logic, they’re essentially blameless, by virtue of their huge reserves of fear and denial.
They dislike the sheepdogs too because they see in them the capacity for violence (which scares them) and their willingness to stand alone as individuals. He points to the typical lib Mom unwilling to have a cop in her kid’s school because it’s too “scary” or “militaristic” (think ROTC on campus.) Among them many things that they don’t know is that sheepdogs are forbidden to hurt sheep.
So when my entire extended family, on both sides, to a person, voted for Obama last month, I was wounded, but unbowed. If I have to stand alone and will myself into a sheepdog I will.
But where I’m confused is when the sheep have the right and ability to outlaw the sheepdogs, thinking they’re the menace. Does that mean the sheepdogs already failed in their duty because things already got so far out of hand, or does it mean that the sheepdogs have to swing into action now, or wait until the wolves start to consume the sheep?
JiangxiDad on December 3, 2008 at 10:10 AM
Voters who are not very well informed still know who is in control of the White House, and are more willing to go along with media bias when that bias coincides with bad economic conditions under a Republican administration.
What’s more interesting is years like 1980 and 1994, when things are going wrong under a Democratic administration and congress. The media bias doesn’t change — they’re still for whomever the Democrats have in power, and attempt to spin the news accordingly — but it’s a lot easier to take bad news and spin it into even worse reports than to take a crappy economy and convince voters it’s all rainbows and unicorns out there.
Even the casual voters have been able to tell in the past when the media is trying to sucker them under those conditions, and that’s the problem Democrats face going into the next two years — if things still stink in 2010, the number of truly uninformed people willing to buy anything the big media tells them is going to be a lot lower than the past two election cycles (and to be fair, Obama and Emmanuel seem to recognize that, which is why they’re not going hard left on national defense or their economic advisors).
jon1979 on December 3, 2008 at 10:11 AM
Haven’t read all the comments, so apologies if someone’s made this point, but couldn’t the data also be interpreted as showing that stupid people tend to follow left-of-centre media?
I mean, I know they’re stupid, you know they’re stupid, it’s just hard to find the scientific evidence.
EnglishMike on December 3, 2008 at 10:16 AM
jon1979
And, hypothetically, if the anointed one is still in office in say six years and the economy is weak you won’t be hearing phrases like “worst economy since Hoover”.
Jeff on December 3, 2008 at 10:19 AM
Most voters do not follow politics that closely. This poll is about media bias, not whether people are dumb or not.
The media is supposed to keep everyone informed and not editorialize the news. They not only editorialize but they also shape the news with outright falsehoods and misinformation.
It used to be that people would not lie because they know that it is wrong to do so. Then we went to it’s ok for little “white” lies if it’s for the good of the people to now if we get caught, we’ll let a lawyer define what is, is.
Vince on December 3, 2008 at 10:20 AM
Great point…
This country becamse great as a REPUBLIC, not a Democracy.
The plan our founding Fathers made for this government was a very interesting one…
To spend money, the bill had to start in the House of Reps, the Peoples House… the one directly elected by the people…
It than had to be sent to the Senate, who were direct representatives of the STATES… so the States had a say in the Fed Gov…
Then it had to signed by the President… whose mandate is more foreign policy than anything else, but he also looks out for the whole country….
So, you had local politicians (House), then States (Senate), then a rep of the whold country (President), having to agree on somthing for it to pass….
Now? All are popularly elected… so now its just a case of which party can buy off the electorate faster…
Democracy will fail… and is failing here. It takes about 30% of the eligable electorate to get voted in as President… and 40% of the electorate pays no Federal income tax….
Figure it out folks… don’t look good.
Romeo13 on December 3, 2008 at 10:23 AM
Ed,
Here is the question that didn’t get answered. Even knowing the correct answer, how many would have voted for Obama anyway?
The premise is, that being informed would have changed the outcome of the voter’s choice? I am going to suggest that even knowing the correct answers, these “Voters” wouldn’t be voting based on logic or reason but “emotion” Do you know what the downside of voting on how you feel in the moment? Your feelings can change but you can’t change your vote. Many will read this, and think DUH! but there are folks out there, that don’t even know this is the process they are applying, they are oblivious. Ask them why they voted for Obama, they will tell you, it is how they think. Then you ask them why they think that way. They can’t tell you but they know it in their “Hearts” it was the right thing to do….and they are eligible voters.
(I don’t think with my heart, I did pick up on cues during this last campaign. The reaction of the Left by the introduction of Governor Sarah Palin to the Republican Ticket, told me volumes, I didn’t need to take a lot of time processing what that reaction meant. I can think on my feet)
Voting for Obama made people “Feel” good. There is no intellect involved here, in fact I don’t even think it is instinct involved here. Seems like Obama’s Hope & Change, repetition, triggered that chemical in their brains, and made them euphoric “feel good” it was like getting a fix to hear him speak after awhile. We saw the faces all through the campaign. They looked like cult members -zombies. Now that he is President, and can’t really talk about Change anymore, See his cabinet, He is either Bill Clinton or George Bush’s 3rd term. I do wonder where they will go to get their fix? What does Hope & Change Withdrawal look like?
Dr Evil on December 3, 2008 at 10:24 AM
Crr6 said:
Alrighty, I’m game. If you could comission your own survey to find out how informed voters are, what would you ask?
Also, your argument that about degree holders somewhat misses the mark. Taking that idea a little further, that means that you’d be ok with a Lawyer doing your open-heart surgery. Just because someone is informed in one area doesn’t make them an expert in other areas. I, for example, know a lot about World of Warcraft, but not much about Beanie Babies ;-)
hawksruleva on December 3, 2008 at 10:25 AM
Keating 5 was an irrelevant issue in the campaign. Obama only raised it in a single ad. Further, if you’ll recall, McCain was fully exonerated of wrongdoing — which is why it’s a non-issue. So, if most McCain voters didn’t know about Keating 5, that’s why.
In other words, you can’t equate Keating 5 with William Ayers or Jeremiah Wright.
The real basis for comparison, I think, is the Sarah Palin stuff vs. Joe Biden. Joe Biden was touted as a foreign policy guru despite no real evidence to suggest that he was, and nobody asked any questions about all his plagiarism scandals and other issues.
Outlander on December 3, 2008 at 10:27 AM
The Dems do have most of the intellectuals, but there aren’t very many of them, so they make up the numbers with the stupid, the poor and the angry. And anyway…
“Some ideas are so stupid that only intellectuals could believe them.” George Orwell
EnglishMike on December 3, 2008 at 10:27 AM
Looking at the “education” system today, holding a post-grad degree ain’t saying all that much.
Jeff on December 3, 2008 at 10:30 AM
This
JiangxiDad on December 3, 2008 at 10:31 AM
my sentiments exactly
mountaineer for liberty on December 3, 2008 at 10:33 AM
I’d like to dig into this contention a little further. Does anyone have a reliable source on a breakdown on what people with post-graduate degrees do for a living? A lot of them are certainly in the legal or education profession, which has it’s own biases. I have friends with post-graduate degrees that I consider very uninformed in matters of civics and ethics.
As for myself, I COULD have a post-graduate degree, if I needed one. Don’t have time for it. Have a family and a job that doesn’t require it. And in my opinion, it doesn’t prove a damn thing. It doesn’t even prove intelligence. Just persistence, and the ability to pay for it. When I took a few MBA classes, the theme was “pay your fees, and get your “B’s”. That’s the grade “B”.
connertown on December 3, 2008 at 10:35 AM
To you. And that’s the exact point of my post. You made choices about which issues mattered to you. You, no doubt, sought out media outlets which reflected your interest in those issues and paid less attention to those that had information you found to be less “relevant.” Even if you are more educated about Keating than the average McCain voter Zeigler’s poll said that “universally” folks knew less about the negative scandals associated with their candidate. That tells you all you need to know. It’s not “ignorance” it’s “preference” that’s all.
DeathToMediaHacks on December 3, 2008 at 10:35 AM
LOL. This in a nation that can’t punch a hole or mark a ballot or pull a lever.
I’d like my civics test in Pinyin please (and a gov’t paid interpeter.)
JiangxiDad on December 3, 2008 at 10:38 AM
It’s amazing. The GOP is obsessed with proving that everyone who disagrees with them is automatically not as smart as them. People who pursue post graduate degrees aren’t just “persistent” (and since when is persistent not a good quality, isn’t it necessary for success?) they are passionate and they have a thirst for knowledge in their specialized area. So no. Post graduate people aren’t automatically smarter than anyone else. But they do have a natural curiosity that outstrips other people in general. They enjoy learning and investigating as both are critical to success in post graduate degrees.
It’s amazing to me how conservatives belittle those who want to better themselves and who believe in education.
DeathToMediaHacks on December 3, 2008 at 10:38 AM
Fortunately, even voters who vote on emotion have their limits. Look at New York City — other than the special case of Sept. 11 (and the fact that Bloomberg’s was a ‘D’ running on the ‘R’ line), voters there for the better part of 100 years have never elected a Republican as mayor except when the presidency and congress is run by Democrats, because under those circumstances, there’s no Republicans for the Dems and/or the big media to plausibly blame for their problems.
That doesn’t mean if things don’t change in two or four years there won’t still be a lot of emotionalists out there pulling the ‘D’ lever. But it will be far less than in 2006 or 2008.
jon1979 on December 3, 2008 at 10:40 AM
Of the two parties, there were many, many more Republicans that knew of McCain’s faults and failures. It was very evident on this site and elsewhere. These were not ignored, they were either prooven overblown (Keating 5) or hated (immigration) but not enough to vote for Obama.
Vince on December 3, 2008 at 10:40 AM
I hear ya, Keep Hope Alive LOL!
Dr Evil on December 3, 2008 at 10:46 AM
Not according to Ziegler’s data. Why are you cherry picking the data?
DeathToMediaHacks on December 3, 2008 at 10:46 AM
I like cherries!
Vince on December 3, 2008 at 10:48 AM
LOL well I can’t argue with that one. Me too!
DeathToMediaHacks on December 3, 2008 at 10:52 AM
I disagree with this idea.
Though the US Constitution does not actually confer upon citizens the right to vote, I believe that to be the most fundamental right in a democratic republic.
Basically every person not incarcerated — idiots, malcontents, drunks, reprobates, even politicians — should be allowed to vote.
Also, these poll questions do not give us any idea as to these peoples’ basic knowledge. We do get an illuminating snapshot of their grasp on current or semi-current events. That does not however mean they could not tell us how many stars are on the flag or how many Senators there are in Congress.
Furthermore, our nation’s history is littered with instances of similar provisions being used specifically to disenfranchise Americans.
It won’t fly, not with the high percentage of semi-literate immigrants and Americans across the country. It takes monumental efforts just to get ID required. A civics test is not gonna happen in this lifetime.
editlessyesisuck
The Race Card on December 3, 2008 at 10:52 AM
Those lefty idiots like Jeff Cohen of media matters/FAIR or whatever always sprayed their urine and dung soiling their little pink panties when they thought people were being manipulated for political gain by the CORPORATE MEDIA.
Now we see that this election WAS actually manipulated for political gain by said CORPORATE MEDIA, but by the left, and now it’s all a big fat lie.
DIsgusting people.
benrand on December 3, 2008 at 10:53 AM
You mistake disdain of operating under an unthinking belief with belittling those who pursue higher education. I can tell you from higher education experience that unthinking belief in ideologies is common, and even encouraged in some disciplines.
Unfortunately, there is a pattern of swallowing the liberal ideologies hook, line and sinker that is associated with longer time periods in intuitions of higher learning. Go figure, the more time you spend learning from liberals and interfacing with liberals, the higher the likelihood of liberal ideologies rubbing off.
Follow me on this. If all things were equal, would you expect to find roughly the same proportions of liberals and conservatives among sociologists, biologists, chemists, and the general population that does not possess a doctorate? Is this the case? If not, why?
The answers are there to be found if you’re intellectually honest.
Marine_Bio on December 3, 2008 at 10:55 AM
Apparently Team Obama isn’t Done Milking the Donkeys.
http://michellemalkin.com/2008/12/02/team-obama-now-pimping-lapel-pins/
Dr Evil on December 3, 2008 at 10:59 AM
Well if I wanted to get a feel for how informed voters are I wouldn’t ask “ZOMG did you know Obama was on a board with William Ayers???”. I might start by asking questions about, oh I don’t know…their knowledge about the candidate’s positions on issues. Crazy idea I know.
crr6 on December 3, 2008 at 10:59 AM
Re-read both. My comments stand. You have a problem with the differentiation between smears and facts. I don’t expect that will change in your insular world.
Yoop on December 3, 2008 at 11:01 AM
I sympathize, but the problem with that is that it would rapidly become a political football, being standardized and formulated to a point where any monkey could be trained to put enough circles around the right multi-choice options.
My preference is to rebuild civics education from a young age….in a 100% privatized education industry.
LimeyGeek on December 3, 2008 at 11:02 AM
Now, Now…Enough of that. How can we build a Nanny state with educated youngsters who can think for themselves? Where would the next generation of Democrats come from?
/SARC
Marine_Bio on December 3, 2008 at 11:07 AM
I think it’s about both. However, I prefer to call these people who don’t follow politics that closely as “ignorant.” I have truly only met a handful of “dumb” people in my life. Most are just uneducated/ignorant.
Watching only one news source is tantamount to reading a book that only tells one story. Like many here, I watch fox, listen to talk radio and tune in msnbc and cnn so I can get all perspectives.
I think that if most voters did that, they might vote a little differently.
BierManVA on December 3, 2008 at 11:07 AM
That would have required BHO to have honestly elucidated his past positions on the issues beyond “present” or outright lying.
Nice try, but it doesn’t work for guns, abortion, or… oh, just about anything he said about any issues he had a record on… oh, what record.
Yoop on December 3, 2008 at 11:09 AM
And yours would be a total lack of reading skills.
Jim708 on December 3, 2008 at 11:10 AM
Says the conservative posting on a conservative blog to the liberal posting on a conservative blog.
crr6 on December 3, 2008 at 11:10 AM
I’ll tell you what will happen when Obama screws up:
1st year – Bush’s fault. He won’t say it, but his media acolytes will
2nd year – Obama will apologize in public, and the media will fawn over his apology while ignoring the screw-up.
3rd year and beyond – they’ll just ignore it, or blame the Republicans if they have taken over control of congress.
tflst5 on December 3, 2008 at 11:12 AM
That might not be his point, but BHO voters are as dumb as rocks.
It’s nice to try and pass them off as merely being “uninformed”, but that’s only a small part of their overall stupidity.
progressoverpeace on December 3, 2008 at 11:13 AM
It’s not difficult. Numerous tests can be made with 20 Multiple Choice basic questions, like a driver’s test or a citizenship test. And people get those tests randomly and input them in computers so we don’t have to deal with hanging chads and whatnot.
Intriguing idea, but consider it the long-term solution.
latinchic on December 3, 2008 at 11:19 AM
I’m not so sure about that. It is very difficult to piece together what these results tell you. There seems to be some kind of a disparity between the results of the different news network congressional control question and the result that those who voter for Obama got the “congressional control” wrong 65-35%.
This would almost lead to the speculation that many Obama voters didn’t view any news with regularity. Or at the very least, didn’t actually listen to the news beyond the 20 second sound bites?
Marine_Bio on December 3, 2008 at 11:22 AM
Stupid and ignorant by any other name
Kini on December 3, 2008 at 11:26 AM
The media were in love, and still are.
The rest were and still are….stupid.
Schadenfreude on December 3, 2008 at 11:27 AM
You can’t fix stupid, but you can educate the ignorant if they allow you. If not, they’re stupid!
thomasaur on December 3, 2008 at 11:30 AM
High school dropout, college graduate, Harvard professor: none of those education levels, in any way, denotes some sort of special fount of political wisdom. A post-graduate degrees denotes that you have specialized knowledge in one area…and one area only. It says nothing whatsoever about your knowledge of anything else.
But you’ve just illustrated the entire point of the survey. It wasn’t to demonstrate that Obama voters are stupid…it was to demonstrate that they were less informed than McCain voters. And your attempted dismissal of the results only passes the sniff test if Obama voters were unaware of all of what you call “smears”, but that is most certainly not the case.
McCain not knowing the number of houses he owns or Palin stating that she can see Russia from her house? Obama voters were certainly aware of these. But the fact that Joe Biden had to quit a previous Presidential bid because of plaigerism or Obama stating that he campaigned in 57 states? Suddenly, Obama voters weren’t all that informed. And the reason why they were more informed about the McCain/Palin points as opposed to the Obama/Biden points is because the media vehicles Obama voters were getting their info from chose to report on the McCain/Palin pieces whilst ignoring the Obama/Biden ones.
Now, would you care to explain why the number of houses McCain owns is a more important issue than Joe Biden quitting his first Presidential run for plaigerism? Care to explain why Palin’s gaffe about Russia is more newsworthy than Obama’s “57 states” gaffe?
McCain voters – on average – are more aware of all of these different stories. That denotes that McCain voters – on average – are more informed than Obama voters.
rvastar on December 3, 2008 at 11:31 AM
+1 – the most impossible are those who persist in their ignorance, don’t seek help/information, and then blame you for everything.
Entelechy on December 3, 2008 at 11:42 AM
Yes, but even the Daily Kos made very few references to Keating 5, and they are as far-left as you’re going to get. I’m not attacking your general point, which is that voters have a confirmatory bias (they tend to gravitate toward information that confirms their beliefs in their candidate, and ignore information that contradicts those beliefs). I think you’re right about that. I’m just challenging the example.
Outlander on December 3, 2008 at 11:45 AM
Before you get a superiority complex, or feel magnanimous, erudite, open, bipartisan, admit that you come here mostly for the thrills of belittling others. Sometimes you do add substantive comments, and that is when I like you the most. The rest of us, for the most part, don’t go over there to comment. Some go to watch the circuses. It’s no fun to poop in other people’s living rooms.
For objectivity, you are one of the smartest lefties who visit here.
Entelechy on December 3, 2008 at 11:48 AM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »