Taft2016
Verified User
OK Mullet, if you want to keep playing...
Define: "Graduate Student"
Define: "Post-Graduate Student"
Gallup Proves Those With Least Education Consistently Vote Democrat
- Thread starter Taft2016
- Start date
OK Mullet, if you want to keep playing...
Define: "Graduate Student"
Define: "Post-Graduate Student"
maineman
Banned
they mean the same thing in different parts of the world. Both have to do with advanced studies for degrees beyond a bachelor's degree.... which you clearly don't have.
Taft2016
Verified User
I didn't say I did, Mullet.
I said I was taught by those with doctorates.
You know, them night schools also offer classes in remedial reading. You might wanna check 'em out.
maineman
Banned
his inability to work with congress... certainly not because the constitution is under attack.
Taft2016
Verified User
As I pointed out, they mean different things to different people, PARTICULARLY in different parts of the world.
And it only makes sense that two different terms refer to two different pursuits; masters and doctorates.
But back to our discussion; Obama did BEST among those with grade school educations. Correct?
His highest percentage in the education demographics was among those with grade school educations? Correct?
Last edited:
christiefan915
Catalyst
Look at the two charts at the link and explain why Gallup and Rasmussen are outliers, if you can. What I remember very clearly is the RWers on this site saying Rmoney was going come from behind, absolutely win and even take the swing states. I remember Rmoney not even preparing a concession speech because he and his pollsters thought he was a shoo-in. I remember the Rmoney team looking absolutely gobsmacked when the numbers gave Obama a resounding win... 332-206 electoral votes.
So you can stow the insults and face reality for once. Your pollsters suck.
"One of the terrific features that pollster.com first introduced to the polling junkies a few years back is the ability to remove pollsters from their aggregate (TPM's Poll Tracker gives you the same wonderful feature, but Pollster did it first)...
...When polling data doesn't make sense, I turn to the experts. In this case, here are some important observations by Mark Blumenthal and Alan Abramowitz on the tracker conundrums:
• Polling Party Identification: Rasmussen and Gallup vs. Everyone Else (Alan Abramowitz, Daily Kos)
• Why has Obama Taken the Lead in the Gallup Poll? (Alan Abramowitz, HuffPost's pollster.com)
• Gallup Poll's Race Issues Should Be Singled Out (Mark Blumenthal, HuffPost's pollster.com)
• Race Matters: Why Gallup Poll Finds Less Support For President Obama (Mark Blumenthal, HuffPost's pollster.com)
I understand that not everyone will agree, but the other feature of the polling graphs is that they are clearly marked as "customized," and you can easily add the trackers back in if you so desire. The action is transparent.
When there are better explanations for the discrepancies from the pollsters, I will add them back. I will appreciate feedback about new data that should make me reconsider. Until then, the aggregates sans Rasmussen and Gallup will be my standard."
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/08/18/1121497/-Why-I-remove-Gallup-and-Rasmussen-from-the-Abbreviated-Pundit-Round-up-charts
Electoral Votes Obama 332 Romney 206
270 to win
You cherry picked from user generated answer sites and even they were ambiguous about any difference. The poll did not make a distinction among those with postgraduate studies.
The point you continue to evade is that this highest educated cohort (postgraduate studies) was 18% of voters. The group you wish to focus on was only 3%. The highest educated group provided more support to his advantage.
I am not arguing your thread title. You said...
You were wrong and this demonstrates why the point in your thread title is rather insignificant. The post grads were 6x bigger! If we are not to care about them then why should we care about the much smaller group of voters that did not finish HS?
Like most of the conservatards on this board, you don't know how to make sense of statistics.
BTW, I have two bachelors degrees and many professional certs.
Taft2016
Verified User
No, some of them were quite specific. At this point, you're the one who is cherry picking. I never said any definition was "wrong." You did. And at this point you're chosing to ignore any different perception of the terms other than your own.
I said mine made the most sense. Which it clearly does; two different terms for two different situations.
And I agreed that may be the case. So why bring it up again?
I pointed out that the thread was about those in the lowest education demographics.
I'm not evading it. If you want to start a thread about that, have at it. This thread was one to discuss the reality that those in the lowest education demographics consistently give the Democrats the greatest percentages of any education demographic.
Do you have any evidence to the contrary?
No shocker here; a dimwit who defines himself by the size of his dick.
You really are THAT stupid.
maineman
Banned
what you think "makes sense" is irrelevant. Post graduate studies means anything after a bachelors. Graduate studies means anything after a bachelors. The fact that you want to make them different means nothing. As pointed out, Obama did best with a very small demographic - those that did not finish high school... and he did SECOND best with a much larger group... those with graduate education. THOSE individuals were more important to his reelection campaign not only because of their larger numbers, but because of their earning potential and how that translated to contributions to his campaign. Again... methinks you don't own a graduate hood and have never earned one. Blowhard.
Last edited:
Nice teabagger burn
Wrong again dimwit; the not-so-very-bright award goes to leftist dimwits who support Liberal ideals. You know, the ideals that suggest that turning all citizens into dependent wards of the state is a good idea.
But what would you know about that; you've been a dimwitted ward of the State your entire life and foolishly believe its free.
The idea that anything that erupts from Dude, Howey, Mainman, Zappas, YOU, Christiefan, Evince and the cabal of brain dead leftists fingers as being intelligent requires the willing suspension of disbelief. You morons are dumber than a doorknob and actually think that Governments have revenue problems and not spending problems.
Carry on dimwit.
Yes, you really are THAT incredibly stupid.
Wrong again dimwit; many like Dude look down their noses at the working poor. Liberals see the poor as a reliable gullible voting block that can be bought through wealth redistribution schemes. But turning citizens into dependent wards of the state is hardly a form of caring.
But alas, you're a brain dead Liberal trained to parrot DNC talking points like a trained circus monkey.