Dr. Frank's What's-it

This just proves that YOUR party is stupider, Next Commenter!!!11

Yeah, whoop-dee-crap. I might be persuaded that some kind of 60/40 percentage might mean something (as to what, who knows) but six points? Who cares.

And also: who cares? :D

First, where does this statistic come from? Nemko says CNN. Where did they get it from? Maybe we haven't heard about it because it's not a representative sample. Nemko provides no link and no information.

Second, this guy Nemko is not an impartial analyst. This is basically the Tom Tomorrow piece in reverse -- he's just grinding his right-wing axe. Most of his article is just repeating idiotic Bush talking points that have been completely discredited, without analysis or comment, e.g. "Kerry voted against tons of military appropriations" -- as if he did this point-by-point as opposed to voting for DoD bills as a whole. Nemko also fails to mention Cheney's campaign to cut many of the same programs as Sec'y of Def. Then he repeats the "most liberal senator" charge, which is just idiotic, and I think even Bush's supporters know that that was a ridiculous thing to say. Then he claims that people probably opposed Kerry because he was in favor of affirmative action and a legalization program for undocumented immigrants. I'm sorry, Nemko, did CNN provide data on that assertion or are you just pulling issues that you disagree with Kerry on out of your butt and claiming that everyone else opposed Kerry because of them because that's what you did? I mean, did ANYONE mention affirmative action in this campaign?

Nemko even goes into a diatribe about liberals wanting to redistribute wealth, which he argues against by saying:

"That takes money from the entities with the greatest potential to improve society (for example, corporations than create jobs, invent life-saving medicines, etc) and redistributes it to the people, whom on average, will never contribute more to society than to hold a menial job."

Now who's the elitist again?

I've seen this statitistic before but I also saw that Kerry got the majority among those with post-graduate degrees.

a ha!! that just proves that our party is smarter than yours! you have to be *smart* to get a post-graduate degree! nanny nanny boo boo

Yeah, Nick, of course: I endorse neither the statistic nor Nemko's laundry list. I think it's neither here nor there how much formal schooling voters for either candidate may have had. But I'm pretty sure that if that particular statistic ran 6 points in the other direction, I'd have heard about it before now. People around here would be wearing it on Tshirts. The interweb would be awash with pictures of peoples' pets holding signs in their mouths which read: "Dear World: sorry the 52% of the educated elite who are not stupid fuckers didn't work harder." Commenters on my blog would brandish it as solid evidence that my general feeling on this - that all Bush voters ought not necessarily to be held in contempt as morons by all of us Beautiful People - is crazy and unreasonable.

For the record, it's my belief that the voting was more or less completely regional/tribal, with Bush getting the slight edge because Kerry was a terrible candidate who never managed to to convince quite enough waverers that he intended to take national security seriously. I've got no statistics to back that up, but I like it better than the theory espoused by the weird lady standing outside the cafe right now: she's holding a sign saying "U. S. A.re 51% morons."

Here is the statistics:

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/US/P/00/epolls.0.html

Nemko's statistics are right, but if you look right under it there is a statistic for post graduate study that is 55-44% for Kerry. Right below that is voter education broken into simply college degree or no college degree. Among college graduates Bush and Kerry are tied at 49% each.

Did Nemko see the statistic that said more people who did post graduate study voted for Kerry? Of course he did. Did he see the statistic that said among people with college degrees Bush and Kerry are tied? Of course he did. But he wanted his nanny-nanny boo boo moment to say "all you liberals think your smarter? Check out this one out of context statistic that I'm pulling out of my ass!"

Nemko says "Frankly, it doesn't surprise me that more college graduates voted for Bush". This is not true and I'm sure he knows it (he saw the CNN statistics page unlike most of his readers I would guess) but he doesn't care. He thought he would be clever.

I frankly think the fact that those who went to college were evenly divided between Bush and Kerry could be a useful statistic to show snobs on both side that perhaps educated people can have differences of opinion. Perhaps someone who wasn't just interested in trying to be make the other side look stupid might have attempted to discuss this.

Footnote: Nemko writes "According to the nonpartisan National Journal, John Kerry's voting record, over his 20 years in the Senate. was the #1 most liberal, moreso even than Edward Kennedy's." The fact that he was still pushing this debunked claim should give readers a clue both about Nemko's integrity and how hard he tries to acutally say things that are, you know, factual.

Thanks for digging up the link.

"perhaps educated people can have differences of opinion"

I second that emotion. Well-stated, Josh.

well like... um thats only cause like... its easier to get to college, when um... your dads a rich republican. everyone who voted kerry like, cant afford college because republicans like, keep them out.

or something.

Josh,

A second second (is that a 3rd or a 4th?) on educated people having differences of opinion.