November 4
...serving up your daily dish.
This has landed in our e-mail box three times today. No doubt the citizens of Baristaville would top the list, if we counted such things.
This "story" is a widespread hoax. If you take the time to think about it, the wide spread of IQ scores is statistically quite improbable.
The Economist published this and later apologized for it.
Posted by: MrM | Nov 5, 2004 10:05:55 AM
aw. Don't spoil the fun. Nothing ensures future GOP success like good old fashioned liberal elitism.
They are nicer, smarter, thinner, more hip and more often than not - out of power!
Posted by: Right of Center | Nov 5, 2004 11:43:22 AM
Interestingly, the "IQs" cited in the referenced article are actually a proxy for average state income (100 being the national average.) It should concern both republicans and democrats that the wealthy are voting blue and the poor voting red. Clearly there is confusion regarding target markets.
Posted by: MrM | Nov 5, 2004 12:52:25 PM
Not surprising considering that a common response from young (and surely uninformred) voters as to their political party is, "Well, truth be told, rich people are usually republican and I want to be rich, so I'm voting republican." And although the younger voters mainly voted for blue this time around, I DID hear this response on more than one occasion. We should be worried if this is the political drive in "middle America."
Posted by: worried | Nov 6, 2004 11:00:55 AM
No surprise there, but there is a funny pattern witht the # 3 is baristaville. FIrst of all this story is entitled Third Times A charm, NJ is the third smartestn state and Glen Ridge High School is the 3rd best high school in NJ
Posted by: GRblonde | Nov 7, 2004 6:20:33 PM
ROC makes a point i have been trying to drive home to the liberals (of which, I am one.)
We need to lose the idea of the liberal elite, the Hollywood left, etc.
Posted by: Left Of Center, like Suzanne Vega | Nov 8, 2004 11:25:23 AM
i wish i was thinner, though...
Posted by: Left Of Center, like Suzanne Vega | Nov 8, 2004 11:27:13 AM
LOC also has a point.
The Dems should start talking to - rather than at - the Red Staters.
However what with all the gloating, i worry the GOP will now overreach and go too conservative in the next 4 years - or some will want to.
Liberals discovered how conservative Bush was in the first term, lets see (and hope) the Religious Conservatives learn how liberal Bush can be in the second.
Posted by: Right of Center | Nov 8, 2004 12:17:54 PM
p.s. LOC,
I am not sure the Left can lose the liberial "intellectual" elitism any more that some righties can lose their supposed "moral" elitism.
Sad fact that it is, it seems most people have to be sure of their superiority in some way.
Posted by: Right of Center | Nov 8, 2004 12:20:05 PM
Perhaps the Democrats should be asking themselves why the wealthy prefer their party. Is it because the DNC's policies, in fact, favor the upper middle class? They should also ask themselves why the largest beneficiaries of government largesse prefer the Republicans.
The GOP needs to wonder how much policies that favor the corporate elite, shrink government spending and foster generational wealth will play among the middle class. A national sales tax will disproportionately tax the red states because it will have the largest impact on the lower middle class and the middle class. The upper middle class will suffer less because they have the wherewithal to save more. The wealthy, of course, have no self interest in tax policy--they already have their money.
In short, both parties have an uneasy alliance of interests: the DNC has both the "intellectual elite" and unionists; the GOP has the small government types and the moral values crowd. Although current policies of both parties have been designed to placate all camps (the Bush first term as the don't tax and spend presidency is an example) these policies are not sustainable.
Posted by: MrM | Nov 8, 2004 2:15:55 PM
