|
EchoVortex
(hard) member
Registered: 02/06/02
Posts: 859
Last seen: 15 years, 5 months
|
Re: Teens for Bush [Re: Phred]
#3263308 - 10/22/04 12:27 AM (19 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
I've pointed out in this forum before how those in the 18-30 age bracket are overwhelmingly in favor of Bush.
Source?
For your information, the poll you referenced is one of high school students, not 18-30 year-olds.
Many pundits believe the explanation for this is that younger people today are as a whole more cynical than the older crowd with a more keenly developed bullshit detection system. Kerry obviously would suffer if this is the case.
Which pundits? Are you trying to imply that Bush doesn't shovel any bullshit for people to detect? If that's the case your own bullshit detector is defective or non-existent.
The younger crowd are also more likely to be internet afficianados, and therefore less influenced by the rabidly partisan legacy media organs. Again, Kerry suffers when the influence of his shills in the Mainstream Press is reduced.
Actually, Internet-savvy voters are far more likely to lean Democratic than Republican. Every Internet insta-poll had Kerry and Edwards winning their debates by huge margins, far greater than those of the telephone polls. The Kerry campaign is using the Internet far more aggressively than the Bush campaign is--I know, I'm on the mailing list for both campaigns.
As far as the Channel One poll goes, I have one thing to say: it has Bush winning Vermont and Illinois!
Kerry is over ten points ahead of Bush in both of these states in the current polling, and Gore won both by wide margins in the last election. They're not even in competition at this point. There's obviously something very skewed about that poll. It might have something to do with the fact that schools which allow Channel One (and its 10:2 news:advertising ratio) into their classrooms tend to be in more conservative school districts. Channel One has been resisted by more liberal school districts ever since it was introduced:
http://www.commercialalert.org/index.php?category_id=2&subcategory_id=32&article_id=120
|
quarkyquasar
Happy FluffyBunny
Registered: 07/20/03
Posts: 312
Loc: NorCaL
Last seen: 1 year, 3 months
|
|
I really liked that response echovortex. Makes alot of sense to ignorant liberals like me. Thanks
|
Phred
Fred's son
Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 2 months
|
|
EchoVortex writes:
For your information, the poll you referenced is one of high school students, not 18-30 year-olds.
I am aware of that. The poll showing Bush support by age was a different one. It's in one of the threads posted in the last month. Shit -- might have been one of the ones that got deleted when we lost an entire week of posts, though. I'll check it out later.
Are you trying to imply that Bush doesn't shovel any bullshit for people to detect?
All politicians shovel some. Comes with the territory. It's just that Kerry's is so blatant and so easily detectable. On top of that, Kerry is the quintessential poser. The young are not only pretty sharp at picking up on posers, they're also pretty disdainful of them.
Every Internet insta-poll had Kerry and Edwards winning their debates by huge margins, far greater than those of the telephone polls.
LOL! Gee, that's a big surprise when you consider the DNC's co-ordinated drive to get Kerry supporters to stuff those polls. There were also many reports of people sending in form e-mails to newspapers oohing and aahing over how well Kerry performed -- several hours before the debates aired. Some of those internet polls showed Kerry with an edge as high as 88 per cent -- within half an hour of the end of the second and third debates. In every single case, the numbers dropped as time went on.
I find it amusing to find you of all people using internet polls to make some kind of point. You were the one railing on and on about how the polls in Iraq were meaningless because they were done face to face rather than over the phone. Yet completely unscientific internet polls with no restriction on how many times a single person can respond somehow become meaningful if they show your favored candidate on top? uh huh.
pinky
--------------------
|
Malachi
stereotype
Registered: 06/19/02
Posts: 1,294
Loc: Around Minneapolis.
Last seen: 14 years, 9 months
|
Re: Teens for Bush [Re: Phred]
#3263394 - 10/22/04 01:18 AM (19 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
-------------------- The ultimate meaning of our being can only be fulfilled in the paradoxical leap beyond the tragic-demonic frustration. It is a leap from our side, but it is the self-surrendering presence of the Ground of Being from the other side. - Paul Tillich
|
EchoVortex
(hard) member
Registered: 02/06/02
Posts: 859
Last seen: 15 years, 5 months
|
Re: Teens for Bush [Re: Phred]
#3263401 - 10/22/04 01:21 AM (19 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
am aware of that. The poll showing Bush support by age was a different one. It's in one of the threads posted in the last month. Shit -- might have been one of the ones that got deleted when we lost an entire week of posts, though. I'll check it out later.
Don't bother: the most recent poll not only shows that Bush doesn't hold an "overwhelming" advantage among 18-30s--rather, exactly the opposite:
Among all likely voters, President Bush maintains a slight lead over Kerry, 51 percent to 46 percent, in the latest ABC News tracking poll, the same as it's been the past two days. But Kerry has a sizable 57 percent to 38 percent lead among young voters, age 18 to 29.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=186261
So what was that you were saying about young peoples' bullshit detectors?
I find it amusing to find you of all people using internet polls to make some kind of point. You were the one railing on and on about how the polls in Iraq were meaningless because they were done face to face rather than over the phone. Yet completely unscientific internet polls with no restriction on how many times a single person can respond somehow become meaningful if they show your favored candidate on top? uh huh.
As usual, you don't get it. My point was NOT that those Internet insta-polls are representative of the actual state of opinion about the debates across the country. My point was that the DISPARITY between the Internet and telephone polls suggest that Democratic-leaning voters are a larger and more active presence on the Internet than Republican-leaning voters. There was absolutely nothing stopping Republican voters from getting on the net after the debates and voting for their candidate, nothing at all--except their own inability to do so or their ignorance that the polls even existed.
|
Phred
Fred's son
Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 2 months
|
|
I've seen several polls about Bush's advantage with the 18-29 age group. I honestly can't remember now which one I posted, but yours is the first I've seen showing Kerry with any edge at all over Bush with that age group, much less with a 19 point edge. Gallup and ABC/WaPo less than four weeks ago had Bush's edge in that age group as 12 points. A 31 point swing in less than four weeks is unprecedented.
Here's http://powerlineblog.com/archives/007983.php a breakdown of the Gallup and ABC/Wapo polls from September 27 --
Quote:
Younger voters, 18-30, have lower levels of unfavorable ratings than all other age groups toward Bush (33%, compared to 52% favorable). They support Bush over Kerry by the widest margin of any age cohort (53-41).
For people 18-30 (regarding Bush): Approve somewhat+approve strongly= 54. Disapprove somewhat+disapprove strongly=39.
John Kerry's lowest favorable rating comes from 18-30 year olds (33%).
Young people are the most satisfied (58-41) with the way things are going of any age group (overall, it is 49-49).
Young people trust Bush over Kerry by the widest margins of any age group (60-33).
Same with terrorism (59-35).
Same with "Strong leader" (65-25).
Same with "make the country more safe and secure" (60-31).
Same with "qualified to be commander in chief" (60-37).
My point was NOT that those Internet insta-polls are representative of the actual state of opinion about the debates across the country. My point was that the DISPARITY between the Internet and telephone polls suggest that Democratic-leaning voters are a larger and more active presence on the Internet than Republican-leaning voters.
That's one possibility, yes. A couple more likely explanations would be:
-- Dems are more likely to cheat on those polls, especially when urged to do so by the vigorous DNC post-debate ballot-stuffing e-mail campaign. I can think of no other explanation for the ludicrous 88% number Kerry had in the first half hour after debate two ended, for example.
-- To point out the obvious, there is no way of knowing how many of those who respond to the polls you mentioned are even Americans, much less Americans in the 18-30 year old range. I recall reading more than a few posts in this forum crowing over how if everyone in the world (or at least everyone in a group of thirty-five countries) were allowed to vote, Kerry would get around ninety per cent of the vote. Do you believe that only Americans vote in CNN's online polls? MSNBC's? I can verify that these polls make no attempt to determine even the country of origin of the person clicking the button, much less the person's eligibility to vote in a US election, much less the age of that person. They've accepted my input without question every time I tried one (which admittedly is not all that often).
Back to the polls which were actually done scientifically -- there is no way in the world there would be a thirty-one point swing in less than four weeks absent a paradigm-changing event on the order of the 9-11 attacks. (and no, Bush's performance in the first debate doesn't count as such an event). It is quite clear that at least one of those polls is seriously flawed. Maybe all of them are.
It will be interesting to see the post-election breakdowns by age group.
pinky
--------------------
|
AntiMeme
yankee doodledandy
Registered: 08/11/04
Posts: 208
|
Re: Teens for Bush [Re: Phred]
#3264204 - 10/22/04 10:20 AM (19 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
It's a disturbing, but not very surprising trend. Self interest will always champion self sacrifice, at least in the current culturual climate.
Another thing I've noticed lately is how geeks seem to go for Libertarianism. My limited 'analysis' is that social isolation breeds anti-social thought.
--------------------
|
Annapurna1
liberal pussy
Registered: 05/21/02
Posts: 5,646
Loc: innsmouth..MA
|
Re: Teens for Bush [Re: AntiMeme]
#3264224 - 10/22/04 10:27 AM (19 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
^ and how is it in your self-interest to vote for someone who wants to cut off your personal freedoms.. send your job to india.. and send you to iraq??...
-------------------- "anchor blocks counteract the process of pontiprobation..while omalean globes regulize the pressure"...
|
AntiMeme
yankee doodledandy
Registered: 08/11/04
Posts: 208
|
|
Who needs personal freedoms if you're not the one being targetted by unjust laws? What does it matter if menial tech jobs for the working class is outsorced? Who cares if poor motherfuckers who want to go to college is killed in Iraq?
--------------------
|
GazzBut
Refraction
Registered: 10/15/02
Posts: 4,773
Loc: London UK
Last seen: 2 months, 14 days
|
Re: Teens for Bush [Re: Phred]
#3264256 - 10/22/04 10:37 AM (19 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
I dont know for sure but I bet that you wont find any other countries in the world where people in the 18-30 bracket would support an extreme moron like bush... says alot about the media manipulation in the US. must be that old liberal bias eh?
-------------------- Always Smi2le
|
Vvellum
Stranger
Registered: 05/24/04
Posts: 10,920
|
Re: Teens for Bush [Re: Phred]
#3264257 - 10/22/04 10:37 AM (19 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
As far as the Channel One poll goes, I have one thing to say: it has Bush winning Vermont and Illinois!
any "poll" or "mock election" that has Illinois and Vermont going to George Bush is incredibly inaccurate - the only indictation that such a poll provides is the poll means nothing. I cant believe you swallowed this bullshit, but then again I can.
|
Phred
Fred's son
Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 2 months
|
Re: Teens for Bush [Re: Vvellum]
#3264287 - 10/22/04 10:48 AM (19 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
I haven't swallowed anything. I just find it interesting that the under thirty crowd constitutes Bush's strongest age demographic, with the glaring exception of the poll EchoVortex links. Obviously, the political opinion of American teenagers (with the exception of eighteen and nineteen year olds who choose to vote) has as little bearing on the outcome of the election as do the opinions of Englishmen or Frenchmen.
I found it interesting. Nothing more, nothing less. Hell, I'd vote for Badnarik, myself. And as I pointed out in my very first post, what I found the most interesting about the channel one poll was the very high percentage of kids who voted third party.
pinky
--------------------
|
Vvellum
Stranger
Registered: 05/24/04
Posts: 10,920
|
Re: Teens for Bush [Re: Phred]
#3264302 - 10/22/04 10:55 AM (19 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
I just find it interesting that the under thirty crowd constitutes Bush's strongest age demographic, with the glaring exception of the poll EchoVortex links.
You obviously are not familiar with the Channel One racket. Well, I am. The schools I attended had deals with Channel One to show their "programming" during homeroom each day for exchange for televisions - their "programming" was mostly Mountain Dew commericals, of course. I'm going to let you in on a secret - nobody actually gave a shit about Channel One - in all of my 8 years being programmed by Channel One, nobody paid attention. In fact, it was more of nuisance than anything. It wasnt unusual for Channel One to be played on mute - or simply not turned on at - often at the request of the students themselves. If you really think that a majority of the people who voted in this "mock election" took it seriously, then you're are truly out of touch.
|
afoaf
CEO DBK?
Registered: 11/08/02
Posts: 32,665
Loc: Ripple's Heart
|
Re: Teens for Bush [Re: Phred]
#3264363 - 10/22/04 11:15 AM (19 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
my guess is that teenagers are more likely to be jaded by all the indoctrination and less likely to be critical of their government.
only a fraction of the voters in this mock election fit into the 18-30 bracket.
-------------------- All I know is The Growery is a place where losers who get banned here go.
|
Rose
Devil's Advocate
Registered: 09/24/03
Posts: 22,518
Loc: Mod not God
Last seen: 1 year, 7 months
|
Re: Teens for Bush [Re: afoaf]
#3264375 - 10/22/04 11:19 AM (19 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
18-30 is traditionally MUCH more liberal than 30-40.
-------------------- Fiddlesticks.
|
1stimer
Religion=Rape
Registered: 11/18/01
Posts: 1,280
Loc: Amerika
|
Re: Teens for Bush [Re: Rose]
#3264386 - 10/22/04 11:21 AM (19 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
18-30 is way to big of an age gap to group together into a statistical reference. 18 year olds are much different than 30 year olds.
-------------------- ash dingy donker mo gollyhopper patty popiton rockstop bueno mayo riggedy jig bobber johnathan pattywhacker gogboob t-shirt monkey. There is such emotion in the distortion.
|
Phred
Fred's son
Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 2 months
|
Re: Teens for Bush [Re: Vvellum]
#3264390 - 10/22/04 11:22 AM (19 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
If Channel One is as you describe, and the reaction of the kids forced to endure it is as you describe, clearly the kids voting didn't get their political opinions from Channel One.
A lot of them may have just voted at random, sure. That can be said of any poll. I have no doubt that some of the younger folks polled by Gallup -- folks interrupted in the middle of a bong hit by the telephone who decided to fuck around with a pollster for laughs, for example -- have given responses they have no intention of following up in the real world. I did that myself three decades ago to some pollster for the Canadian government who took up around fifteen minutes of my time with a seemingly endless list of multiple choice questions. She must have been scratching her head at the pattern of my answers, but she was polite. Damned if I can even remember what the poll covered. I just remember I was shining her on for pretty much the whole thing.
Again, I don't use that poll as any kind of indicator how the election will turn out. But a sample size of 1.4 million is roughly one and a half thousand times larger than the typical election poll done by Zogby, Gallup, ABC/WaPo, Rasmussen, and others. Hell, I've seen poll results listed in this forum where the sample group consisted of less than 600 people! So even if the result of the poll is meaningless in terms of votes cast November 2 (since few Channel One respondents are of voting age), it can't be dismissed out of hand for faulty methodology.
I don't expect it to alter you vote or anything.
pinky
--------------------
|
Rose
Devil's Advocate
Registered: 09/24/03
Posts: 22,518
Loc: Mod not God
Last seen: 1 year, 7 months
|
Re: Teens for Bush [Re: 1stimer]
#3264392 - 10/22/04 11:22 AM (19 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
18-30... They are all considered young adults, in pollitical polls and telivision ratings. If Neilsen says it, it must be true.
-------------------- Fiddlesticks.
|
Vvellum
Stranger
Registered: 05/24/04
Posts: 10,920
|
Re: Teens for Bush [Re: Phred]
#3264397 - 10/22/04 11:24 AM (19 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
then why is it so interesting? All I see is a faulty poll that has no bearing on reality.
|
afoaf
CEO DBK?
Registered: 11/08/02
Posts: 32,665
Loc: Ripple's Heart
|
Re: Teens for Bush [Re: Rose]
#3264408 - 10/22/04 11:28 AM (19 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
being liberal and trusting their government are not mutually exclusive.
-------------------- All I know is The Growery is a place where losers who get banned here go.
|
|