Are those opposed to Trump simply half-wits, fishwives?

[OhSusana]

Having being accused of being a "half-wit" by somebody attempting intelligent comment on a forum topic, it did set me thinking.
Is there any evidence to show that Trump supporters are more intelligent than the rest of the population?
Certainly they seem to believe this, but is their assumption actually based on fact?

This is what I found.
I searched a lot of articles, and they all came up with the same basic line, which I found, statistically, and analytically best expressed in this article -

Education, Not Income, Predicted Who Would Vote For Trump
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/edu ... for-trump/

Reading the article, you will see that
1. Support for Clinton surged in the 50 most-educated counties in America.
2. Support for Clinton collapsed in the 50 least-educated counties.

One of the concluding sentences says it all -

Trump’s approach to the campaign — relying on emotional appeals while glossing over policy details — may have resonated more among people with lower education levels as compared with Clinton’s wonkier and more cerebral approach.

And what about Brexit?

This article I found to be basically clear of politics, and purely statistical -

The Brexit Index: a who’s who of Remain and Leave supporters
http://www.populus.co.uk/2016/05/brexit ... upporters/

As you might imagine, similar results were forthcoming in the UK.
Those with a higher educatiion were more likely to support Remain, and
those with a lower education level were more likely to support Brexit.
People with "no formal education" were massively in favour of Brexit.
Those with a university degree were much more likely to support remain.

There are thousands of studies out there, but I tried to look purely at the statistical level.
And I find the results fascinating.
Are politics now being determined by the uneducated?
Are those amongst us with lower educational levels actually deciding what happens by strength of numbers?

There is a lovely - beautiful - madrigal by Thomas Weelkes (sp?) - and the final line runs something like -
"More geese than swans now live, more fools than wise".
Obviously similar thoughts to mine have been around for several centuries.

In conclusion, it seems evident that, contrary to the opinion of my colleague on this forum who accused many of us of being "half-wits", Trump supporters are not more intelligent than the general population. If anything, the converse seems to be true. And the same goes for Brexit.
Education levels are now determining the course of politics.

[OhSusana]

And might I request that colleagues respond with intelligent debate rather than resorting simply to name calling and the like.
I have seen horrendous bullying and the like on a different Paphos forum.
Hopefully here we can strive to be above this primitive behaviour.
I hope this request, at least, we can all agree with as intelligent, and educated human beings. Thank you.

[Jimgym]

Perhaps the poster was talking about those on this forum only, not the general population and basing his opinion on what he read here?

[Dominic]

If you don't want name calling and bullying, you might want to tone down your own input.

I am not saying you should. That is entirely up to you, and this is the political forum, not the moderate forum. But I don't see how you could possibly hope to achieve anything but an argument with your opening remarks.

Perhaps I will be proved wrong? Who knows.

I will say this though. I voted remain, and have a degree (in Biochemistry even, which was well hard), but I know people who voted leave who have degrees too. Could it not be that the masses voted for Brexit because they were more directly affected by the issues at stake than the better educated? Perhaps they have real world experience that the better educated lack?

Democracy, and politics, are determined by the people who can be bothered to vote. If the uneducated have learned how to vote, perhaps the politicians should be aware, and treat them with a bit more respect now?

[Jimgym]

Well said Dominic, thank you.

[Jimgward]

The undeniable fact of recent referendums in the UK show that the over 60's carried the vote in Scotland to remain part of the UK, while the under 60's voted for independence. They were labelled "nationalists" as a demeaning term.

Brexit referendum found the over 60's overwhelmingly voting for Brexit and the under 60's voting to remain. Nationalist labels now became popular by the media. A reverse of the Scottish referendum.

[cyprusgrump]

Correlation does not necessarily demonstrate causation...

[geoffreys]

A thread for "The Pit" perhaps?
Geoff.

[keving]

Why the pit at this stage? There has been no name calling so far.

Or perhaps you want extreme name calling, which you are allowed in The Pit?

[Dominic]

Certainly not pit material yet.

And the pit isn't really the place for extreme name calling either. It's just the place to continue your regular name calling until you run out of steam.

[PhotoLady]

It's just the place to continue your regular name calling until you run out of steam.

LOL, that gave me a giggle

[johnoddy]

And might I request that colleagues respond with intelligent debate rather than resorting simply to name calling and the like.
I have seen horrendous bullying and the like on a different Paphos forum.
Hopefully here we can strive to be above this primitive behaviour.
I hope this request, at least, we can all agree with as intelligent, and educated human beings. Thank you.

I laughed at you so much a bit of wee came out!

[keving]

^
an example of intelligent debate

[Dominic]

^
an example of intelligent debate

Actually I think it's is an example of Monica, from Friends. She is talking to Joey who asked her if she still found the guy at work funny.

My wife likes Friends, and Comedy Central used to show it A LOT.

[Jimgym]

Perhaps those who didn't go to college and are perceived by some liberal elite to be less intelligent, are hitting back? Perhaps, because the aforementioned have had enough of being talked down to and are hitting back? Again, perhaps it should be a lesson to those who feel they are superior in some way because of a college or uni education to sit up and take notice? Just some thoughts.....

[keving]

Oh Oh Susana, you are brave, but for a "Strawman" piece not badly constructed if a little one sided and a tad pompous, but perhaps that was the thrust of your argument. Interestingly a YouGov poll taken from August to Date has consistently shown a percentage advantage to those wishing to leave the EU. And I do tend to agree with Dominic, is it those who have experienced life's reality rather than led a closeted life in education that have a greater grasp or a better vision of the benefits that exist outside of the constraints imposed by being in the EU. I left school at 16 with a meagre collection of Qualifications, I attended the University of Life, and think I did rather well, education is no indicator of intelligence or indeed common sense..you only have to look at some of our Polticians to realise that I personally would rather trust a man with "muck on his hands and steel in his heart"

Susana's post is tongue in cheek and, deliberately, ever so slightly provocative in order to get a discussion going.

It stems from a rude and arrogant poster, who shall be nameless, who labelled people with a different view to his own as half-wits and hysterical fishwives, and by association with Katie Hopkins, as idiots.

I think Susana has constructed a good null hypothesis to test whether he who shall remain nameless was correct in his determination that some people on this forum are half-wits, hysterical fishwives and idiots.

With regard to the connection between intelligence and voting pattern I have not seen any report correlating intelligence to voting. I have seen connections between highest educational achievement (eg leave full time education at 16, 18 or 21 etc).

But as you have pointed out education is no indicator of intelligence, there is not a good correlation.

I am not sure what proportion of the electorate lead a "closeted life in education". I am sure university lecturers and school teachers actually form a very small section of the electorate.

You may have left school at 16. I may have left full time education at 21. But now at age 60, having worked for 35 years, my work experience has actually shaped me and my views on the world much more than my additional 5 years of education.

You learn a lot just living life. And I do believe that as you age, regardless of highest educational achievement decades ago, there is a convergence.

Not necessarily a convergence that I agree with. For example, I cannot understand for the life of me why such a high proportion of the electorate aged over 60 vote Conservative ... or voted Brexit.

I blame their children

[cyprusgrump]

Not necessarily a convergence that I agree with. For example, I cannot understand for the life of me why such a high proportion of the electorate aged over 60 vote Conservative ... or voted Brexit.

Guess what?

There are millions that can't understand why you would vote otherwise...

And at the GE and the referendum, they outvoted you...

[Mrblobby]

Good post Lloyd , I remember years back in the UK we had " I'm backing Britain " and it came to naught .

The UK and the USA have lost their way on car manufacturing , but Germany and France still have theirs ....what is their secret ?

Something has to be done to give the ordinary joe in the street a job to do every day , what ...I don't know . I hope Trump comes up with something , but I doubt things can be changed .

[keving]

It was the Rust Belt which helped Trump above all else. The promise of jobs and prosperity in communities which have sadly long since passed their sell-by date. The promise that Trump would slap huge penalties on imports from China and Mexico, which led blue-collar workers to believe that they would once more be in demand.

The bad news for Trump is that people have now got used to cheap clothes and cheap household goods from China. You cannot change this. There is no earthly way that Americans can ever compete with China, where overheads are low and hourly wages just $2-$3 per hour. Americans demand $12 an hour and upwards, more for skilled labour. And they demand expensive healthcare provision to go with the jobs. So the cost of household goods and cars will rise exponentially.

The factories and infrastructure just aren't in place to cope with the demand currently supplied by China. This could take 5-10 years to set up. And in all likelihood, Trump will be out of office by then. That is, if he hasn't blown up the World in the meantime

The situation wasn't a lot different in the UK with regard to Brexit and the outlandish promises made by Farage and Boris which people were led to believe as fact.

My son's girlfriend is American and I was talking to her the other week.

In particular, I asked her about Trump's promise to "bring back jobs to America"

There is very little unemployment in the United States.

In December 2016 the unemployment rate was 4.7%, this was a slight increase from 4.6% in November 2016.

Now get this. 4.6% was a 9 year low in the US unenploymemt rate.

Unemployment is not an issue.

So, if Trump 'brings back jobs to America' and creates new jobs, who is going to do those jobs? Is he going to target Chinese immigration to the US to do these 'new' jobs.

I'm afraid its all rhetoric, all hot air fueled by an ill thought out protectionist policy based on populist nationalism.

[cyprusgrump]

It was the Rust Belt which helped Trump above all else. The promise of jobs and prosperity in communities which have sadly long since passed their sell-by date. The promise that Trump would slap huge penalties on imports from China and Mexico, which led blue-collar workers to believe that they would once more be in demand.

The bad news for Trump is that people have now got used to cheap clothes and cheap household goods from China. You cannot change this. There is no earthly way that Americans can ever compete with China, where overheads are low and hourly wages just $2-$3 per hour. Americans demand $12 an hour and upwards, more for skilled labour. And they demand expensive healthcare provision to go with the jobs. So the cost of household goods and cars will rise exponentially.

The factories and infrastructure just aren't in place to cope with the demand currently supplied by China. This could take 5-10 years to set up. And in all likelihood, Trump will be out of office by then. That is, if he hasn't blown up the World in the meantime

The situation wasn't a lot different in the UK with regard to Brexit and the outlandish promises made by Farage and Boris which people were led to believe as fact.

My son's girlfriend is American and I was talking to her the other week.

In particular, I asked her about Trump's promise to "bring back jobs to America"

There is very little unemployment in the United States.

In December 2016 the unemployment rate was 4.7%, this was a slight increase from 4.6% in November 2016.

Now get this. 4.6% was a 9 year low in the US unenploymemt rate.

Unemployment is not an issue.

So, if Trump 'brings back jobs to America' and creates new jobs, who is going to do those jobs? Is he going to target Chinese immigration to the US to do these 'new' jobs.

I'm afraid its all rhetoric, all hot air fueled by an ill thought out protectionist policy based on populist nationalism.

Meh...

Why doesn't 4.9% unemployment feel great?

Only 62.7% of adult Americans are working. The so-called Labor Force Participation rate hasn't been this low since the late 1970s. The rate measures how many people over age 16 are working or actively seeking work. Back in the '70s, it was low because fewer women worked outside the home.
That's not the story today. Now, three factors are driving the decrease in workers.
The first is that a huge part of the adult population, Baby Boomers, are retiring. That's expected and healthy. It explains about half of the decline in the workforce.
The second is more young people are going to college and graduate school. They are studying more, which should be a positive for the nation.
But the third one is alarming: some people have just given up on finding work. It's hard to quantify how many people fall into this dropout category, but it's large enough to matter. Politicians like Trump talk about it in stump speeches.
The Wall Street Journal estimates that about 2.6 million of the roughly 92 million American adults who don't work want a job but aren't looking for one.