squishyx Posted November 5, 2004 Share Posted November 5, 2004 it wouldnt really surprise me in the smartest people in the country were democrat. but it really doesnt say anything. the country listed morals, the war in Iraq, and economics as the biggest issues of the election. you dont need a PH.D to form a valuable opinion about those topics. atleast in 2000 the liberals had a decent argument that Gore should be president. Now im starting to see why everyone calls them cry-babies (it was plastered all over my college and my friends scattered around the state). 10 million more people voted for Bush then 4 years ago, thats a pretty strong statement for a guy everyone said our own country hated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sammyk Posted November 5, 2004 Share Posted November 5, 2004 I am on a blue island in a sea of red. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RowdyFan42 Posted November 5, 2004 Share Posted November 5, 2004 I'm assuming the white ones are counties whose information wasn't available (or complete) when the map was made. I immediately recognized my home county (Saratoga); it's the white county in eastern New York that starts right above where the Massachusetts border would be if it extended west into NY. BTW, Bush took Saratoga County by 7765 votes, which is a much smaller margin than I expected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squishyx Posted November 5, 2004 Share Posted November 5, 2004 now that u mention it rowdy that map is wrong. i live in dutchess, 2 counties below yours, and it says we voted kerry. and we most certainly did not Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy Leeds Posted November 5, 2004 Share Posted November 5, 2004 Pretty revealing. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Of what? That people in population-dense areas voted for Kerry and people in rural areas voted for Bush? We've been talking about that since the end of the election. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> yup Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RowdyFan42 Posted November 5, 2004 Share Posted November 5, 2004 now that u mention it rowdy that map is wrong. i live in dutchess, 2 counties below yours, and it says we voted kerry. and we most certainly did not It's hard to tell on that map, but that blue blob on the border is actually two (well, three) counties. Directly below Saratoga County is Albany County, and the two border counties are Rensselaer and Columbia. Dutchess is correctly identified as going to Bush. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squishyx Posted November 5, 2004 Share Posted November 5, 2004 oh, hehe never mind. it be easier if NY's counties were the size of some in south-wests. the more i look at this map the more i think this country made the right choice. i know popular vote wise this wa a somewhat close election, but if seems if you travel anywhere in the country you will be able to find bush supports. and i know big cities make things alot closer, but look how many states are all red or have just one or two counties that are blue. now look how many states are all blue (i only about 5, its tough too see the mass border). i think that qualifies as a mandate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TK Posted November 5, 2004 Share Posted November 5, 2004 Just looking a Pennsilvania. It's amazing that 85% of that state is red yet Kerry still carried it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squishyx Posted November 5, 2004 Share Posted November 5, 2004 Just looking a Pennsilvania. It's amazing that 85% of that state is red yet Kerry still carried it. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> look at Cali, NY, Ohio, and even Florida. ( i know kerry didnt take the last two but he was a lot closer then the map leads you to think). amazing the distribution of the people. i think we should spread out more Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TK Posted November 5, 2004 Share Posted November 5, 2004 Just looking a Pennsilvania. It's amazing that 85% of that state is red yet Kerry still carried it. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> i think we should spread out more <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I'm sure people are dying to move to Death Valley and the Everglades Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RowdyFan42 Posted November 5, 2004 Share Posted November 5, 2004 (edited) oh, hehe never mind. it be easier if NY's counties were the size of some in south-wests. No prob. I had to paste the map into Paint Shop Pro, blow up New York to about 3x, and compare it against another county map and CNN's by-county tables to be sure. Just looking a Pennsilvania. It's amazing that 85% of that state is red yet Kerry still carried it. But if you notice, the blue areas are the biggest population centers in the state. Pittsburgh, Philly, Allentown, and Wilkes-Barre/Scranton. Also, completely off-topic: I'm sure you've all heard of Electoral-Vote.com. Here's a "did you know": their hosting provider is HostRocket.com, based right here in Saratoga County (here being me, of course, not you guys) and home to some coming-soon stuff that I'm working on. Very cool. Edited November 5, 2004 by Rowdyfan42 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TK Posted November 5, 2004 Share Posted November 5, 2004 (edited) But if you notice, the blue areas are the biggest population centers in the state. Edited November 5, 2004 by TK421 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sheeps Posted November 5, 2004 Share Posted November 5, 2004 It's a hoax. The same thing was tried in 2000.http://sq.4mg.com/IQstates.htm Guess it's better to call the other side stupid than it is to admit that your own party was wrong about a lot of its assumptions (I'm not referring to anyone here, just the people that set up the bogus IQ listing). <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Oh really? The IQ numbers were originally attributed to the book "IQ and the Wealth of Nations", though they do not appear in the current edition. The tests and data were administered via the Raven's APT, and the The Test Agency, one of the UK's leading publishers and distributors of psychometric tests. This data has been published in the Economist and the St. Petersburg Times, though this does not mean it should be taken as fact. Though the data does correlate somewhat to IQ of students per state based on SAT/ACT data, though this would be biased for those that had completed a high school education. Someone has also taken 2000 census data on percentage of state residents that have earned a college degree and used that to compare the voting in the 2000 election, it seems to correlate well. Someone sent me a table showing average income per state, and how they voted as well. Some people have written me saying that this is a hoax, I am unsure if it is, someone did a list like this in the 2000 election, I found it interesting, but moreso this time, as people knew exactly what they were getting into. My powers of fact checking dwindle in the face of such pillars of journalistic integrity as the Economist and St. Petersburg Times. Needless to say, as I stated above, the data is in question, but it's still an interesting correlation that is very plausible. This wasn't posted as an elitest diatribe, as i said, I just found it interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Desert Devil Posted November 5, 2004 Share Posted November 5, 2004 (edited) It's a hoax. The same thing was tried in 2000.http://sq.4mg.com/IQstates.htm Guess it's better to call the other side stupid than it is to admit that your own party was wrong about a lot of its assumptions (I'm not referring to anyone here, just the people that set up the bogus IQ listing). <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Oh really? The IQ numbers were originally attributed to the book "IQ and the Wealth of Nations", though they do not appear in the current edition. The tests and data were administered via the Raven's APT, and the The Test Agency, one of the UK's leading publishers and distributors of psychometric tests. This data has been published in the Economist and the St. Petersburg Times, though this does not mean it should be taken as fact. Though the data does correlate somewhat to IQ of students per state based on SAT/ACT data, though this would be biased for those that had completed a high school education. Someone has also taken 2000 census data on percentage of state residents that have earned a college degree and used that to compare the voting in the 2000 election, it seems to correlate well. Someone sent me a table showing average income per state, and how they voted as well. Some people have written me saying that this is a hoax, I am unsure if it is, someone did a list like this in the 2000 election, I found it interesting, but moreso this time, as people knew exactly what they were getting into. My powers of fact checking dwindle in the face of such pillars of journalistic integrity as the Economist and St. Petersburg Times. Needless to say, as I stated above, the data is in question, but it's still an interesting correlation that is very plausible. This wasn't posted as an elitest diatribe, as i said, I just found it interesting. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Actually, sheeps, the link I gave takes you to the numbers of the "IQ and the Wealth of Nations" study. If you take a look, it's obvious the numbers don't match the "red states are stupid" chart. IQ is such a subjective thing (I'm a proctor in Mensa and we have hundreds fo different ways to gauge intelligence) and it may be that people in red states have lower IQ's than than those in blue states, but it seems to me someone is really trying too hard to say that stupid people are the reason the election went the way that it did. Edited November 5, 2004 by Desert Devil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sheeps Posted November 6, 2004 Share Posted November 6, 2004 I don't understand. Those numbers weren't originally published? They have NO ground in argument? I guess IQ is selective. Maybe I'm biased because I have a 156. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaddDog Posted November 6, 2004 Share Posted November 6, 2004 To be honest, even though my IQ is fairly high, I don't put much stock in intelligence tests or IQ as a concept. It doesn't even assess certain types of intelligence that are conspicuously absent on standardized tests, and basically tests how well you can take those tests in a limited time frame. Binet didn't even originally create the first intelligence test to categorize normal children, he did it for the French Ministry of Education to identify children that needed additional help in school (like special education type situations). Now we use these tests to put everyone into specific categories so the tests are essentially being misused in a sense. Besides, some people with an exceptional IQ do jacksh*t with their lives, whereas those who score somewhat lower on an IQ test can sometimes be quite successful in life. I don't have too much confidence in these IQ/election results since I have NO idea what samples they used and how it was determined what IQ they had. And that's assuming I even DO give a crap about IQ in the first place!!! (It DOES seem like the red states feel like the blue states perceive them to be 'dumb hicks' and they are punishing us by keeping Bushwhacker in office. ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Desert Devil Posted November 6, 2004 Share Posted November 6, 2004 IQ is such a subjective thing that it wouldn't be uncommon for you guys to have a difference of 50-60 points if you took a number of different tests. You can use GRE, SAT, ACT, etc. to approximate an intelligence quotient. Additionally there are a bunch of IQ tests that supposedly measure creative ability. I attended a conference last year on intelligence and after many discussions it was decided that IQ was the property which an IQ test measures . But what the hell do I know, I'm from a red state ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts