New Loras Poll: Sanders does better with better educated, more liberal Democrats.

[HappyPlace]

Contrastingly, Clinton does well with those whose "highest educational attainment is high school" and "moderate and conservative sections of the party".

Clinton and Sanders Supporters
The two top candidates do have different strengths within the electorate. One such point of difference is in family income levels. In the most recent Loras Poll, Clinton garnered the support of 55.0 percent of those with a family income below $50,000, whereas Sanders only received the support of 20.6 percent of these same voters. Sanders does very well with those with college or graduate degrees, however; 64.3 percent of those who select Sanders as their first choice candidate have a college or graduate degree, whereas only 47.9 percent of Hillary supporters hold such degrees. Furthermore, Clinton captures 56.0 percent of all the likely Democratic caucus-goers whose highest educational attainment is high school, while Sanders secures 13.0 percent of the same part of the electorate.

Clinton and Sanders have comparable appeal to the liberal elements within the Democratic electorate, but Clinton is stronger than Sanders with the moderate and conservative sections of the party. Clinton leads Sanders 45.1 percent to 40.2 percent among those who label themselves very liberal. This constituency does make up a greater percentage of Sanders supporters than Clinton, however: 28.7 percent of those whose first choice was Sanders label themselves as very liberal, whereas the number is 15.3 percent for Clinton.

“In all, it appears Sanders draws his support most from among those with the highest levels of formal education, of liberalism, and those with middle and upper income levels. Clinton does better with those with lower levels of education and of lower income status, as well as moderate and conservative likely Democratic caucus-goers,” Budzisz remarked.

http://loras.edu/About-Loras/News-Events/News/2015/Clinton-Leads-but-Sanders-Gains,-Loras-College-Pol.aspx

Of course, it's early yet, things will change as more people learn more about each candidate.

[Ill16]

1. Tell me about Loras.

[riversedge]

52. Many Bernie

fans were critical of this poll this morning when someone posted that Hillary was leading. I shake my head.

[Qutzupalotl]

2. You pretty much need a computer or smartphone to know who Bernie is

and what he stands for, given the paucity of media coverage he's received. You kind of have to seek him out. I expect this will change after the debates, when these polls won't simply reflect name recognition.

[HappyPlace]

5. Media blackout, limited debates, there are reasons for these things.

And the Sanders campaign and his supporters are going to have to work thrice as hard to overcome them.

[lunamagica]

7. I think most high school graduates (no college) have computers and smartphones

At least where I live, I see smartphones everywhere. They are hardly a status symbol.

[Android3.14]

8. Nobody said computers and smartphones were status symbols

The study just shows Bernie Sanders attracts intelligent educated people. That urge in yourself to listen more to what Mr. Sanders has to say is your intelligence trying to clue you in.

[lunamagica]

9. Excuse me, but having a college degree doesn't equal widsom or intelligence

Some of the smartest, wisest people I know, never went to college.

And Berenistas get offended when they get called elitists!

The replies from them in this thread are incredible offensive and insulting

[Android3.14]

16. You insult yourself

Data is data.

If someone is unhappy when a study notes there are more smart educated people in one group than another, then I would suggest that the person possesses the wherewithal to change his or her level of education.

The danger, of course, is that the person might find that furthering their education may mean that their opinions will change.

But the student can comfort himself or herself with the reassurance they will still be a freshman come November, 2016, so will probably still think a war mongering puppet for the monied elite represents their interests.

Alternatively, an uneducated ignorant conservative could join the Sanders camp and bring the collective wisdom down a notch.

[lunamagica]

18. The study didn't say anything about "smart" people

The Bushes. Quyale, Palin, they all went to college. Brilliant people, there.
But keep going, I'm loving the replies here, and how they reflect on your candidate

[DemocratSinceBirth]

20. Well

If someone is unhappy when a study notes there are more smart educated people in one group than another, then I would suggest that the person possesses the wherewithal to change his or her level of education.

1) Wisdom and lack of a college education aren't mutually exclusive.
2) The suggestion that people, especially adults, can just change their level of education is patently absurd.

Please keep em coming...You are providing great entertainment for this plebeian.

[Android3.14]

31. I'm sensing more here

Adults go to college all the time. Fact is, I was one of them. I didn't graduate until I was almost 30, and I still attend a class every couple of years.

There are many millions of dollars spent each year on adult education. We have our own local senior college for retired persons wanting to learn and further their growth.

You know, DSB, if this is poking a nerve with you, and it certainly seems like it is, it's a pretty strong indicator that you might want to take advantage of some more college or perhaps go to community college or an adult education program to sharpen your skills before attending university.

And just think, if Bernie wins, he'll push for free tuition.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

56. Regardless of my level of education I learned enough not to make...

You know, DSB, if this is poking a nerve with you, and it certainly seems like it is, it's a pretty strong indicator that you might want to take advantage of some more college or perhaps go to community college or an adult education program to sharpen your skills before attending university.

Regardless of my level of education I learned enough not to make erroneous assumptions and patronize strangers, especially if I lacked the standing to patronize anybody. How does the old saw go, "physician, heal thyself."

[OilemFirchen]

35. Data ARE data.

Even I know that.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

57. Good catch.

[PatrickforO]

127. Hmm. The old Latin rules seem to be going away.

For instance, I'd be willing to bet you won't find one college professor who uses 'syllabi' as the plural for syllabus. Just doesn't happen any more.

The singular 'datum' is so rarely used as to be almost extinct from living English, and the word 'data,' though originally plural is now given the singular treatment for a plural. Another example is when you might be speaking of a staff. This is always visualized as plural - a number of people, but we say 'the staff is...'

But, technically, I must admit you're correct.

[OilemFirchen]

133. Modern parlance, old chap.

Do try to keep up with the times, eh wot?

[lunamagica]

37. I just want to say this. Could you at least concede that maybe, just maybe

Last edited Thu Sep 3, 2015, 01:53 AM - Edit history (1)

the less educated Clinton supporters and the college educated Sanders supporters view things differently not because of education, but because of life experience?

That the college educated Sanders supporters can afford to be idealistic, but Clinton supporters know they must be pragmatic?

That maybe Clinton supporters see Sanders and are able to see beyond the rhetoric? Oh, that wonderful rhetoric, saying what we all want to hear. But that's all it is, rhetoric. This is a man that in three decades in congress has accomplished nothing except naming a couple of post offices. Other than that, he has only pushed the yes or no button, and talked, talked talked.

I just don't see how as president he will be able to accomplish what he couldn't in congress.

This is a man who hasn't gotten a single endorsement from the people he works with (and would work with if elected). How can he get anything done when they don't even support him.

Maybe Clinton supporters see that.

And then Sanders supporters go on and on about a revolution sweeping the nation...they'll gamble the election on Sanders, because if he loses, oh well, life goes on... maybe next time. They think this way, because they can afford to.

Clinton supporters are pragmatic, because life has taught us to be. A GOP win would have devastating effect on many of us.

We see Hillary as a continuation of President Obama's accomplishments. She'll work, build and expand on them. We truly believe this is the most realistic and best outcome for the GE

Can you see we don't come from a place of ignorance, and we're not "low-information voters"? That we can have the same information and come to different conclusions?

[Android3.14]

43. If there were evidence to back it up, sure

But the truth is that Clinton garners her financial support from persons and organizations who have interests at odds with our own, such as the financial industry, the military undustrial complex and for-profit prisons.

Your fear that Clinton is the only one who can beat the Republicans is ridiculous. Numerous models show Bernie would beat the GOP. Heck, my slightly mentally handicapped cat could beat the Republicans.

[HappyPlace]

58. Respectfully, I think that you're projecting.

First, I don't think that either group of supporters are that homogeneous that such generalizations can be made of their members.

Second, I don't think most voters think about things nearly as deeply as you and I, as you suggest Clinton voters do.

Many just vote D no matter what and then go with the D with name familiarity, much like they might buy a product by brand name over an unknown brand.

That's not a slam, that's just human, D or R or Independent, people are that simple.

[Warren DeMontague]

140. Maybe. Or maybe the Sanders supporters have figured out that nominating the "pragmatic" guy got us

A second George W. Bush term in 2004, and nominating the guy who the conventional wisdom beltway people told us it was lunacy to run, WON us the election 4 years later.

[mythology]

147. For some reason you remind me of the Adlai Stevenson quote

Where the woman claimed all the smart people were voting for him and he replication he needed more voters than that.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

12. Since when is suggesting your internet interlocutors are ignorant a sign of superior intelligence?

The study just shows Bernie Sanders attracts intelligent educated people. That urge in yourself to listen more to what Mr. Sanders has to say is your intelligence trying to clue you in.

Since when is suggesting your internet interlocutors are ignorant a sign of superior intelligence?

[DisgustipatedinCA]

44. You like the word interlocutors a lot move seen you use it 5 or 6 times recently

Here nor there--just observing.

[okasha]

101. Actually, what it says is that he appeals to affluent educated people.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

3. Great argument

New Loras Poll: Sanders does better with better educated, more liberal Democrats....



“In all, it appears Sanders draws his support most from among those with the highest levels of formal education, of liberalism, and those with middle and upper income levels. Clinton does better with those with lower levels of education and of lower income status, as well as moderate and conservative likely Democratic caucus-goers,” Budzisz remarked

That's a winning argument. When you canvass for your candidate please feel free to inform the people you are canvasing that all the poor and stupid people are voting for Clinton.

[Scootaloo]

10. Scuse me while I sip my latte and drive a volvo. n/t

[delrem]

93. Good luck when you do the same, for your candidate.

Since you want to put it that way.

By the way, I would be considered "poor" by anyone's standards, in North America. I don't understand that as being a negative. Regardless of my education (the OPs point), I don't consider myself to be "stupid", a term that you introduced for rhetorical effect. That being the kind of thing that people like me, poor by choice but not buying into your rhetoric, notice.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

104. Well

New Loras Poll: Sanders does better with better educated, more liberal Democrats.

I will just leave it to others to divine the poster's intent.

[delrem]

105. Well, I'm sure you will! And you sure showed THEM,

whoever they are!

How dare a poll show numbers! The dastards!
Probably racists, too! Right??

[DemocratSinceBirth]

107. The poster in this thread who suggested I take "Adult Education" certainly made an adverse inference

New Loras Poll: Sanders does better with better educated, more liberal Democrats.

The poster in this thread who suggested I take "Adult Education"courses certainly made an adverse inference

[delrem]

108. I'm not discussing the matter with them.

Do you understand that simple thing?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

113. We already established you and your associates believe I am a moron.

I'm not discussing the matter with them. Do you understand that simple thing?

We have already established you and your associates believe I am a moron who is in need of Adult Education courses. These attacks are now becoming cumulative.

[delrem]

119. Am I a racist, yet?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

121. Continue to heap insult on top of insult toward me for no good reason.

I used to believe empathy was the sine qua non of liberalism. The repetitive impugning of my character in this thread has disabused me of that notion.

[delrem]

123. You remind me of Christ on the Cross. n/t

[DemocratSinceBirth]

124. That's the first nice thing you and your associates have said to me in this thread. Thank you.

You remind me of Christ on the Cross. n/t

That's the first nice thing you and your associates said to me in this thread. Thank you.

[delrem]

125. You're welcome. And thanks for the entertainment!

[DemocratSinceBirth]

126. Have a nice evening.

eom

[Gloria]

4. Well, I don't know how educated they are on the economics of

the situation we're in and how his plans could make things worse...but, they will never get implemented due to the debt situation and the central banks around the world and the global mess things are...

It's the guy on the bottom who is really feeling it...

[HappyPlace]

6. Americans, especially those at the bottom, frequently vote against their own self interests.

We see this over and over again.

Getting their news from Fox or other crappy sources, if they even have time to follow any news, crappy or otherwise.

[Maedhros]

11. You keep saying Sander's plan will make things worse,

but you haven't come close to making the case for that argument.

Bernie is the only candidate concerned about "the guy on the bottom" - go listen to the man speak. His plan is very straightforward and simple, and he has one objective: help "the guy on the bottom" to have a better life.

As it is, when you say "his plans could make things worse," you are echoing Republican talking points.

[Gloria]

19. NO, I am looking at the tax implications

they will not only hit "the rich."

There are ripple effects that go beyond the simple "screw the rich, help the poor" mantra.

Seriously, economically, we are in such bad shape we'll be lucky if what we have now stands intact...

And don't ever accuse me of delivering "Republican talking points."

Economic facts are facts....

I just got finished explaining (with link) how Sanders ditched his own bill that he worked on with Ron Paul (House version companion to Sanders' Senate version) that was up for a vote which wanted to open up the Federal Reserve to transparency..It would have enabled us to see the Fed's relationship to other Central Bans and WALL STREET. At the LAST MOMENT he bagged it and decided to vote for a watered down bill....Then he played around and the bill was again introduced but died.

It seems to me that for all his talk about Wall Street, etc. he seems to play in that space when he wants to......WHY did he betray Paul on the eve of that vote?

[Maedhros]

29. You're trying to change the subject.

We were discussing Bernie's economic plan, not the Fed audit bill.

You have not made the case for how Bernie's plan will fail - you just assert that it will. That's not good enough.

[Gloria]

70. I cannot make a case against it in a quick answer...HOWEVER....here's a read for you...

I suggest you really delve into the state of the global economy, think Greece, think so many things that are coming to a head.

These comments by Marc Faber, just today, may inform you of the complexities of the situation. There is just no way that any ideas Sanders, can improve the situation. We can chip away and try to ease the pain, but structurally, the old stuff won't work.
Demographically, debt-wise, ...see Europe. Nice idea to have loads of bennies, but ultimately, this falls under its own weight....

Would I love to have a society which helps everyone? OF COURSE...but we don't have the ability now...And politically,
it cannot happen with the present obstructionist Rethugs....

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-09-02/its-tipping-point-marc-faber-warns-there-are-no-safe-assets-anymore

"It's A Tipping Point" Marc Faber Warns "There Are No Safe Assets Anymore"


Markets have "reached some kind of a tipping point," warns Marc Faber in this brief Bloomberg TV interview. Simply put, he explains, "because of modern central banking and repeated interventions with monetary policy, in other words, with QE, all around the world by central banks - there is no safe asset anymore." The purchasing power of money is going down, and Faber "would rather focus on precious metals because they do not depend on the industrial demand as much as base metals or industrial commodities," as it's now "obvious that the Chinese economy is growing at nowhere near what the Ministry of Truth is publishing."

Faber explains more... "I have to laugh when someone like you tries to lecture me what creates prosperity."


Some key excerpts...

On what central banks hath wrought...

I think that because of modern central banking and repeated interventions with monetary policy, in other words, with QE, all around the world by central banks there is no safe asset anymore. When I grew up in the '50s it was safe to put your money in the bank on deposit. The yields were low, but it was safe.



But nowadays, you don't know what will happen next in terms of purchasing power of money. What we know is that it's going down.

On the idiocy of QE...

In my humble book of economics, wealth is being created through, essentially, a mixture of capital spending, and land and labor. And if these three production factors are used efficiently, it then creates a prosperous society, as America became prosperous from its humble beginnings in 1800, or thereabout, to the 1960s, '70s. But it's ludicrous to believe that you will create prosperity in a system by printing money. That is economic sophism at its best.

On the causes of inequality...

Unfortunately the money that was made in U.S. stocks wasn't distributed evenly. And we have precise statistics, by the way published by the Federal Reserve, who actually benefited from the stock market boom post-2009. This is not even one percent of the population. It's 0.01 percent. They took the bulk.



And the majority of Americans, roughly 50 percent, they don't own any shares anyway. And in other countries, 90 percent of the population do not own any shares. So the printing of money has a very limited impact on creating wealth.

On China's lies... and its commodity contagion...

I indicated on this program already a year ago, the Chinese economy was decelerating already then. It's just that the fund managers didn't want to accept it.


And now it's obvious that the Chinese economy is growing at nowhere near what the Ministry of Truth is publishing in China, but more likely either no growth at all or maybe around two percent, but no more than that.


So that has a huge impact on commodity prices, and in turn it has a huge impact on the economies of all the raw material producers around the world from Latin America, to Australasia, Russia, Middle East, Africa and so forth. And these countries then with falling commodity prices have less money to buy, also less money to buy American goods.

On Asian currency devaluation... and a Chinese economic collapse...

Yes. These countries just followed the example of what Mr. Draghi and Kuroda tried to achieve with lowering the value of their currencies, which is actually to create a depression in real incomes and a contraction of world GDP in dollar terms, and a contraction of world trade in dollar terms, which is of course negative for economic growth around the world.


Well, I mean, we have to put the achievements of China and also of President Xi in the context of what China was 20, 30 years ago, and what it is today. And it's a remarkable change. Now will China have a very serious setback? And don't forget, the U.S. after 1800 had numerous financial crises, and depressions, and the Civil War, and went through World War I, and through the depression years, and World War II and so forth. And the country continued to grow.

I think China is, from a cyclical point of view now, in a very serious downturn, serious. And from a secular point of view, I think there is still tremendous growth opportunity in China in the long run. But, as I said, cyclically I think they're going to have a tough time

On where to invest...

MORE

[Maedhros]

159. Still no explanation of why "There is just no way that any ideas Sanders, can improve the situation"

Really? None of Sanders' ideas will help?

That's nonsense.

That which is presented without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. You can't just say "it's complex" and expect anyone with critical thinking skills to concede your point.

If you want to claim that the world economy is in turmoil, I'll agree. When you say there is nothing Sanders could do as President to improve the situation of working class Americans, you sound like either a defeatist or an anti-tax conservative, neither of which is worth paying much attention to.

/bye.

[Gloria]

163. Ideas are fine but you need a reality check...

Politically, financially we will not invent a New Deal. There will be changes to the present Deal. There would be targeted attempts to improve equality that will possibly be implemented after a struggle. There will not be huge revolution because the competing interests will be huge. Winners and losers, and not just the rich could lose. I.E,
Walmart raises pay...then cuts jobs, get it?

My advice is you get educated, take all promises from anyone with a grain of salt, increase your saving and self-sufficiency as much as possible, help those in need, and never vote Republican or try destroy any Democrat you don't like, because, by far, they will try to pass along some improvement if they can.

This is all bigger than just domestic politics...look at the migrant issue in Europe, going on now. A very expensive problem that wii be hard for those mixed economies to deal with. Most have already had to move away from cradle to grave bennies...

Sanders people need to get their brains out of their butts if they think he can solve huge problems by mobilizing the masses...the lower income/education folks are working
a few jobs and are dropping from exhaustion...and they've heard it all before...

[SonderWoman]

13. So the well to do are voting Bernie and the poor are voting Hillary.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

14. I prefer the company of the latter...

Here's a conversation I was having with a buddy on another board:


I wrote:


" I prefer the company of my fellow plebeians to the company of intellectuals. "

He wrote:

" I would honestly prefer the company of 5 random prisoners inside the state prison than 5 random intellectuals."

[SonderWoman]

15. Well off whites won't be effected by a Republican in the WH.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

17. Well off Democrats and Republicans won't be affected by a Republican in the White House

eom

[HappyPlace]

21. No, the poor have heard of Hillary, less likely to have heard of Bernie Sanders.

And not just the poor, but more likely to be poor, IMHO.

Access to the Internet, reading preferences, exposure to a greater variety of sources, etc., possible favor higher earners and more well-educated folks.

Once they learn about him, I think they trend toward supporting him over the others.

[SonderWoman]

23. LOL. What a sad twisted excuse.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

34. The fact that you would suggest being poor and being ignorant are synonymous...

No, the poor have heard of Hillary, less likely to have heard of Bernie Sanders. And not just the poor, but more likely to be poor, IMHO.

Access to the Internet, reading preferences, exposure to a greater variety of sources, etc., possible favor higher earners and more well-educated folks.

Once they learn about him, I think they trend toward supporting him over the others

This plebeian finds your suggestion that being poor and ignorant to be synonymous disturbing.

[HappyPlace]

36. To suggest that no correlation exists is disturbing.

Ignorance and lack of access to information sources is a symptom of poverty.

That's impossible to dispute.

And, you might want to look up the word, "ignorant" to keep this discussion civil.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

39. Ignorance=don't know, unaware of

President Obama Defeated Willard Romney 64% -35% among those without a high school education:


http://www.ropercenter.uconn.edu/polls/us-elections/how-groups-voted/how-groups-voted-2012/


Perhaps we don't need their votes.

[beam me up scottie]

24. Yes, rich folks just LOVE them some Bernie!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251560231

[SonderWoman]

27. Doesn't matter to me.

[beam me up scottie]

30. Now that you mention it, I have noticed that you're impervious to logic.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

42. The evidence suggest as a person's income goes up:

The evidence suggest there is a positive correlation between income and support for Senator Sanders, i.e., the more income you have the more likely you are to support Senator Sanders, ergo:

“In all, it appears Sanders draws his support most from among those with the highest levels of formal education, of liberalism, and those with middle and upper income levels. Clinton does better with those with lower levels of education and of lower income status, as well as moderate and conservative likely Democratic caucus-goers,” Budzisz remarked

.

Can you please explain to me how an article from Forbes Magazine contravenes that evidence?


Thank you in advance.

[beam me up scottie]

46. The poster I responded to concluded that

" the well to do are voting Bernie and the poor are voting Hillary"

Can you please explain to me why I shouldn't point out how absurd that is?

Thank you in advance.

Signed

bmus, another elitist latte sipping well to do Bernie supporter

[DemocratSinceBirth]

51. Best we all eschew stereotypes.

eom

[beam me up scottie]

53. mm hmm.

[Armstead]

66. That would be very helpful -- I and many peope I know are scaping by and.....

they support Sanders. It is utter nonsense to say that people who support Sanders have nothing to risk or lose.

I wish me and my Sandinister friends were all latte drinking upper income elitists.....(Well I do sip latte on occasion, but it's a luxury.)

[DemocratSinceBirth]

67. No latte for me. I am lactose intolerant.

[Armstead]

69. Actually my lattes often come from convenience store dispensers..I think they lack any real milk..

...or coffee for that matter.

[teach me everything]

77. Bernie recognizes income inequality as a critical issues

That's what he has been campaigning on - to strike a balance and rebuild the middle class. That's what it is all about.

Clinton can't do that (as far as I can see)

[Zorra]

22. Makes sense. Voters with lower education levels are far more likely to vote republican as well. nt

[DemocratSinceBirth]

25. Hmmm

Makes sense. Voters with lower education are far more likely to vote republican as well. nt

They teach us in elementary school that the name of a person, place or thing should be capitalized. Perhaps you are referring to those who believe in a republican form of government. If that was your intention please disregard what I wrote.

Thank you in advance.

Signed,


Your resident board plebeian

[Android3.14]

33. Did you really criticize someone's use of capital letters?

Look, I hate to be the one to point it out, but elementary teachers never taught you to always capitalize a person, place, or thing. For example, you don't capitalize grammar teacher (person), nor do you capitalize school (place) nor do you capitalize ignorance (thing). They actually taught you to capitalize proper nouns, as in the name of a person, the name of a place or the name of certain things, such as the Moon.

That being said, most folks know that pointing out that a lowercase letter should be uppercase is a poor strategy in winning an argument.

I doubt even Mike Huckabee or Louie Gohmert would use that tactic.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

38. A Republican is the name of a party... A republican is someone who favors a republican form of ...

A Republican is someone who belongs to the Republican party... A republican is someone who favors a republican form of government. Please pardon me for omitting the reference to proper nouns.

That being said, most folks know that pointing out that a lowercase should be instead be uppercase is a poor strategy in winning an argument.

Is suggesting those that vote differently from you are ciphers a better strategy to win an argument?

Since I seem to have attracted your gaze you can regale me with tales of your superior intellect.

Thank you in advance

DemocratSinceBirth
DU denizen, blue collar scholar and board plebeian

[Android3.14]

41. What, exactly, does "ciphers a better strategy to win an argument" actually mean?

I thought it strange when you used the phrase "your internet interlocutors", but using "cipher" as a verb is just weird.

I'll cipher across the room. I ciphered yesterday, and I will cipher tomorrow. Maybe if I cipher my internet interlocutors I won't have to spend so much time ciphering.

Look, I am walking away from this argument. You're a friggin' Einstein. You win.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

45. Cipher

What, exactly, does "ciphers a better strategy to win an argument" actually mean?
View profile
I thought it strange when you used the phrase "your internet interlocutors", but using "cipher" as a verb is just weird.

I'll cipher across the room. I ciphered yesterday, and I will cipher tomorrow. Maybe if I cipher my internet interlocutors I won't have to spend so much time ciphering.

Look, I am walking away from this argument. You're a friggin' Einstein. You win.


Android3.14

Cipher-Full Definition of CIPHER

1
a : zero 1a
b : one that has no weight, worth, or influence : nonentity


http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cipher

I used cipher as a noun and used it appropriately:

Is suggesting those that vote differently from you are ciphers a better strategy to win an argument?

-DemocratSinceBirth

Yes, it is best you take your derriere and scurry away from this thread. I am certain you have had it handed to you many times, from much lesser persons.

DemocratSinceBirth
DU denizen, blue scholar scholar, resident board plebeian, and handing the pretentious their derrieres since 1981

[DemocratSinceBirth]

62. Maybe if you used ellipsis points to indicate you didn't use the full quote we wouldn't be ...

I thought it strange when you used the phrase "your internet interlocutors", but using "cipher" as a verb is just weird.

-android 3. 14

Maybe if you used ellipsis points to indicate you didn't use the full quote we wouldn't be at this juncture, ergo:

41. What, exactly, does "roid3.14
41. What, exactly, does "ciphers a better strategy to win an argument" actually mean? actually mean?

android 3. 14

My full quote:

Is suggesting those that vote differently from you are ciphers a better strategy to win an argument?

-DemocratSinceBirth

BTW, I was going to add that to my initial response but it is probably past the time where you can edit a post and not get the red edit mark which I find aesthetically displeasing, lol.

[BainsBane]

63. I'm still waiting to hear about the "Ayn Rand school of history"

To which authors at the International Socialist Review purportedly subscribe.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

64. That is beyond my ken. Please elaborate

Thank you in advance.

[BainsBane]

80. There is no such thing

as an Ayn Rand school of history. Nor is there any discernible explanation for why venerable a Marxist publication such as the International Socialist Review would even print libertarian or Ayn Rand-like analysis.

Long story short, I wouldn't take too seriously anonymous internet proclamations about education, whether it relates to voting behavior or not.

[LettuceSea]

28. Believe it or not, they get the same number of votes as you!

[NanceGreggs]

73. And yet I keep reading here ...

... how those "lower education level" Republican voters are "hearing Bernie's message" and are likely to cross party lines to vote for him.

[freshwest]

131. Whatever happened to the LU talk Bernie made? That would tell the tale. n/t

[Fumesucker]

170. That is commonly accepted but not true for whites anyway..

It's really middle class whites who vote en masse against their own economic interests, not so much poor ones.

http://themonkeycage.org/blog/2012/03/23/voting-patterns-of-americas-whites-from-the-masses-to-the-elites/

Within any education category, richer people vote more Republican. In contrast, the pattern of education and voting is nonlinear. High school graduates are more Republican than non-HS grads, but after that, the groups with more education tend to vote more Democratic. At the very highest education level tabulated in the survey, voters with post-graduate degrees lean toward the Democrats. Except for the rich post-graduates; they are split 50-50 between the parties.

What does this say about America’s elites? If you define elites as high-income non-Hispanic whites, the elites vote strongly Republican. If you define elites as college-educated high-income whites, they vote moderately Republican.

There is no plausible way based on these data in which elites can be considered a Democratic voting bloc. To create a group of strongly Democratic-leaning elite whites using these graphs, you would need to consider only postgraduates (no simple college grads included, even if they have achieved social and financial success), and you have to go down to the below-$75,000 level of family income, which hardly seems like the American elites to me.

The patterns are consistent for all three of the past presidential elections. (The differences in the higher-income low-education category should not be taken seriously, as the estimates are based on small samples, as can be seen from the large standard errors for those subgroups.)

[LettuceSea]

26. I know very few 'book smart' people that understand the concept of electability

Most of them can only see the political spectrum through their own lens, and cannot understand why everyone else doesn't feel the same way.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

32. Some of the comments in this thread are elitist and ugly.

The irony is those displaying the most intellectual conceit have the least to be conceited about.

[seabeyond]

40. it is all about self interest and trickle down. self interest for that demographic and then others

will get trickle down. it has been discussed endlessly on du

[DisgustipatedinCA]

47. Pardon, but do have any idea what trickle down economics is, and who championed it?

I'm embarrassed to see such rank ignorance at what is supposed to be a site where people can have intelligent discourse. Accusing liberals of favoring trickle down economics is stunningly uninformed, and it doesn't bode well for those hoping to find intelligent discourse here.

[beam me up scottie]

49. +1

Some people simply parrot talking points.

The irony that they're using a Republican belief that policies benefiting the wealthy will help the middle and lower class to claim Bernie's supporters are only voting for the person who could most benefit then financially is completely lost on them.

[teach me everything]

81. I never subscribed to the trickle down theory - it was always the pissing on theory I believe in.

and it's right on the money.

[beam me up scottie]

103. That is indeed a more accurate term.

[Romulox]

164. She's been corrected dozens of times. Whatever this is, it isn't "ignorance"... nt

[freshwest]

59. So much for the party of the downtrodden and disregarded. Is there a new definition for DINO, now?

Because this kind of talk is unfamiliar to me as a long time Democrat. That befits Libertarians, not Democrats. Hey, but what do I know, I must be a dummy now.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

65. Pretty soon they will be channeling Phil Gramm

Pretty soon they will be channeling Phil Gramm and waxing about "makers and takers" and "those that are in the wagon and those that pull the wagon."


I feel like Orwell's fictional Winston Smith.

Up thread it was recommended I take a remedial education course, go figure!

[freshwest]

68. Please don't tell me it's going to go there. Remedial? Noooo! Pleasepleaseplease! n/t

[DemocratSinceBirth]

74. Okay

My old man, god bless him, had a ninth grade education. He passed away when I was fourteen years old. He left my mom and I a 700 square foot home and a lot of debt. When I got out of high school I took odd jobs to get by. I sold sun tan products for Hawaiian Tropic at Daytona Beach area pools and tended bar and bounced at some biker bars at night. I could quickly see these weren't career positions so I took out student loans and went to community college. I received an A.A. From there I went on to a state university and received a B.S. , an M.A., and did post grad work in Government.

So not only was the I first person in my family to graduate from college, I was the first person in my family to go past the graduate level.

But on this site, by someone who presumably is a progressive or at least holds himself out as such, I was told I could benefit from remedial education. Ugly stuff, indeed.

[Autumn]

118. Trickle down was discussed endlessly by Reagan, It never worked even thought he loved it.

[kenfrequed]

160. Holy crapola

You do realize that Bernie Sanders is about the farthest candidate from "trickle down economics" of any candidate running for the Democratic nomination.

Do you even know what trickle down economics means??

Honestly, every time I read a comment from you it is more shocking in what kind of obviously false claim you will make next.

Can't you just discuss issues?

[Romulox]

165. You have to know that this is 180 degrees wrong. Why do you continue to post incorrect information?

[Warren DeMontague]

48. ITS THEM EGGHEADS WITH THEIR THINKIN'

I DONT TRUST ANYONE WHO THINKS

[beam me up scottie]

50. ALERT!!! This elitist latte drinking volvo driver wants you silenced!

[HappyPlace]

54. DAMN YOU LORAS POLL!!11!!1

Funny how the very same poll that seemed so hopeful includes results that incite scorn and ridicule...

Damn polls!

[beam me up scottie]

55. Ikr???

It's hillaryous!

[wendylaroux]

60. why all the fighting,Hillary has this, remember??!!

[beam me up scottie]

61. Lol! Perfect!

[Zorra]

72. lawd have mercy

[NanceGreggs]

71. Well, if true ...

... this doesn't bode well for Bernie.

According to DU, the average voter is living in a van down by the river (thanks to Obama's failed presidential policies), and are definitely in the "below $50,000 family income" bracket.

It looks like Bernie - the Champion of the Common People - doesn't fare very well among the common folk.

I've been told repeatedly on this site that the middle class is struggling financially and, as a result, will be looking to Bernie to fight for them. Apparently, if this poll is to be taken seriously, that struggling middle class is seeing HRC as their best hope.

Jumping up and down over the fact that BS isn't appealing to the "moderate and conservative sections of the party" kind of underscores the fact that conservative GOPers won't be flocking to Bernie's side as a result of seeing common ground in his rhetoric either - yet another DU "truism" that obviously has no basis in reality.

"Clinton does well with those whose 'highest educational attainment is high school'."

Again, I fail to see how that idea is something worth celebrating by people who maintain that while HRC represents the "elitists", Bernie is the true representative of the everyday middle-class voter.

Cheering BS's securing of a paltry 13% of the "high school education only" demographic among likely caucus-goers doesn't speak well for his "message" that HE is the Great Deliverer of the everyday working man, does it? Perhaps he only meant "the everyday working man with a college or graduate degree, and an income of over $50,000 per year".

“In all, it appears Sanders draws his support most from among those with the highest levels of formal education, of liberalism, and those with middle and upper income levels."

So much for the champion of the downtrodden middle class, eh?

[beam me up scottie]

75. !

[NanceGreggs]

78. Exactly the fact-laden ...

... response I've come to expect.

Sanders, "champion of the downtrodden middle class", does better among those with an income of over $50,000 a year and a college or gradate degree.

I guess his message of being "for" a certain class of people has now been defined - and, guess what? If you're earning less than that and aren't college-educated, you're not in the "class" he's fighting for.

[beam me up scottie]

82. I always enjoy your lectures about what's good for us.

Seriously, who needs Comedy Central when I can listen to NanceGreggs?

Do go on.

[NanceGreggs]

86. If you consider ...

... a point-by-point commentary on an OP to be "a lecture on what's good for you", perhaps you don't have the intellectual capacity to understand what the discussion is actually about.

Have you anything to say about the content of the OP? If not, perhaps you should stay out of the conversation - and just quietly eat your popcorn rather than make a fool of yourself by showing that you have nothing useful to contribute to the discussion.

[beam me up scottie]

92. You mean that smelly trailer full of used straw and ridiculous assumptions?

According to DU, the average voter is living in a van down by the river (thanks to Obama's failed presidential policies), and are definitely in the "below $50,000 family income" bracket.

Again, I fail to see how that idea is something worth celebrating by people who maintain that while HRC represents the "elitists", Bernie is the true representative of the everyday middle-class voter.

Cheering BS's securing of a paltry 13% of the "high school education only" demographic among likely caucus-goers doesn't speak well for his "message" that HE is the Great Deliverer of the everyday working man, does it? Perhaps he only meant "the everyday working man with a college or graduate degree, and an income of over $50,000 per year".

So much for the champion of the downtrodden middle class, eh?

That's what you consider a point-by-point commentary on an OP?

[NanceGreggs]

94. Again ...

... stick to your popcorn. You apparently have nothing of value to add to the conversation.

And there's no need to keep proving the point - we all get it.

[beam me up scottie]

96. Oh we always get your point, Nance: DU sucks!

According to DU, the average voter is living in a van down by the river (thanks to Obama's failed presidential policies), and are definitely in the "below $50,000 family income" bracket.

Your first sentence mocked a homeless DUer and those of us who defended them after they were compared to the Clintons who were also "broke and homeless" by a HC supporter.



If you hate DU so much why do you keep posting here?

To make sure the rest of us are just as miserable?

[NanceGreggs]

97. If you should ever have something worthwhile to say ...

... I hope someone posts it in Late Breaking News - because it will be.

[beam me up scottie]

99. And if you ever decide to post something that doesn't insult other DUers let me know.

Because that would be news indeed.

[NanceGreggs]

100. What ev.

Eat some more popcorn. It's what you're best at.

[beam me up scottie]

102. I'm popping more now.

Do go on.

[NanceGreggs]

110. Happy to see you've found what you excel at. n/t

[beam me up scottie]

111. More insults please!

Being insulted by you is a badge of honour on DU.

[Number23]

167. !!!!

[HappyPlace]

87. They would have you believe that those numbers are HIS fault....

When, far more likely, Low Information Voters go for the name recognition or have some fond memory of Bill Clinton.

I say that the polls shows that Clinton gets the LIV vote and the "don't get out much do ya?" vote.

Longitudinal study suggests that as Bernie gets his message out, more and more less educated (and younger and lower income) people come over to his side.

Sux to be so wrong, so often, but they do this by choice.

[beam me up scottie]

95. They spin so much I get dizzy just watching them.

Now he's the candidate of rich educated liberals so that's ANOTHER reason to support Hillary...

[Armstead]

76. Your dismissiveness of elite liberal intellectuals sounds a lot like Nixon and Reagan

...or your basic Fox News commentator

[NanceGreggs]

79. Like that makes sense.

PS: It doesn't.

[Armstead]

84. Like your post makes sense?

That little exchange sounded like high school.

But I will say that you seem to have disdain for those elite intellectuals who favor Sanders because they believe in his liberal policies and don't happen to believe your candidate would make much difference in the status quo.

Just kind of reminds me of things the GOP likes to dredge up against elite liberal intellectuals.

[NanceGreggs]

89. I merely commented on the fact ...

... that BS, the alleged champion of the middle class, seems to have a much wider appeal among the "elite intellectuals" than he does among those he supposedly represents.

I thought Hillary was the candidate who represented the "elite" - apparently not.

[okasha]

114. Allow me to assure you, as one who has worked with elite liberal intellectuals

her entire professional life, that the difference between a University academic department and a kindergarden can not infrequently be reduced to the height of its members.

Note: This post Is directed to Armstead, not to Bains.

As for "smart" phones, mine wanted to reference the two posters above as Farmstead and Basins.

[Armstead]

122. Your characterization is rather misleading and disingenuous

Sanders is a relatively unknown person, except for people who follow politics closely, or live in Vermont. So, yes, it is likely the people who are familiar enough to support him are likely to be people who do pay more attention. And most of the Sanders supporters I know have middle class or lower incomes, and are hardly the fat cats.

And yes, someone who vacations in the Hamptons and gets paid Hundreds of thousands of dollars for speeches and attends Dinald trump;s wedding as a lark does qualify s an "elite." And the policies espoused by the pro-corporate DLC, Third Way or whatever they are calling themselves this week are oriented to the elites.

You, of course, are certainly entitled to you disagreements with that analysis of their policies and allegiances. However it is a bit Nixonian and Rovian to portray the followers of her primary opponent as a horde of "elite intellectual liberals."

[NanceGreggs]

129. I commented on the "facts" contained in the OP.

They are not my characterizations - but my response thereto.

If you have a problem with BS being seen as appealing more to the "elite" than those with only a high school education who earn less than $50,000 a year, your argument is with the OP, not with me.

I didn't come up with those stats - they are someone else's survey results. They were posted with the inevitable as though they were something to be celebrated.

If you don't believe BS is appealing more to the college educated over $50,000-per-annum voters, I would suggest you take that up with the people who came up with the poll results posted above. Those are THEIR stats, not mine.

Are we now at the point where Hillary supporters are responsible for what Bernie supporters post as being reflective of who he appeals to and why?

Seriously?

[Armstead]

130. It's mainly your dismissive tone I have a problem with

I know, I know....Sanders supporters, obnoxious, etc. People in glass houses, etc., mea culpa

But it does bother me that just because you disagree with Sanders, you have to state it in terms that -- I'm sorry -- do sound like the shit the Repulicans started cranking out in the 70's to marginalize liberal and intellectuals

[NanceGreggs]

132. My tone ...

... whether you find it dismissive or what the fuck ever, has NOTHING to do with the fact that the poll contained in the OP says what it says.

That is what I commented on. If you think the poll results stated in the OP are in any way inaccurate, skewed, or biased - your argument is with THE STATS CITED and not with me.

If you believe the survey cited in the OP is not reflective of reality, why have you NOT responded to the OP?

For fuck's sake - get a grip. If you think the survey quoted is wrong, why are you NOT arguing with THAT, instead of arguing with people who responded to it?

[Armstead]

134. I don't have a problem with it

I stated my reasons above.

and the OP poster simply said

"Of course, it's early yet, things will change as more people learn more about each candidate."

Which is a reasonable statement, whether you agree or disagree with it.

[NanceGreggs]

135. Yeah, that's all the OP said.

There was nothing else to the OP at all ... except for:

"Clinton and Sanders Supporters
The two top candidates do have different strengths within the electorate. One such point of difference is in family income levels. In the most recent Loras Poll, Clinton garnered the support of 55.0 percent of those with a family income below $50,000, whereas Sanders only received the support of 20.6 percent of these same voters. Sanders does very well with those with college or graduate degrees, however; 64.3 percent of those who select Sanders as their first choice candidate have a college or graduate degree, whereas only 47.9 percent of Hillary supporters hold such degrees. Furthermore, Clinton captures 56.0 percent of all the likely Democratic caucus-goers whose highest educational attainment is high school, while Sanders secures 13.0 percent of the same part of the electorate.

Clinton and Sanders have comparable appeal to the liberal elements within the Democratic electorate, but Clinton is stronger than Sanders with the moderate and conservative sections of the party. Clinton leads Sanders 45.1 percent to 40.2 percent among those who label themselves very liberal. This constituency does make up a greater percentage of Sanders supporters than Clinton, however: 28.7 percent of those whose first choice was Sanders label themselves as very liberal, whereas the number is 15.3 percent for Clinton.

“In all, it appears Sanders draws his support most from among those with the highest levels of formal education, of liberalism, and those with middle and upper income levels. Clinton does better with those with lower levels of education and of lower income status, as well as moderate and conservative likely Democratic caucus-goers,” Budzisz remarked."

I guess you missed that part.

[Armstead]

136. He posted something from a poll -- something frequently done here

It's a straightforward demographic analysis. Nothing particularly incendiary or judgmental.

I don't know what you think I should get excited or inflamed about.

My own experience is somewhat different (definitely not high income, nor are most of the Sanders supporters I know) but, enh, polling sometimes hits the mark and sometimes not.

IN any case, it's quite a leap from the OP to your tirade against awful intellectual elitist leftist Sanders supporters.

[NanceGreggs]

138. You REALLY don't get it, do you?

You're arguing with me for commenting on what the OP stated - and yet you have NOT argued with the OP itself.

If you believe the survey cited in the OP is wrong, skewed, inaccurate, biased, not reflective of what Bernie stands for - WHY don't you have the nerve to SAY SO in response to the OP directly? Where is your reply stating that the stats contained in the OP are not "reflective of your own 'somewhat different' experience"?

Why are you arguing with ME for expressing my opinion of the stats the OP is promoting, instead of arguing with the person who actually posted those stats?

I've yet to see a reply from you to the OP explaining your disagreement with what they've posted. Are you not capable of expressing your differing opinion directly to OP? Is there some reason why you are incapable of doing so?

[Armstead]

139. Lemme try this real slow.....

How accurately the poll reflects the actual overall composition is not my point in responding to you post.

Regarding the poll, it may be correct. But, its too soon to tell whether Sanders can broaden his appeal as more people learn about him.

BUT I responded to your note because You extrapolated it into a bash fest, about how those awful people who suppoert Sanders are deluded, because Sanders Will never appeal to lower income working and middle class voters. And you couldn't resist tossing in Nixonian/GOP jabs.

That's what I was replying to.

[beam me up scottie]

85. +1

If they chose Hillary she'd be singing their praises.

[freshwest]

88. 'Give us your elite, your entitled who could afford college, your masses yearning to join the 1%.'

Last edited Thu Sep 3, 2015, 12:35 AM - Edit history (2)

Yeah, fixed the motto at the Statute of Liberty. The anti-immigrant crowd may have a new home. Don't want to sully our pristine shores.

HRC will be content with the lumpenproletariat vote, enemy of true revolution. This makes me nervous. What will be done with us undesireables if these are the new Democrats?

Disclamer: I have a college edu-mi-cation, but that doesn't solve every situation.

[okasha]

83. Short version:

Those with the most to lose from income inequality believe Hillary will do more to help them than Sanders will.

bounce:

[freshwest]

90. Short... and sweet. n/t

[AOR]

91. This thread serves no purpose but to divide workers...

beyond sickening and I knew some of the responses that were coming before I even scrolled the thread. This elitist bullshit is why many people have no use for the Democratic Party. Us "uneducated blue-collar laboring morons" have built this country that allows the elitist educated "upper-crust" their upscale lifestyle. Without blue collar labor, they are NOTHING. Let them try eating their computer or their latest educational thesis. Where does their food come from ? Why it falls from the sky onto their kitchen table of course. No "uneducated" labor involved. Where does their housing come from ? Did it build itself ? Did their place of work just suddenly appear ? The bridges, the infrastructure, the roads ? All built by "uneducated" blue-collar people. It's those "blue-collar working class uneducated morons" that build societies, do the grunt work, and everything else that's needed to keep a society running. This piece of shit thread doesn't deserve one rec let alone 4.

[LettuceSea]

98. THIS!

Thank you for reminding the smaller pool of voters who wins General Elections for the Democratic Party.

[AOR]

109. To be honest...

I really don't care about what wins elections for the Democratic Party. I care what happens to the people on the ground and solidarity among workers. The kind of elitist garbage being spewed in this thread is a common theme among the Democratic Party activist apparatus whether they be for Clinton or Sanders. Everything is geared to these upscale educated, professional class, yuppified philistines who don't have an ounce of solidarity with those beneath their social station. That is what "lip-service" means.

As a friend once said --" The Democratic Party leadership hangs out a sign - we welcome the downtrodden, the "uneducated",the poor, and the persecuted. But then when the people actually show up, they start complaining bitterly about the mud being tracked on their elegant imported carpet. They should take down that sign, or get rid of that damned carpet." But they won't, not until and unless they are forced to. Forcing them to would take outside pressure, and outside pressure means organizing outside of the party, and organizing outside of the party means basing the movement on ideas that are universal and resonate with and redress the grievances and respond to the needs of ALL working people, not merely pander to the whims, prejudices and preferences of an "enlightened" few.

[HappyPlace]

112. This OP is a Rorschach test, it took a section from the study, verbatim.

The replies, whether from Clinton supporters or Sanders supporters, say more about the members than about the study or the author of the OP.

It is what it is, different candidates drew from different demographics, as one might expect.

Everything else in this thread is Rorschach test, pure and simple.

And, it's DU. It'll be OK.

[beam me up scottie]

116. "The replies say more about the members than about the study or the author of the OP"

Yes they do.

Well done!

[AOR]

117. People are being destroyed by capitalism...

in increasing numbers by the day. Fuck Rorschach tests whatever that is and playing games.

Come all of you good workers
Good news to you I'll tell
Of how that good old union
Has come in here to dwell

Which side are you on?
Which side are you on?
Which side are you on?
Which side are you on?

My daddy was a miner
And I'm a miner's son
And I'll stick with the union
Till every battle's won

They say in Harlan County
There are no neutrals there
You'll either be a union man
Or a thug for J.H. Blair

Oh, workers can you stand it?
Oh, tell me how you can
Will you be a lousy scab
Or will you be a man?

Don't scab for the bosses
Don't listen to their lies
Us poor folks haven't got a chance
Unless we organize

--Florence Reece

[reddread]

148. the Bell Curve is a harsh mistress

and the truth painful.

[AOR]

156. You'll have to expand on that...

my blue-collar intellectual capacity is limited in deciphering one liners that could read more than one way.

[reddread]

158. well said

[whatthehey]

161. That works both ways

Did the people building those roads design their backhoes and jackhammers? Did they calculate the stress requirements of that bridge so it didn't collapse under them mid-construction? Or did engineers with their fancy elitist pointy-headed effete math do that? Did a farm worker give us Miracle Wheat that saved a billion lives or was it a PhD overeducated snooty ponce? Where did your labor-saving machinery and detailed blueprints and advanced synthetic materials come from? Did they fall out of the sky or did you have to rely on someone who cracked a fucking book once or twice in their lives just like we do for every other advance in the last few centuries which has, after millenia, finally made life progress beyond the nasty, brutish and short level which it proverbially possessed when grunt work was the only option? Your piece of shit reverse snobbery doesn't have much to recommend it either.

Jurors (inevitable) should note that any apparent attacks are exact echoes of the post to which I'm replying.

[AOR]

162. Alert ? why would anyone alert...

you're more than welcome to apply criticism to anything written. That's how I see it. I don't alert on anything and never have. As far as your post goes... it is nonsense of the highest order. Without blue-collar labor nothing gets built and nothing gets done. That is a fact. It is not open to debate. Ideas are meaningless without the "grunts." Are there social scabs without an ounce of solidarity among blue-collar workers ? Of course there are but far far less than among the white color professional class and "management." The world does not revolve around the professional class, yuppies, and the intellectual set but many sure as hell think it does. There are no advances possible without blue-collar "grunt" labor and there never will be.

It is the blue-collar people, the struggling, the poor, the "uneducated" that are disrespected in society not the other way around. You also have the wrong idea as to what is being said. I'm not dissing the professional class or what they do. I'm not dissing education or the intellectuals. I'm dissing their complicity with capitalism at all costs, their upper "middle-class" elitism and sensibilities, and complete lack of solidarity and respect that many of them have with blue-collar workers and those beneath their social station.


Solidarity Forever

When the union's inspiration through the workers' blood shall run,
There can be no power greater anywhere beneath the sun;
Yet what force on earth is weaker than the feeble strength of one,
But the union makes us strong.

Solidarity forever,
Solidarity forever,
Solidarity forever,
For the union makes us strong.

Is there aught we hold in common with the greedy parasite,
Who would lash us into serfdom and would crush us with his might?
Is there anything left to us but to organize and fight?
For the union makes us strong.

It is we who plowed the prairies; built the cities where they trade;
Dug the mines and built the workshops, endless miles of railroad laid;
Now we stand outcast and starving midst the wonders we have made;
But the union makes us strong.

All the world that's owned by idle drones is ours and ours alone.
We have laid the wide foundations; built it skyward stone by stone.
It is ours, not to slave in, but to master and to own.
While the union makes us strong.

They have taken untold millions that they never toiled to earn,
But without our brain and muscle not a single wheel can turn.
We can break their haughty power, gain our freedom when we learn
That the union makes us strong.

In our hands is placed a power greater than their hoarded gold,
Greater than the might of armies, magnified a thousand-fold.
We can bring to birth a new world from the ashes of the old
For the union makes us strong.

Ralph Chaplin

[ram2008]

106. Better educated tend to pay attention earlier...

And are more likely to be more in tune with the daily back and forth in politics, probably get most of their news from the internet rather than TV and from a variety of sources, and have a stronger command of the issues . It's not surprise that this is Sanders' base, but this can easily change since Bernie's message crosses educational boundaries, the problem is getting it out there and engaging people who are less likely to pay attention at this time. Lots of work to do.

[AOR]

115. You don't need to be a Rhodes Scholar to know when you're getting fucked over...

Many are smart enough to recognize this current sham of a political system for what it is. Low voter participation is an indictment of the corrupt nature of the current two-party political system and not an indictment of the "stupidity" of the people who do not vote or low-information voters. The majority of the struggling working class people - who don't bother to vote on "both sides" - know from bitter experience that the political system is all fucked up and corrupted by big money to the point of disrepair. They know that the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. They know that the government and the majority of people in power - at all levels (including local) - are corrupt lying mutts doing the bidding of big money and nothing else. For most "uneducated" working class people it's no "revelation" that those in power are lying dogs serving their own interests. By that knowledge alone, they're far more radical and left wing that the supposed "left" activists who still think elections alone will change social/economic conditions on the ground in any way other than platitudes and lip-service.

[beam me up scottie]

120. The reaction to this poll is predictable.

The same people who accused Bernie's supporters of being too conservative and libertarian are now being accusing them of being too liberal and educated.

No matter who or what you are you're always too something for some Hillary's supporters.

[MoveIt]

128. too close for comfort? n/t

[Armstead]

143. Good point....I thought we were all scruffy leftist hippies. I guess that was last week.

[beam me up scottie]

145. We're like Bernie: He's too far to the left! No! He's too far to the right!!!

[PatrickforO]

137. Well, I have a master's degree and am considered fairly liberal.

I like Bernie just fine. Well enough, as a matter of fact, to donate regularly to his campaign.

Hillary, not so much.

Does this one data point (me) validate the result suggested by the survey?

[Armstead]

142. Fie on you for being an elitist liberal intellectual

Go forget your masters degree and stop thinking and become a conservative.. Then you'll be acceptable, I guess.

[HappyPlace]

146. We are the "early adopter" types: Prius, solar modules on the roof, etc...

...before other people figure it out.

I'm pretty sure this is not a slam on supporters of the status quo so much as an observation.

[Bobbie Jo]

150. I also have a master's degree and am considered very liberal

I am a licensed clinical social worker.

I like Hillary just fine. Will probably vote for her in the primary.

Bernie is okay, I'm just not feeling the bern.

Am I an outlier according to the survey?

[Armstead]

151. No, you're not.

Despite the increasing dominance of the science of demographics and mass-everything, people are still individuals.

The poll doesn't say EVERY person in those categories supports Sanders.

Heck financially I'm just scraping by, as are most of my friends who support Sanders.

[Bobbie Jo]

152. My post was a bit tounge in cheek

Of course I understand it doesn't mean EVERY.

Seems like the poster I responded to was looking for some validation, which he quickly received.

On the other hand, education level doesn't necessarily equate with a high-end salary. Just ask anyone in my line of work.

[Armstead]

154. My response was TIC too

Last edited Thu Sep 3, 2015, 01:17 PM - Edit history (1)

[WI_DEM]

141. I'm so glad you're so happy that better educated, more liberal

and I assume more well to do people support Sanders. I see you are jumping for joy over it. It's a great element to have, but you also better hope that he begins to attract less educated (maybe because they didn't have the opportunities to get a better education), poorer folks and attract more people of color because to win the Democrats will need all of this vast coalition.

[Armstead]

144. uh, yeah. I think most do hope that.

[Bluenorthwest]

155. Are you joyous that the less liberal people, more conservatives are flocking to Hillary?

That's one dubious source of pride. 'We attract the most conservative portions of our Party!'

Kim Davis is a Democrat. A conservative Democrat. She is not on my side. She will not vote for Bernie under any circumstances. This does not break my heart.

[Bluenorthwest]

153. More liberal voters vote for Bernie. This Party has some very conservative members, I hate to say it

but Kim Davis, the Kentucky clerk refusing to issue marriage licenses is a Democrat. She's not going to vote for Bernie. She makes many times the median local income at 80k but has no degree. Like many conservative Democrats she is very religious.
It's a very big tent.

[kenfrequed]

157. He does better with people that have informed themselves earlier

The more people hear of him and from him the better his numbers will get. This is why we are seeing momentum and "feeling the Bern!" and all that.

[Romulox]

166. Low information voters often tend to vote against their own economic interests. nt

[ericson00]

168. McGoverniks were more elite than Muskieniks

Howd that turn out?

[Warren DeMontague]

171. I think we need to learn the lesson of Henry Clay's loss to James K. Polk

or we are DOOMED to repeat it!

Fifty-Four Forty Or Fight!

[JackInGreen]

169. Pay no attention

Any apparent difference is do to Bernistas snorting powdered unicorn poop.

[Warren DeMontague]

172. That's why it's handy that the Volvo has such a flat dashboard.

[JackInGreen]

173. ...Plutonium Nyborg?

if THATS a benefit of being a Bernista then I REALLY fell in with the right crowd.

[Warren DeMontague]

174. Indeed.

Good Nyborg, Man.