No, seriously. It’s not flame bait. While I tend to be a bit more Republican in my political leanings, I am far from having the opinion that all or even most Democrats are stupid.
In fact, based on my statistically insignificant group of colleagues and friends, I would venture to say that more highly intelligent people are Democrats than Republicans, so perhaps it’s a bit of a bell curve with more Republicans falling in the middle (what with our country being a roughly 50-50 split).
What inspired this ridiculous brain storm? Election recounts! The Florida fiasco in 2000 seemed to indicate pretty clearly that the majority of the stupid voters who couldn’t figure out the butterfly ballot were democrats. Now we in the state of Washington have a recount of our own in the race between (D) Gregoire and ® Rossi. And, like in Florida of 2000, the about-to-be-disenfranchised voters this time around who somehow voted incorrectly again seem to fall on the side of the Democratic candidate.
“I never meant to say that the Conservatives are generally stupid. I meant to say that stupid people are generally Conservative. I believe that is so obviously and universally admitted a principle that I hardly think any gentleman will deny it.”
The Florida fiasco in 2000 seemed to indicate pretty clearly that the majority of the stupid voters who couldn’t figure out the butterfly ballot were democrats.
That’s neither here nor there. Take a look at the ballot:
If you want to vote for Bush, it’s obvious you choose the top circle. Voting for Gore is slightly confusing. Granted, it took me all of two seconds to figure it out, but my very first instinct when quickly glancing at it was that Gore is the second circle. Now imagine the reaction of all the seniors who saw this. If you switched Gore’s and Bush’s position on the ballot, I’d bet lots of Republicans would have inadvertantly voted for Buchanan too.
what inspired this ridiculous brain storm? republican seniors giving their life savings to the college republicans because of letters supposedly asking for money to elect bush.
The College Republican National Committee has raised $6.3 million this year through an aggressive and misleading fund-raising campaign that collected money from senior citizens who thought they were giving to the election efforts of President Bush and other top Republicans.
Many of the top donors were in their 80s and 90s. The donors wrote checks — sometimes hundreds and, in at least one case, totaling more than $100,000 — to groups with official sounding-names such as “Republican Headquarters 2004,” “Republican Elections Committee” and the “National Republican Campaign Fund.”
But all of those groups, according to the small print on the letters, were simply projects of the College Republicans, who collected all of the checks.
And little of the money went to election efforts.
Of the money spent by the group this year, nearly 90 percent went to direct-mail vendors and postage expenses, according to records filed with the Internal Revenue Service.
Some of the elderly donors, meanwhile, wound up bouncing checks and emptying their bank accounts.
“I don’t have any more money,” said Cecilia Barbier, a 90-year-old retired church council worker in New York City. “I’m stopping giving to everybody. That was all my savings that they got.”
Barbier said she “wised up.” But not before she made more than 300 donations totaling nearly $100,000 this year, the group’s fund-raising records show.
Now, she said, “I’m really scrounging.”
In Van Buren, Ark., Monda Jo Millsap, 68, said she emptied her savings account by writing checks to College Republicans, then got a bank loan of $5,000 and sent that, too, before totaling her donations at more than $59,000.
guys, let’s put aside our differences and come together to mock senior citizens.
I know plenty of senior citizens and very few of them are stupid.
Why is it, then, that senior citizens are so often portrayed in the media as the cheap con-artist’s dream?
Are there really a disproportionate number of stupid senior citizens in our society (as opposed to, say, stupid 30-somethings)?
Seniors suffering from the onset of dementia tend to be a bit more suspicious, so dementia can’t be the culprit, can it?
While I find the minimum voting age in our nation to be somewhat questionable (have to spoken to an 18 year old lately?) maybe we should have a maximum voting age too, under the same premise as the minimum age.
In the interest of elitism, maybe we should raise the minimum voting requirements to having attained at least a Bachelor’s degree and the age of 25 and put anybody over the age of 70 out to pasture and away from voting booths and telephones… for our protection as well as their own.
From my family experience, the elder generation in their 80s simply grew up and lived in a more civilized or at least mannered time. They tend to at least by default take people at face value. Now as adults they became more wary and worldy, but for example, my Grandfather is physically incapable of being rude, and this lets telemarketers (for example) take advantage of him. Just recently he had a 1200$ car repair because he took it to the ‘dealership’ and they fucked up by injecting too much oil during a change with those pneumatic oil dispensers, which blew his seals. Of course he was too polite not to take them at face value when they said it wasn’t their fault, even if he knew damn well it was.
On a tangent somewhat to the topic, but there it is nevertheless.
millions of people of all races and ages voted. some put a lot of thought into their vote some did not. some were well versed in politics, some were not. getting rid of all voters that are ____ or _______ just because you read about x number of fools is silly.
It’s tough to say. Here in the South, most uneducated people support Bush because of the war, lowering taxes, etc. In fact, the South (which is commonly seen as uneducated, overall, and, to be fair is usually in the bottom when these things are measured) used to be mostly Democrat, but is now mostly Republican. Correlation? You tell me.
The well educated tend to be Liberal, Democrat because they have no other viable choice, and socially libertarian. Of course this changes once you become very wealthy, as it is in your best interest to accrue as much money as possible, and the Republicans are much more pliable when it comes to creating legislation friendly to big business.
The well educated tend to be Liberal, Democrat because they have no other viable choice, and socially libertarian. Of course this changes once you become very wealthy, as it is in your best interest to accrue as much money as possible, and the Republicans are much more pliable when it comes to creating legislation friendly to big business.[/quote]
“Millionaires for Bush, Billionaires for Kerry
Why the super-rich favor the candidate who will raise their taxes.”
In September, the research firm Prince & Associates surveyed 400 people worth more than $1 million for Elite Traveler magazine. (Note to self: Try to get gig writing for this magazine.) The rich folk favored Bush by a 58-42 margin. Not too surprising. But when you break out the numbers, they tell a different story. The petit bourgeoisie millionaires were passionately for Bush: Those worth between $1 million and $10 million favored Bush by a 63-37 margin. But the haute millionaires, those worth more than $10 million, favored Kerry 59-41.
…
Russ Prince explained the difference by noting that, absurd as it may sound, those with a net worth of merely seven figures don’t feel financially secure. “The people with less than $10 million are still very focused on their personal financial situation in the short term,” he told the Wall Street Journal, where the results were first published.
