OGTEleven Posted August 22, 2006 Share Posted August 22, 2006 What is your excuse for this? I can't get no...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted August 22, 2006 Share Posted August 22, 2006 What is your excuse for this? I can't get no...... 749341[/snapback] Weed lowers sperm counts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted August 22, 2006 Share Posted August 22, 2006 Weed lowers sperm counts. 749375[/snapback] Or, as Shakespeare put it, "Strong drink giveth the desire but taketh away the ability." But I suppose "Weed lowers sperm counts" is just about as poetic. Maybe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon Posted August 22, 2006 Share Posted August 22, 2006 Weed lowers sperm counts Sperm can count? Who knew...... As for the linked article I think the writer is making a mistake in his implicit assumption that children are necessarily going to follow thier parents politics. I'd say the opposite is just as likely not to mention that their peers probably have more influence on their politics than their parents do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted August 22, 2006 Share Posted August 22, 2006 Great... now we're creating a subspecies based on political affiliation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted August 22, 2006 Share Posted August 22, 2006 Sperm can count? Who knew...... As for the linked article I think the writer is making a mistake in his implicit assumption that children are necessarily going to follow thier parents politics. I'd say the opposite is just as likely not to mention that their peers probably have more influence on their politics than their parents do. 749408[/snapback] Which begs the question, how does Party ID in America develop? First, you mention that their peers will have mor eof an influence on politics then their parents did. Why? How? Their peers are in the same position they are - they don't have any experience outside of politics besides their parents. Certaintly only a small handful are even interested in politics, and none get the chance to vote. Research has shown that young people tend to have the same distribution of party ID as their parents, with the caveat of it being much weaker then the parent's PID. If you are looking at the effects of parental PID from a rational choice theory, it has a pretty good explanation. Most new voters will have a weak PID because they haven't had much experience yet. They do have some, which is from their parents. While kids most certaintly don't like to let their parents control them, they still can (and will) listen to their advice. Generally, this is why children have very weak party IDs toward one side or the other. Peers are not like this. Since they all generally have a weak PID, peers cannot explain pushing someone toward one party or another, as they don't care enough (and don't have well engrained feelings) toward a party. Whose advice is a child going to take more to heart: A parent who says that the republicans are screwing them, or a kid that says "I dunno, the Republicans are okay I guess"? Once children get to vote and get to become active in politics, then the next part of the rational choice theory kicks in. They will choose which party has the best potential for them, given their experience. As elections pass and votes are made, this will shift their PID even stronger toward their parent's party or away from it. Therefore, generally, kids do follow their parents political views, but hold those views much weaker then their parents do. From the rational choice perspective, his whole argument is stupid. The reason why get out to vote drives don't work is because the costs for young people to vote outweigh the benefits. Face it, most people in college don't care too much about property taxes, gun laws, or most things politicans ramble on about. There are very few issues that immediately impact them. So instead of take the time to research and vote for little results, they choose not to. He also states that: Given that about 80% of people with an identifiable party preference grow up to vote the same way as their parents Another idiotic statement without anything to back it up. For how long, exactly, professor? Its not surprising that 80% of people vote the same way as their parents in the first election or two they vote in, but then it'll start to switch and they will adjust their views to their own lives. Without saying how long they are voting the same way as their parents, he leaves out information that is crucial to his argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted August 22, 2006 Share Posted August 22, 2006 Great... now we're creating a subspecies based on political affiliation. 749454[/snapback] Just so liberals and conservatives don't inter-breed, KurtGoebbels is fine with it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wacka Posted August 22, 2006 Share Posted August 22, 2006 Which begs the question, how does Party ID in America develop? Well, young people are still stupid and therefore are naturally democrats. When they get experience and wisen up, they become republicans. (I'm joking for you humor impaired dems! ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted August 22, 2006 Share Posted August 22, 2006 Well, young people are still stupid and therefore are naturally democrats. When they get experience and wisen up, they become republicans. (I'm joking for you humor impaired dems! ) 749535[/snapback] Aren't jokes usually funny? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted August 22, 2006 Share Posted August 22, 2006 Conservatives make babies in the back of their SUVs Liberals can't make babies in the backseat of their Honda Fit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wacka Posted August 23, 2006 Share Posted August 23, 2006 If you drive a Honda Fit, when will you ever get laid? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blzrul Posted August 23, 2006 Share Posted August 23, 2006 Well, young people are still stupid and therefore are naturally democrats. When they get experience and wisen up, they become republicans. (I'm joking for you humor impaired dems! ) 749535[/snapback] Well even if you are joking you'd better be careful. Your fearless leader's brain, Karl Rove, has been quoted as stating the exact opposite, e.g. that the more educated people are, the more they tend to vote Democratic. I realize the image of a knuckle-dragger is probably not flattering to your ego but...well, if the shoe fits.... (I'm joking for your humor impaired Rethugs) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cromagnum Posted August 23, 2006 Share Posted August 23, 2006 Well, young people are still stupid and therefore are naturally democrats. When they get experience and wisen up, they become republicans. (I'm joking for you humor impaired dems! ) 749535[/snapback] They did a study http://forum.digitalspy.co.uk/board/showthread.php?t=436181 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted August 23, 2006 Share Posted August 23, 2006 Well even if you are joking you'd better be careful. Your fearless leader's brain, Karl Rove, has been quoted as stating the exact opposite, e.g. that the more educated people are, the more they tend to vote Democratic. 749730[/snapback] You mean the more educated they are by the American Liberal Education System, the more likely they are to join it? There's news. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted August 23, 2006 Share Posted August 23, 2006 You mean the more educated they are by the American Liberal Education System, the more likely they are to join it? There's news. 749828[/snapback] More time in school = Less time in the real world Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted August 23, 2006 Share Posted August 23, 2006 You mean the more educated they are by the American Liberal Education System, the more likely they are to join it? There's news. 749828[/snapback] I think a lot of it also depends on the school & the schools requirements for political education. Here at UT, you only have to take 2 classes of government (6 hours total) for any degree outside of a Political Science degree. First class is how Government works, second is on a issue topic in Government that you pick (foreign policy, Congress, etc). Most of the teachers do a pretty good job at not injecting their opinions in those classes. The upper-division classes are where you're most likely to find it happening. I've had teachers present a liberal or conservative slant, but they mainly use it for humerous purposes, nothing serious. Sort of a Jon Stewart approach to teaching I guess. During actual discussion and teaching my experience has been extremely good. Teachers have just gave the facts here, and if theres an opinion based argument that is relevant, present both sides. My class makeup (teachers are always curious about how their students think on the party ID scale) is usually about 40% conservative, 30% liberal, and 30% think of themselves as an independent/moderate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cromagnum Posted August 23, 2006 Share Posted August 23, 2006 Well, young people are still stupid and therefore are naturally democrats. When they get experience and wisen up, they become republicans. (I'm joking for you humor impaired dems! ) 749535[/snapback] Actually, Rush Limbaugh has an opinion on this, here's the mp3 of his views. http://www.bartcop.com/rushnazi.mp3 And here's the video format http://www.bushflash.com/nazi.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
\GoBillsInDallas/ Posted August 23, 2006 Share Posted August 23, 2006 What is your excuse for this? I can't get no...... 749341[/snapback] Women with hairy armpits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KurtGodel77 Posted August 29, 2006 Share Posted August 29, 2006 Just so liberals and conservatives don't inter-breed, KurtGoebbels is fine with it... 749466[/snapback] Looks like I was alluded to twice within the first seven posts. Not bad! I had a nice rebuttal to your Goebbels reference, but I deleted it. No sense in spoiling a good thread through yet another shouting match. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted August 29, 2006 Share Posted August 29, 2006 Looks like I was alluded to twice within the first seven posts. Not bad! Once, numbskull, once. I had a nice rebuttal to your Goebbels reference, but I deleted it. No sense in spoiling a good thread through yet another shouting match. 755229[/snapback] And I had a nice rebuttal to your Fleming nonsense (like how you can't defend your thoughts, you can only defend the pedigree of the idiots that tell you what to think). But KRC closed the thread to spare you more embarrassment. BTW, the Post also called Fleming "delusional". I looked up the review. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts