Political Correlation?

There are two topics that are going back and forth on the credentials of Kerry and Bush for being president.So far I have seen only 'fundies' arguing for Bush and 'evilutionists' arguing for Kerry, and I wonder if this is a fairly universal correlation ... Are there any 'fundies' that are for Kerry? Why?

​

Are there any 'evilutionists' for Bush? Why?

​

Is this correlation related to the level of criteria for evidence and logical thinking?Let's try to keep this one free from the bashing and negative arguments eh?(edited to add sub-topic)This message has been edited by RAZD, 08-25-2004 11:50 PM

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.

and we're off ...

A lack of response would seem to indicate the correlation is valid.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

No generalization like this can ever be valid, it's more complex than that, and I think you know that.

---

"Wake up, O sleeper, rise from the dead, and Christ will shine on you."Ephesians 5:14

True -- it can be refuted by evidence to the contrary. To date there is none.Anecdotal evidence is like that.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

quote:

---

Is this correlation related to the level of criteria for evidence and logical thinking?

---

I think it is a general trend that the more educated you are the more liberal you are. At times, one's left or right wing bias will make you more likely to believe one argument over the other. However, you also have to judge the reliability of the witnesses. Who should you trust more, people at the scene or people who weren't there but heard stories? I would tend to believe those that were actually there, regardless of bias.This is my own personal opinion, but I think conservatives right now are more concerned with maitaining power than maintaining the truth. This seems to be echoed in the creationist movement as well. It seems that as long as what they think is the truth is upheld, then it doesn't matter that you have to tell a few lies along the way. In other words, keeping a conservative in office is the primary goal and the means to that end are beside the point.

This isn't c-span.
Honestly though I really wouldn't care either way. Politics will always be politics.

---

peace

quote:

---

I think it is a general trend that the more educated you are the more liberal you are.

---

^
|
|
|That's disgusting.

---

peace

Apparently you've missed my posts. I am an applied physicist, a non-'fundy' Catholic, accept evolution, and support Bush. Judging from some of the anti-Bush arguments advanced on these boards, I'd say this conclusion is decidedly premature, at best.Some of the anti-Bush crowd seem to regard Michael Moore as the sole infallible source of information needed, much as the 'fundy' YECs do the (interpreted by themselves ) Bible.At very least this displays a disregard for the need of external corroborating evidence.

quote:

---

Some of the anti-Bush crowd seem to regard Michael Moore as the sole infallible source of information needed, much as the 'fundy' YECs do the (interpreted by themselves ) Bible.

​

At very least this displays a disregard for the need of external corroborating evidence.

---

I totally agree with this. There are liberals that are quick to jump on the Michael Moore bandwagon without critically examining his claims. This type of behavior is seen on both sides of the aisle and must be confronted on an issue by issue basis.

quote:

---

That's disgusting.

---

But yet that seems to be the trend. Notice I say "trend", there are many exemptions to this trend, but overall most conservatives have a high school equivalence education while most liberals have at least some college if not a college degree. The question many conservatives ask is whether the atmosphere within universities encourages liberal thought and liberal politics. Most liberals claim that exposure to world events both past and history in combination with enlightened classical writers lends itself more towards a socialist or liberal bias. Is conservatism a result of religious views and liberalism a result of the Enlightenment of which current university curiculums are based on? The question remains unanswered, really.

Hmm, I think this remains a vast overgeneralization.An MBA is, after all, a post-graduate degree, and I'd hypothesize that there are few socialist MBAs (at least in the USA).Law, medicine, physical and mathematical science and engineering, do not seem to lean heavily to the left.Perhaps if you said those in academia (especially humanities, social sciences, and to some extent biologicsal sciences) tend toward the liberal end of the spectrum, your statement would be more accurate.Nevertheless, "academics", are a small subset of "the well-educated" (if defined as those with a postgraduate degree).

thank you for stepping up.care to address why you still think bush is a positive choice?without negatives?

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

quote:

---

Hmm, I think this remains a vast overgeneralization.

---

Perhaps it is. However, how many church going high school educated liberals do you know? I know of none personally, but maybe I just need to meet more church goers. Most of the liberals I know are college educated in various fields including the sciences. The vast majority of conservatives that I know are religious and with no college experience. Perhaps I am taking my personal experiences and unfairly foisting them onto the rest of society, but I think there is a grain of truth in there as well. For instance, we often hear of conservatives railing on university professors and the "academic elite" for perpetuating falsely held liberal policies. I never hear of liberals complaining about a conservative bias on college campuses.As for MBA's, I will agree that it is very evenly split between supply side/demand side, or open capatilism and socialism. If this site is any indication, I would say that a majority, no matter how slim, of scientists tend towards liberalism. The humanities, as you mention, are predominately liberal. Like I said, it is an overall trend with exceptions.