I've reading my polysci book a lot lately (hopelessly trying to catch up before finals) and paying a lot of attention to this election thing and I have one question I hope some of y'all can help me out with. Why does demographics play such a big deal in voting? I first noticed this in the book when it says Blacks vote this way, Jews this way, rich whites vote here, Cubans that and on and on. Then the same thing on TV. Like the overseas Millitary votes going to Bush. So just because you're in the Marine Corp does that mean you're voting Republican? What really irked was that the book says platforms and issues are the least important thing people care about when voting. So I'm thinking to myself, do people vote the way they do just because they were born into a certain group? I ask my friends (the few that vote) to help me out here. Didn't help me a bit. My black friends voted democrat and told me that's what they're supposed to do. My country friends all voted Bush: they had their reasons, but none of them dealt with issues. I've concluded this whole system is pretty screwy, and that either way it's not going to effect the success or failure of my life. I've kinda become disenchanted with the whole process. I think that if either one of these guys did anything that was better than mediocre that he would of won the election. This is a race of the average, so average that I guess people can't come up with a better reason to vote other then by demographic. I wonder then how a woman, half Cuban, half black, union worker, who was raised Jewish then lost God but then born again as a Catholic, who struck it rich with an Internet start up company, but dropped out of high school would vote. I'm gonna have to figure out the percentages according to this chart in my book....
Kim, One would hope that people would be educated enough to inform themselves of the issues and candidates before they made a choice. I have never voted along party lines. I have tried to be open minded and fair in my assessment of each individual that has run for office. And I hope (rather naively) that that would be how everyone would be. One thing that is sad is the complete feeling of hopelessness that, not only young people, but also a vast majority of people feel politics has become. Being able to choose our leaders is one of the greatest gifts we have as a free people. It's a shame it has become so cynical and suspicious. We should be proud of our elected officials. Sadly it seems those days are gone. I'm not that old, but I remember a time when we had respect for our elected officials. We didn't go around prying into their personal lives and we gave them the room to do their jobs without continually looking over their shoulders. If we felt like we made an informed and good decision on whom we wanted in politics, we accepted that decision and gave them the benefit of the doubt. I'm rambling and probably haven't answered your question. Just wanted to throw this out there. ------------------ 'Deeds, not words, shall speak me.'
I think this was a good part of Hillary Clinton's platform for her New York Senate campaingn -- part of her effort to reach out to all of her fellow citizens of New York. (She did graduate law school, and substitute "Real Estate Deals" for "Internet Start Up.") She voted for Gore. ------------------ Stay Cool...
How else do you explain 92% of blacks voting for Gore in Florida? Really puzzling. What, does Gore think that number should be closer to 100%? Is that the reason for all these counts? ------------------ People like to slam Bush's education record, but at least Texans know how to punch holes.
In response to Kim's question about the importance of demographics: First and foremost, demographics only predict trends, not absolutes. Let me clarify. When it is said that the military votes are supposed to be Republican, that could mean as little as, on the statistical average, 55% of military votes go Republican. This may not be the exact percentage and it could easily vary from candidate to candidate. Second, the voting correlations indicated by demographics are usually due to other common factors of those groups. For example: Military=Republican- Historically speaking, Republicans have always put a higher priority on military spending, so it would be in the best interest "rah! rah!" military personel to vote republican. African Americans, Cubans, Hispanics, and most other minority groups=Democrat- A couple of factors may play roles in this trend. First, Democrats are heavy proponents of affirmative action programs, which would benefit minorities. Second, there is a large seperation of wealth in this country that presently favors white males. Democrat taxation and social programs typically are designed to lessen this seperation. Southern States=Republican-Heavy religious influences make the pro-life/prayer in school Republicans seem more appealing. Women=Democrats- Pro-choice stances of democrats and some affirmative action programs benefit women too. Now, of course, within each group, there will be people with different priorities that will vote for another party, but the trends of the gropu as a whole will favor the traditional party for the group as a whole. Cute My answer: it depends on her priorities. If she likes being rich and wants to be richer, Republican. If she feels strong ties to her minority backgrounds, or feels strongly enough about prhibiting prayer in schools (she did lose God after all), Democrat. If she suffers from "rob from the rich give to the poor" Robin Hood syndrome, Socialist. If she really likes trees and hates corporations, Green. If she just doesn't give a rat's @$$ about anybody, but herself, Libertarian. Or maybe, she just won't vote ------------------ [This message has been edited by Launch Pad (edited November 16, 2000).]
Actually, I believe that Cubans tend to be more Republican, mainly because of the idiotic notions that Democrats are communists. ------------------ "He was under more balls than a midget hooker."-Bobby Hill visit www.swirve.com
I'm a white male, pretty lucky right now in my job. I have a complete grasp of the issues, and therefore voted for Gore. ------------------ "Everyone I know has a big but... come on Simone, let's talk about your but."
I hope you realize how offensive that stereotyping is. All of your above descriptions are pretty weak (what, she can only feel a part of her heritage if she's a democrat) but the one I take the most umbrage to is your libertarian description. So I guess all libertarian's care only about themselves? None give to any charitable organizations? That is an incredibly inaccurate statement. Libertarians believe there is definitely a place for charity, it is just not the government's business. Government cannot do anything efficiently becuase it has no compition. It tries to do too much and when it fails it never just says "oh, I guess that won't work." Nope, the solution is always to take more money and rights from Americans to try to bludgeon the problem to death. The libertarian movement is based not on a stoppage of social services but a withdrawel of government from those services. Next time you try to draw such pretty little delineations around the parties try to know what you're talking about first. dylan ------------------ [This message has been edited by dylan (edited November 16, 2000).]
dylan, Apparently sarcasm is a foreign concept to you. I guess you missed the entire rest of the post, where I kept mentioning that individuals have different individual priorities, and demographics only predict "trends" (though you can call them "stereotypes" if you'd like). Naw, Libertarians don't want to end charity, they'd just like to put a larger burden on it by removing programs like Welfare, government subsudization of education and training programs including college grants and loans programs, dropping Social Security and Medicare, deregulating the medical field, getting rid of the FDA, and totally dropping the federal income tax. In short, they'd like to castrate the federal government, and trust the good will of the rich white men in power to take care of all those people that can no longer afford a good education, medical expenses, retirement, or generally, a adequate level of living. But gee, since I don't know what I'm talking about obviously, why don't you visit your own Presidential candidates webpage to read about more *cough* brilliant *cough* Libertarian propaganda. But then, I don't really believe that all of them are uncaring individuals . . . nope, some of them are myopic, irresponsible, and just plain stupid (here are a few smilies to soften the "offensive" nature of the last statement: ). ------------------
