The dearth of an informed electorate

[montanadave]

". . . whenever the people are well-informed, they can be trusted with their own government; that, whenever things get so far wrong as to attract their notice, they may be relied on to set them right." (Thomas Jefferson, as cited in Padover, 1939, p. 88)

According to a recent study (http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/brunitedstatescanadara/671.php?nid=&id=&pnt=671&lb=), American voters are substantially misinformed on key issues, that this misinformation had a direct impact on how they voted, and, not surprisingly, this misinformation was correlated to exposure to specific news sources.

And the recent Citizens United ruling by the Supreme Court is unlikely to improve the situation. Clay Ramsay, of WorldPublicOpinion.org commented, "While we do not have data to make a clear comparison to the past, this high level of misinformation and the fact that voters perceived a higher than usual level of false and misleading information, suggests that the increased flow of money into political advertising may have contributed to a higher level of misinformation." (quoted from the article linked above)

I'm not looking to start a Fox News vs. MSNBC dogfight by posting this information nor revisit the Citizens United debate.

My purpose was simply to draw attention to the paradox which presents itself when, in a society where access to information is virtually unlimited, people are often overwhelmed by the sheer volume and multiplicity of sources. Given the limited time available to most people, they choose to acquire their news from a limited number of news outlets, whose objectivity and veracity may vary greatly.

It's easy to stay in an "echo chamber" where all the news is ideologically pre-filtered and conforms to one's closely held beliefs. It's nice to hear well-connected and well-educated folks with loads of credentials reinforce our opinions, enabling us to feel smug about how much smarter we are from those delusional dumb asses on the other side of the debate.

But we do so at our peril. Many of our "trusted" news sources are delivering a shoddy product and it is incumbent on citizens to shake off the intellectual torpor induced by these shills and make a concerted effort to educate themselves on the critical issues facing this nation, even though this educational process can frequently prove disquieting.

There is nothing wrong with holding strong opinions. But adopting a position without adequately exploring alternative points of view is reckless and misguided.

[Gutshot John]

Let's see if I understand this properly, because the American electorate doesn't buy into the left's spin, they're misinformed? Your study (and therefore any conclusions about Americans being informed) is complete bullshit.


Though the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) concluded that the stimulus legislation has saved or created 2.0-5.2 million jobs, only 8% of voters thought most economists who had studied it concluded that the stimulus legislation had created or saved several million jobs. Most (68%) believed that economists estimate that it only created or saved a few jobs and 20% even believed that it resulted in job losses.

The economy has lost over 8-10 million jobs since 2008, unemployment is at recent record highs and if counted properly would be approaching 20%, Obama promised 8% max unemployment and we're at 9.8% and yet Americans should believe that 2 million jobs makes any kind of difference? The only things that Americans are confused about are the esoteric and obscure statistical methodology that indicates that it could have been 10-12 million jobs? Who the **** cares what the CBO says?


• Though the CBO concluded that the health reform law would reduce the budget deficit, 53% of voters thought most economists have concluded that health reform will increase the deficit.

Because it defies basic common sense. You can't spend more money and then claim that you're going to be spending less. The CBO must go by whatever numbers Congress gives them. The numbers Congress gaves them makes huge assumptions and a best case scenario that no credible economist will be sustained in actuality. In this case it seems that Americans are exceptionally well informed.


• Though the Department of Commerce says that the US economy began to recover from recession in the third quarter of 2009 and has continued to grow since then, only 44% of voters thought the economy is starting to recover, while 55% thought the economy is still getting worse.

Who Americans going to believe? The Department of Commerce or their own eyes? They see Americans out of work, they see persistent structural unemployment and there doesn't seem to be any improvement. While the economy has grown because of improved efficiencies (reduced labor costs as Americans are put out of work), the unemployment rate has NADA to do with GDP. The above conclusion is a cynical dishonesty and a blatant attempt to misinform.


• Though the National Academy of Sciences has concluded that climate change is occurring, 45% of voters thought most scientists think climate change is not occurring (12%) or that scientists are evenly divided (33%).

Again another attempt at spin when Americans have every reason to engage in healthy skepticism. Climates ALWAYS change but that's not how most Americans (or the World population) perceive the issue. The questions are three-fold: First is the Climate getting warmer? (it is); Second whether that warming is due to mankind's actions? (scientists are deeply divided over this); and Third even if man-made whether there is anything that can be done about it at all, without profound economic costs that would devastate the world economy? (there is no debate about this at all).

All in all judging whether people are informed or misinformed based on such simplistic and biased criteria demonstrates an inherent dishonesty and dare I say an attempt to MISINFORM the electorate through innuendo, half-truth, patronizing bullshit.

All in all I give Americans a lot of credit for being able to see through such stupidity. That doesn't mean I expect perfection, nor should anyone when BOTH parties so actively engage in spin, but making broad conclusions based on such specious criteria does NOTHING to fix the issue and a great deal to muddy the waters.

I can't believe you're falling for it.

[Belmont31R]

Some of their points about republicans are simply not true.



The way Congress got ObamaCare to be scored as reducing the deficit was not including the doc fix bill into it.



As far as "reducing taxes".....http://blogs.forbes.com/sciencebiz/2010/03/25/who-pays-for-obamacare/

I guess people already forgot ObamaCare had lots of tax increases in it.



• Though the Department of Commerce says that the US economy began to recover from recession in the third quarter of 2009 and has continued to grow since then, only 44% of voters thought the economy is starting to recover, while 55% thought the economy is still getting worse.


This can be easy since normal people view the economy as whats in front of them, and maybe some of it from what some gov agency tells them. This area is doing pretty good by the numbers compared to the rest of the country yet there are still empty storefronts all over the place. Lots of little strip malls with maybe 25% occupancy. Apply for a job, and there are way more people applying. 3 of my direct neighbors have moved in the last year for jobs somewhere else.

So you can either believe what a talking head is saying the economy is doing or look at whats going on around you.

Believing the stats the gov puts out isn't very smart because they can play with the numbers, and looking at a stat doesn't tell you the whole story. For instance many of the gains in GDP can be attributed to stimulus spending so while on paper it looks like things are improving its really pretty false. That stimulus spending is borrowed money, and has to be paid back. So in the future that amount of money plus interest will have to be taken back out of the economy to pay it back. Like a credit card....it doesn't actually mean you have that money. You can improve your situation short term but it robs future earnings when the bill comes due.



As far as how the jobs created or saved numbers are derived this is another area where the stats can be manipulated. They were counting everyone in a company that got stimulus funding as having their job saved. For instance my MIL works for a contractor who builds things on military posts. One of their projects (of many) were stimulus funded so by the way they calculate the jobs everyone in that company's job was saved even though they were in no danger of losing their jobs without that one job. Its a good size company who has contracts all over the US, and office sites in a few states.

Also doesn't take into account how short or long term the job was. It could be a job for a month, and its a job created. Never mind the fact that person goes back to being unemployed.


Besides how do you spend a trillion dollars and not create or save some jobs? Of course it was going to do that to some extent. The issue is its a trillion dollars, and we get to pay it back in the future. The issue is also it didn't do what Obama said it was going to do.

[John_Wayne777]

According to a recent study

An amazing fact about studies:

If I base one off of flawed assumptions and cherry pick the data I use in it I can make it say almost anything.

[500grains]

But adopting a position without adequately exploring alternative points of view is reckless and misguided.

Such as thinking that "rich people" are refusing to 'put their capital into the economy' in order to hurt Obama?

Ha! Ha! Ha!

OK, and now a serious message from a Czech newspaper:




"The danger to America is not Barack Obama but a citizenry capable of entrusting a man like him with the Presidency. It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of an Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have such a man for their president. The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails America . Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The Republic can survive a Barack Obama, who is, after all, merely a fool. It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools such as those who made him their president."


Here:




USA scores the lowest in national average IQ among the developed countries of the world, at a national average score of 98.

http://www.abytheliberal.com/internationalism/are-americans-stupid-statistics-and-research-data



And a video:

http://www.i-am-bored.com/bored_link.cfm?link_id=21629

___

[Bubba FAL]

Many Americans don't believe the global warming bullshit because the planet has actually been in a cooling cycle for the past few years. And it's damn hard to sell global warming to millions of people buried under record snowfalls - hence the new term "climate change" recently embraced by those perpetrating this money-making scam. What a wonderful phrase of ambiguity - no shit, the climate changes every 15-20 years as we go through normal warming/cooling cycles, yet no matter which way the temps go, the movement can be exploited by those bilking the ignorant out of millions of dollars.

In the 70s it was a coming ice age, in the 90s the ice caps were going to melt and the planet burst into flame. I predict we will hear the ice age ploy resurrected in the near future as we move deeper into the current cooling phase.

It's no wonder we are becoming skeptical of junk science and bullshit statistics.

How does one spin Obamacare as a good thing now that millions have seen their insurance premiums rise (30% in my case) for 2011 as a result of the new regulations?

Property values are still in the tank, unemployment has not improved significantly, gas prices are on the rise, gov't agencies are burying us in new regulations/red tape (and vigorous enforcement of existing regulations), Congress is still trying to spend money that we don't have, and banks are still not lending. Meanwhile, the rest of the world is giving our gov't a collective WTF?. So, are we to believe the Fed propaganda or our own eyes?

[Business_Casual]

It is moronic to think that spending a trillion dollars in the Stimulus to save or create a hand full of jobs was worth it. Seriously, do these people not hear themselves? Madness.

B_C

[The_War_Wagon]

Heroes of the electorate! :rolleyes:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=19v5Kjmc8FI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P36x8rTb3jI

When we figure out how to re-educate, or otherwise negate, 150,000,000 of these folks, then maybe we'll get closer to a constitutional republic again. :eek: