About thunderlips11


Befriend (13)
240 threads
Followed by 0
Following 0
Ignored by 2
Ignoring 0
Ignore thunderlips11
In Paraguay
Registered Aug 12, 2009

thunderlips11's most recent comments:

  • On 20 Oct 2014 in In praise of the dragging down Boomers, thunderlips11 said:

    marcus says

    1) Just like everyone else, they are susceptible to big money advertising

    and the effect of big money in general in politics.

    Big money and advertising has been with us for more than a century at least.

    (Dan Smoot and HL Hunt are very interesting; most of their nonsense is repeated today - But it is more popular than ever before, esp. in the Tea Party contingent, which is most certainly not a Youth Movement by Composition. Needs a thread of it's own)

    If anything, this argument would go better for X and Y, because they've lived in the era that epitomizes Soft Money, the end of the Fairness Doctrine, Think Tanks, Fox News, etc. Yet the voting record does not support this.

    marcus says

    2) Just like every other age group, there are plenty of fundamental Christianists and others who are either highly gullible or below average intelligence or education level or all three.

    NOT like every other age group. The rise of Christian Right is a Boomer Story. Sure, there were snake handlers before, but the membership boomed with boomers in the late 60s to early 80s. The Jesus People/Jesus Freaks are the source of voting power (and donation money) for the Christian Right.

    This deserves it's own thread sometime.

    marcus says

    3) Just like every other age group, they are especially vulnerable to propaganda about taxes and government spending and war and race, and "family values" and guns, just like so many people in other groupings are manipulated in politics.

    This answer to this is in #1.

    marcus says

    But bottom line: if it's a total of 53% or something like that that ended up on the conservative (fuck you I've got mine) side of the spectrum, there is no generalization that particularly makes sense or is interesting about this age group. Were talking about a handful of people out of 100 being a reason to generalize about the 100**, when there are all kinds of factors influencing the people, 30% or more of whom are idiots.

    marcus says

    (**and really we're talking about a handful of people out of 200 and generalizing about the 200 based on that, since half didn't vote. Sure that says something about the group too, but it's not different than any other group.)

    It's absolute nonsense to dismiss exit polls on those grounds. As somebody who is a teacher - a math teacher - you should certainly understand that generally speaking, the larger the sample size less the margin of error. You'll see that the source features an average sample number much higher than 100-200 people.

    Since personal characteristics including race, gender, age, income, etc. aren't collected from the voter while they are in the booth, this is the only reliable proxy we have. I'll repeat that they are primary tool used to adjudicate the fairness of elections, and I believe that if professionally run exit polls off by more than a small degree, it's a sure sign of voting fraud.

    National exit polls consist of presidential and/or congressional vote questions in addition to questions on gubernatorial races, important issues affecting the vote decision, presidential approval and a number of current national issues. With the exception of the 1972 CBS News Exit Poll, all include basic demographic variables such as gender, race, education, income, and age, among others. Sample sizes for these studies usually range from 8,000 to 20,000 voters, with the largest samples coming from the 1986 and 1988 ABC News Exit Polls which consist of over 50,000 interviews.

    Please email Data Services at DataServices-RoperCenter@uconn.edu for information concerning fees, other studies, or to answer any questions you may have.


    By all means write the University if you have questions or doubts about their methodology.

    More later.

  • On 18 Oct 2014 in In praise of the dragging down Boomers, thunderlips11 said:

    marcus says

    Americans (and I guess humans in general) in their arrogance often seem to spend way to much time in life comparing ourselves to others.

    I find this a pathetic human attribute, but I understand it.

    After thinking about it, I get what the real issue is. And I don't mean that you feel inferior to boomers when you compare yourself. But you feel like we had it easier in some ways, better in some ways. And then in some twisted way, you blame us that things aren't the same for you.

    I can tell you, that this is less true than you think, except with respect to housing (and that is mostly with the aid of hindsight). At least not if you have reasonable intelligence and skills (and experience)

    I would say that times are more noticeably worse for low income and or low skills folks now than 30 years ago.

    But the fact that you blame boomers for what you feel when you get all wrapped up in those ego based comparisons is sad.

    Look, Marcus.

    When demographers and historians write the legacy of the boomers, it won't be "Oh they were victims of conditions".

    Your age group - not all of you, but the people in your age cohort generally - voted for Republicans and Neoliberals over and over again. What destroyed America wasn't "Competition" that "Nobody could control for". In the first half of the 20th Century, you think American goods didn't compete with German, French, and British products? They did, but thank fuck there was an average Tariff of around 30%.

    Who cut the taxes on the 1%? Who "Freed us from the cold dead hand of government" and the Boomers brought him back a second time by big margins amongst themselves? Most Favored Nation trading status for Communist China? H1-Bs and outsourcing? Who got rid of those tariffs? Who really opened the floodgates and declared the first amnesty so that even poor Americans had a race to the bottom with wages and broke the unions, particularly in meat packing and other low-value added industries? Who fired all the ATCs? Who made a stink about Rock Music and Lyrics that poisoned kid's minds? Who joined all the evangelical churches over the past 40 years and turned the Religious Right into a powerful voting block, that in previous decades was a bunch of marginal snake handlers nobody cared about winning votes from? Who started demanding "Law and Order" and building the Prison Industrial Complex?

    Why did democrats shift to the right, and the Progressive Wing lose all power? Why is it that most Democrats today are to the right of Liberal Republicans like Eisenhower on economic issues?

    If Boomers repeatedly voted against - even by a small margin - the people who propose these things, but the old fucks swung the vote anyway, one could make the claim that they are innocent of responsibility for the current mess.

  • On 18 Oct 2014 in In praise of the dragging down Boomers, thunderlips11 said:

    marcus says

    I never said the boomers aren't a huge number of people. I just said that generalizing about them as you do, and assigning blame to them as you do, makes no sense.

    You could cite other groups, such as men, or white men, or Christians, or democrats, or capitalists, or tax payers, or working folks, or college educated, or women, or married, or parents....

    These are all large groups, and they are all comprised of nearly half idiots who are apathetic about a lot of important issues. In many elections half or so don't even bother to vote.

    First of all, I'm not looking at those groups, I'm looking at Age Cohorts.

    If it's okay to ask how Millenials will vote, how Whites vote, how Blacks vote, how Women votes, etc. why can't we ask how Boomers vote and investigate that over time?

    Who complains when somebody points out "Blacks go for the democrats in every election?"

    If you look at Boomer voting record, you do not see a pattern of left, center-left, or even moderate tendency.

    This is true NO MATTER how big or small they are, even though they are a huge chunk of the electorate - although now they are offset by Generation Y, which is why Democrats are starting to win again.

    Another bullshit media claim is that GenX is "more conservative". Not based on their voting record, they ain't.

    When the Boomers voted to the right, they generally did by strong margins. The few times they did vote left, there were either spoilers (Perot), or the margin was puny, around 2% more than not. A handful more for Obama than against in 2008.

    Again, this is not blaming every individual because of the group they are a member of.

    It is about overturning incorrect orthodoxy and a misleading narrative.

Home   Tips and Tricks   Questions or suggestions? Mail p@patrick.net   Thank you for your kind donations

Page took 379 milliseconds to create.