Saturday, April 18, 2015

why you pan-troglodytic deuterostems will get exactly what you deserve...,


sciencedaily |  Most partisans -- average Democratic and Republican voters -- act like fans in sports rivalries instead of making political choices based on issues, according to a new study with a University of Kansas researcher as the lead author.

"What is the consequence of today's polarized politics? What's motivating partisans to vote in this climate?" said Patrick Miller, a University of Kansas assistant professor of political science. "For too many of them, it's not high-minded, good-government, issue-based goals. It's, 'I hate the other party. I'm going to go out, and we're going to beat them.' That's troubling."

Miller and Pamela Johnston Conover, a distinguished professor of political science at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, are co-authors of the study "Red and Blue States of Mind: Partisan Hostility and Voting in the United States," published recently in the journal Political Research Quarterly.

The researchers analyzed the attitudes of voters nationwide in survey data from the 2010 Cooperative Congressional Election Study. They found that many average voters with strong party commitments -- both Democrats and Republicans -- care more about their parties simply winning the election than they do either ideology or issues. Unlike previous research, the study found that loyalty to the party itself was the source of partisan rivalry and incivility, instead of a fundamental disagreement over issues.

The survey showed that 41 percent of partisans agreed that simply winning elections is more important to them than policy or ideological goals, while just 35 percent agreed that policy is a more important motivator for them to participate in politics. Only 24 percent valued both equally or expressed no opinion.

When it came to uncivil attitudes, 38 percent of partisans agreed that their parties should use any tactics necessary to "win elections and issue debates." When those who agreed with this view were asked what tactics they had in mind, the most common ones they offered were voter suppression, stealing or cheating in elections, physical violence and threats against the other party, lying, personal attacks on opponents, not allowing the other party to speak and using the filibuster to gridlock Congress. Democrats and Republicans were equally likely to express this opinion.

"This is the first research to show that strong partisans who are motivated by partisan conflict are endorsing uncivil attitudes about the political process," Miller said. "This comes to an important point. If our politicians are polarized and uncivil, maybe it's because many voters are polarized and uncivil."

16 comments:

Vic78 said...

The research isn't telling the whole story. Let's say you've been getting your ass kicked every day like Daniel from Karate Kid. It's natural to want to fight back at some point. It isn't fair to say that Daniel and Johnny are having problems after Daniel finally hits Johnny with the brass knuckles.

What I'm saying is that the research is promoting false equivalence. One side is really fucking crazy. Who are these researchers working for? By saying "both sides" you enable the bad actors to keep up the bullshit. I'm in favor General Sherman's break your enemies strategy. It sucks that it's like that, but this is what we have to work with right now. To the researchers, get with the fucking program.

Constructive_Feedback said...

[quote]care more about their parties simply winning the election than they do either ideology or issues. Unlike previous research, the study found that loyalty to the party itself was the source of partisan rivalry and incivility, instead of a fundamental disagreement over issues.[/quote]


Brother CNu: THANK YOU FOR POSTING THIS. It affirms what I have been saying all along.


I WILL LIMIT MY FOCUS TO "BLACK AMERICANS", regardless of the fact that it is true for most others in the nation.


In as much as BLACK AMERICANS agree that we are 'Steps Behind' due to the LEGACY OF WHITE SUPREMACY AND MARGINALIZATION IN AMERICA - one would think that an effort to KEEP OUR PEOPLE MINDFUL OF OUR PURPOSE would seek to circumvent the THEFT OF OUR CONSCIOUSNESS into the "Malcolm X American Capitalistic Political Football Game".


This would be a WRONG ASSUMPTION THOUGH.


As the forces who have become the establishment power within the Black community show incompetency at providing the SOCIAL JUSTICE to the masses as promised, their LUST FOR POWER has them USING BLACK PEOPLE, shifting their focus nationally into the fight between the TWO DUNG PRODUCING PARTY ANIMALS.


Black people can be made to SUPPORT that which they tell you in private THEY OPPOSE if you merely frame the argument as "DEMOCRAT / REPUBLICAN" or "BLACK/ WHITE".


The problem is NOT WHAT THESE IGNORANT PARTIES DO, however, it is the lack of INSTITUTIONAL INTEGRITY AT THE COMMUNITY LEVEL and the REGULATION NECESSARY to prevent the theft of our valuables.

Constructive_Feedback said...

[quote]One side is really fucking crazy.[/quote]


Vic78:

The fact that you KNEW Bill O'Reilly's "Sexual Harassment" accuser by name the other day told me EVERYTHING I NEED TO KNOW about what is important to you per your investment in time.


I HAVE NO DOUBT that you earnestly believe that "ONE SIDE IS CRAZY". And that YOU, like always are "Standing With Jesus".


The problem is that, per your own bigotry and shortsightedness you can't bring yourself to see that THE PROPER MEASURE should not be (your perceptions of) CRAZINESS.

Instead we need to look at the VALUABLES EXTRACTED AND INVESTED IN THE FIGHT and the residual UPLIFT that the INVESTORS have received.


FROM WHERE I STAND the "TWO PARTY POLITICAL SYSTEM IN AMERICA" is the binary choice, not "Democrat or Republican" but INVESTING IN VOTING FOR YOUR SALVATION or HOLDING A PORTION OF YOURSELF OUT so you won't get MOLESTED.


MY CHALLENGE TO YOU is to not look at the relative INDEX to 100% WHITE PERFECTION that the NUL details....................but instead for you to do an audit of your FUEL FARM and determine HOW MUCH ROCKET FUEL has the AMERICANIZED NEGRO burned up in the past 50 years through politics, only to remain at 72% YET STILL blame his WHITE RIGHT WING ENEMY for his own continued state of inferiority?

ken said...

Participants

We recruited 460 undergraduates at a large US public university in spring 2014. Students participated
for course credit in mandatory introductory political science courses. Participants ranged
from 18 to 32 years old (M = 19.52, SD = 1.93) and were plurality freshmen (M = 1.65, SD
= .85). They were mostly white (78.70%), slightly Democratic (M = 3.86, SD = 2.01)6
, and slightly liberal (M = 3.76, SD = 1.65). Students were recruited by gender so that all four conditions
had 115 participants each, yielding 230 men and 230 women with both genders evenly
divided between inparty and outparty leader conditions. Though a convenience sample, Druckman
and Kam (2011, 70) note that “student subjects do not intrinsically pose a problem for a
study’s external validity” as they resemble the public on most non-demographic factors.

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/21565503.2014.992795

Not sure I would call this a good sampling. But something more interesting to me is I couldn't find any of the words in the study report that was used in the interpretation, i.e....voter suppression, stealing or cheating in elections, physical violence and threats against the other party, lying, personal attacks on opponents. I did find the word "threats" used but not in the context used in the interpretation.

Vic78 said...

You're gonna sing your song until your throat gives out. Why does it seem like I'm answering the same debate points every time? My bigotry? You're the one that takes issue with Neil Tyson and Charlo Greene because they are different from you. That's been your pattern. Someone doesn't act or believe how you think one ought and you go after that individual. Hell, someone could agree with you >80% and you'll still go after him for the minor disagreements.

Your schtick is pretty funny. Blah blah negro valuables molested by the PROGRESSIVE HOMO ERECTUS SOMETHINGSOMETHING ALLIANCE. The topic doesn't matter; you have to bring it up. You have your worldview and ain't nobody gonna turn you around. Mannnn, yo ass crazy.

mhicks said...

"i.e....voter suppression, stealing or cheating in elections, physical violence and threats against the other party, lying, personal attacks on opponents."


I imagine that the questions are not explicit as such, the researchers would not provide such an obvious "tell," because respondents would tend to answer in a manner that meets their perceptions of what the questioner wants, rather than providing a more honest answer.

Vic78 said...

Having said that, you get further ahead pushing issues than you do pushing the party. It's more difficult to manipulate an interest group than it is to play someone loyal to the party. People wouldn't be so afraid of the other party if they had their own foundation to build on. Both parties have to pay attention to issues. The women's groups are taking issues seriously right now and nobody's ignoring them.

Constructive_Feedback said...

REALLY?

http://withintheblackcommunity.blogspot.com/2015/04/question-black-women-which-plight-of.html



I guess if you qualify it by saying "ISSUES RELEVANT TO THEIR INSULAR GROUP OF POLITICAL OPERATIVES" your views might squeak in.

IF you said "THE INTERESTS OF BLACK WOMEN WHO HAVE INVESTED THEIR HOPES INTO THEIR SCHEME" - then I violently disagree with you.

Vic78 said...

I thought that what I said was pretty straightforward. If you have an issue or set of issues that you are working on behalf of, you can further your cause better than if you are loyal to a party.

What do THE INTERESTS OF BLACK WOMEN WHO HAVE INVESTED THEIR HOPES INTO THEIR SCHEME have to do with what I'm talking about above?

CNu said...

If you have an issue or set of issues that you are working on behalf of,
you can further your cause better than if you are loyal to a party.


Please flesh that out for me a little bit Vic.

Reason I ask, Hellury is a hawkish neocon, anti gay-marriage, private mail-server operating, which way is the political wind blowing sow - who makes Granny Goodness look like a piker. Yet, she's trying squirm her squishy naesty ace into a bit of Elizabeth Warren mimetic camo, pretend that she's "evolved", not had the most ruthless possible imperial sights set on Africa, and that she has a value proposition for wimmin, mentholated americanized negroes, and now obsolete discarded clerks(middle-class) who've been unceremoniously ejected from the game of musical chairs on the deck of the Titanic.

Constructive_Feedback said...

THIS IS YOUR ANCESTOR, ACCORDING TO THE "SCIENTIST" Neal DeGrasse Tyson who enjoys fame and unchallenged loyalties among the Secular Progressive circles.

http://www.petco.com/assets/product_images/live_animal/ferret_D.jpg

In "Cosmos", executive produced by the writer of "Family Guy" and "Cleveland Brown" - the SCIENTIST DeGrasse Tyson said:

"During the 3rd mass extinction that killed most plant-life and animals on earth when a giant asteroid hit the earth THESE FURRY CREATURES burrowed into the EARTH AND SURVIVED THE DUST CLOUD that blocked out the sun, causing the creatures and plants on the surface to die".

QUESTION VIC78!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Why do you want me to pace myself on the FOOLISHNESS that I hear and NOT consider the ideological underpinnings of these claims?


DO YOU BELIEVE THAT YOU ULTIMATELY EVOLVED FROM A FERRET-LIKE CREATURE?

How did lesser mammals and birds branch off from this creature?

Constructive_Feedback said...

If you have an issue or set of issues that you are working on behalf of, you can further your cause better than if you are loyal to a party.

It all depends what YOU see as "A PARTY", as it appears that you are limiting your minds eye and DISARMING YOURSELF with the promise that THE NEXT ROUND OF INVESTMENT OF YOUR VALUABLES are going to turn out differently if you try harder to fight your enemy.

MY NEW ROUND OF RESEARCH: The accelerated exodus of (mostly) Sub-Saharan Africans from Libya to Italy Is Due To The Chaos In LIBYA. DESPITE The Fact That The US GOVERNMENT Complained The Other Day About The ABSENCE OF A GOVERNMENT IN LIBYA - No CORRUPT 'AMERICANIZED NEGRO MEDIA OPERATIVE' OR 'AFRICANA STUDIES PROFESSOR' Has Yet To Enumerate The DAMAGE DONE As They WENT ALONG WITH THE "Humanitarian Mission" In Libya Because They Wanted Obama To Use The US JUSTICE DEPARTMENT To Fight Their DOMESTIC WHITE RIGHT-WING ENEMY So They Looked The Other Way From The US Department Of Defense, CIA And State Department

SO MUCH FOR YOUR DAMNED "TEAM" (PARTY) CONCEPT

Constructive_Feedback said...

My Good Man, CNu:


After watching "Sweetie Pies" on "OWN" about the tragedy of Black males in St Louis - I WONDER WHY are you focusing on NATIONAL POLITICAL OPPORTUNISM (Through Hillary) but seemingly are walking past the LAYERS OF MORE LOCALIZED GOVERNMENT that these Black women were told were the KEY TO THEIR SALVATION - if they supported the MACHINE into power?

Do tell?

CNu said...

lol, um, er, ah..., haven't been pulling my weight on that pipe you stay schmoking - so honestly have no idea what you're talking about.

Vic78 said...

Wow, you don't believe in evolution???

Vic78 said...

I had those latino groups in mind. They've chosen immigration as their issue and they've been pushing it since 2006. They've made progress on the issue. Another one was the the women's groups going after the gynecologist Rush Limbaugh. They aren't beholden to any parties but the parties have to respect them.

As for Madame Secretary, her boss played her. She's stuck following his lead. She's going to have to tone the hawk thing down a bit. She should forget about the war on drugs. She has to support the Persian/Cuban plans. She's smart enough to know the Democratic Party has the Obama brand now. There is no distancing one's self. What she's doing now is the only option she has.