|

Support for Sarah Palin among Republicans is inversely proportional to their levels of education

 youbetcha1.jpg

Numbers cruncher extraordinaire Nate Silver discerns at least one distinctive pattern in the various polls measuring support among Republican voters for possible GOP candidates for president in 2012:

The higher a voter’s level of educational attainment, the less likely it is that he or she supports Sarah Palin for the Republican nomination.

Check it out HERE.

Share:

13 Comments

  1. dogrescuer

    “The higher a voter’s level of educational attainment, the less likely it is that he or she supports Sarah Palin for the Republican nomination.”
    That certainly makes sense!

  2. Don’t worry Pat, there seems to be hope that your dream will come true after all.

    http://www.newsweek.com/2010/11/26/why-sarah-palin-might-become-president-in-2012.html

  3. DUH!

  4. Orlando Clay

    “Obviously, we gotta stand with our North Korean allies.” — Sister Sarah, The Glenn Beck Show, November 24, 2010

    Where’s snuss on this one? Gee, after the way he refused to let go of then-Senator Obama’s “57 states” gaffe, you would think he would be all over this message board, endlessly criticizing Palin for such an inexcusable mistake. After all, snuss and his ilk who want us to believe they’re “fair and balanced.”

    snuss, snuss, wherefore art thou?

  5. Snuss has been banned from the blog.

  6. Orlando: As expdoc notes, Snuss is no longer with us. He’s been gone since this past summer.

    Interestingly, though, Snuss still submits a comment every now and then, as if he thinks it somehow will surmount the software block. Several other of our banished commenters do the same thing. It’s pathetic. Don’t these guys have better things to do than continually seek entry where they’re not wanted?

  7. “The higher a voter’s level of educational attainment, the less likely it is that he or she supports Sarah Palin for the Republican nomination.”

    That’s because we realize we know more about international affairs (ie- North vs South Korea) than she does…and that just shouldn’t be. My husband and I can’t stand this woman, and we both lean conservative…then again, we both also have college degrees.

  8. and we all know it’s soooo much better now with obama….yaaa you betcha…lol…NOT!!!

  9. Poor kaye! A poll shows that Sarah Palin is most favored among the least educated Republicans, and the best she can come up with in response is some lame non sequitur about Obama.

    But then, this is the same kaye who told us a few weeks ago that the economy under George W. Bush “was the very best it had ever been.”

  10. Barry; Your pseudo-snarky comment that most of Palin’s supporters “were educated by one of the largest democratic support groups in the nation – the NEA” is not the clever indictment you think it is. After all, most of the better educated Republicans who don’t like Palin presumably are just as likely to have been educated by NEA teachers. So, what it comes down to, Barry, is that the lesser-educated Republicans support Palin, and the better-educated Republicans don’t — no matter if either group was taught by NEA teachers.

  11. Barry: Out of thousands of commenters we’ve had here over the past three years, only about a dozen and a half or so have been banished.

    Their offenses have included unacceptable vulgarities, blatant racism or sexism or religious bigotry, excessive religious proselytizing and, in several cases, repeatedly misquoting me. There also have been a few other miscellaneous offenses.

    All but one or two of those who were banned were given prior warnings but persisted in their unacceptable ways. Nobody has been banished simply for political disagreement with me. If that were the standard for banishment, virtually all of our regulars would be gone by now. After all, the overwhelming majority of commenters here are conservatives, and I’m not.

  12. By the way, Barry, I gather from your comment No. 13 that you still don’t understand the point of this post.

    Consider, for example, this paragraph from you: “As for the supporters, look at the last election map of 2010 and where the blue was – in the urban centers of America. Do you want to compare the education of the average democrat voter? For every pointy-head PHD, there is are probably dozens of high school dropouts.”

    But this post has got nothing whatever to do with the blue parts of the election map or with Democratic voters at all. This is about a poll of Republicans, not Democrats, and it shows that the more well-educated Republicans are less likely than the less well-educated Republicans to support Palin.

    As for your claim that “a higher percentage of the less-educated Palin supporters had teachers that were members of the NEA (or some other union) as compared to the percentage of higher-educated Palin supporters,” that’s pure nonsense. You don’t have one whit of evidence to support that conclusion.

    Besides, your argument about NEA teachers contradicts your point about who supports Palin and who doesn’t. If less well-educated Republicans presumably were taught by NEA teachers and better educated Republicans were less likely to have been taught by NEA teachers, the inescapable conclusion is that those Republicans who were taught by NEA teachers are more likely to support Palin than those who weren’t. Basically, you’re contending that Palin supporters are more likely to have been taught by NEA teachers.

  13. CherylP.

    One would need to be dumb as a stump to back Palin!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>