Whoops, apologize for that one. Hit the reply button too early.
Anyway, based on your article’s quotation:
Like Gore, Kerry split college-educated voters overall with Bush, but he increased Democratic support among college-educated men, going from a 57-percent to 39-percent deficit in 2000 to a 53-percent to 45-percent deficit this year.
This not only does not indicate any hard numbers, but has nothing to do with registered Democrats. Just because you vote for a Democratic presidential candidate (or even a straight Democratic ticket) doesn’t mean you’re a member of the Democratic party. If you’re not a registered Democrat but vote Democratic, you’re just left-leaning.
Again, you’re making the mistake of confusing a Democratic voter with a liberal or a leftist, which is not a wise thing to do at all. Some of the most reactionary voters I’ve ever met voted straight Democratic tickets in every election - and they’d bloody your nose if you called them a liberal.
I grew up in Western Pennsylvania, among union Democrats, so I can assure you that this is true for at least some Democratic voters. I’m sure they figure in those percentages somewhere. Also, most black voters are not liberals per se, though they are surely Democrats.
Also, you seem to think college graduates only refers to young voters, instead of how most of us understand the term, namely someone who has graduated college. I know a guy in my local alumni group who is a member of our Class of 1942. Does he drop off of your statistics sheet because he is over 29?
Right. That brings back my earlier point that a lot of this is just a by-product of having a two-party system. There is some weird-ass affiliation going on out there even though the groups have extremely little in common and share no common philosophy.
Religious fundamentalists and big business have very little in common. Likewise, the Democrat party is made up of a bunch of rag-tag groups that could care less about each other. Do you think a lesbian Wiccan is going to be able to talk coherent politics to a union worker from rural Indiana?
You can’t say much at all about the correlation between Ruplicans and Democrats because there is very little unity or shared vision. It is just clumps of people that landed where they landed and represent nearly all philosophies and education levels on both sides.
I think most Engineering Colleges call it “Logic Design” or “Design Logic”… the ‘study’ threw me off (each college likes to add its own designators to classes)…
Looking only at the top of the education food chain… seems pretty even to me…
I have several advanced degrees … and have worked/known many with advanced degrees… I’ve seen no correlation between education and party affiliation…
The best ‘indicator’ of party that I have personally witnessed (and by no means have any proof for) would be wealth and how one obtained said wealth… those who tend to earn more, and are ‘self made’ tend (in my expirence) to be republican… those who have money from prior to their generation… tend to be democrat… (not liberal nor conservitive, but pure party affiliation)…
Seems those that either have less money… or have never had want of money; believe others should get ‘more’ of a helping hand… and those who are ‘self-made’ believe others should be able to ‘lift themselves up by the bootstraps’…
oddly enough, the formulation was perfectly comprehensible as set forth.
May we not presume that the currency of debate here is the underlying reasoning, which, if evident, may be acceptably set forth as mere outline if so desired.
What point, exactly, is served by displaying your laudable grasp of grammer? (other than to mark you as a hopeless pedant, that is…)