# Why are Republicans so obtuse? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 2, 2010, 6:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-republicans-so-obtuse/527412 "2010-02-02T18:04:26Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2010, 4:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-republicans-so-obtuse/527412/141 "2010-02-04T16:51:12Z")
> [@Chessic\_Sense](#): > > He said “implies a knowledge”, not “implies a lack of knowledge” Ok, well, it doesn’t imply enough knowledge to be able to answer the question, so it’s a distinction without a difference. ---
**Author:** ![Kearsen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/82dd89/32.png) [@Kearsen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kearsen)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2010, 4:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-republicans-so-obtuse/527412/142 "2010-02-04T16:57:27Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Ok, well, it doesn’t imply enough knowledge to be able to answer the question, so it’s a distinction without a difference. Not sure doesn’t mean that I agree or disagree with the facts presented, it simply means “unsure” , not “I DON’T KNOW” I’m not sure how to explain the difference further to you if you haven’t grasped it. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2010, 5:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-republicans-so-obtuse/527412/143 "2010-02-04T17:02:56Z")
> [@dre2xl](#): > > Well, I don’t know about blacks, but on the question of 9/11, [61% of Democrats not sure Bush didn’t know about 9/11.](http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/bush_administration/22_believe_bush_knew_about_9_11_attacks_in_advance) 35% believed he knew in advance, which mirrors the 36% of Republicans that believed Obama wasn’t born in the US. But Bush DID know an attack of some sort was coming. That’s a fact. Answering that Bush knew an attack was coming is not the same as expressing a belief that he was in on it. It should also be noted that Bush’s credibility on just about everything took a huge nosedive after it was discovered that he had lied about the WMDs in Iraq. That was, in itself, such huge, and consequential and _unlikely_ lie that it made people question everything else he said. As implausible as the possibility of Bush having prior, specific knowledge of the 9/11 attacks might have been, it had also seemed equally implausible that he would just make up the WMDs in Iraq, but he did. Obama has not blown such a giant hole in his own credibility as Bush did, and the doubts about his birth are not just based on an implausible hypothesis (far more implausible than Bush hypothetically being able to have specific advance knowledge of 9/11 – I’m not talking about character or personality here, just physical, theoretical plausibility), but a hypothesis which has actually been factually _disproven_. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2010, 5:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-republicans-so-obtuse/527412/144 "2010-02-04T17:08:40Z")
> [@Kearsen](#): > > Not sure doesn’t mean that I agree or disagree with the facts presented, it simply means “unsure” , not “I DON’T KNOW” > > I’m not sure how to explain the difference further to you if you haven’t grasped it. There isn’t any difference. “I don’t know” doesn’t imply any more opinion of the facts than “I’m not sure.” How is somebody saying they don’t know whether Barack was born in the United States a more informative answer than saying they’re not sure? How is it less embarrassing? ---
**Author:** ![Kearsen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/82dd89/32.png) [@Kearsen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kearsen)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2010, 5:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-republicans-so-obtuse/527412/145 "2010-02-04T17:22:47Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > There isn’t any difference. “I don’t know” doesn’t imply any more opinion of the facts than “I’m not sure.” > > How is somebody saying they don’t know whether Barack was born in the United States a more informative answer than saying they’re not sure? How is it less embarrassing? Because not sure implies some knowledge on the subject as in the facts might be inconclusive (or not easily accessed), whereas an " I don’t know" answer to the same question would imply NO knowledge of the subject at all. To me, it’s just a tricky distinction to ensure someone answers the question, however in this case, improperly. When the “not sure” demographic gets lumped in with the Yes or No vote to skew debate falls with your way of thinking there is no reason for distinction. I am saying there is reason for distinction. Also, I make no claims about more or less embarrassing. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2010, 5:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-republicans-so-obtuse/527412/146 "2010-02-04T17:32:43Z")
> [@Kearsen](#): > > Because not sure implies some knowledge on the subject as in the facts might be inconclusive (or not easily accessed), whereas an " I don’t know" answer to the same question would imply NO knowledge of the subject at all. To me, it’s just a tricky distinction to ensure someone answers the question, however in this case, improperly. I don’t agree that this distinction exists, nor do I agree that there’s anything “tricky” about it. It’s a standard phrasing in polling, and I don’t see why you think 'I don’t know" would be a less favorable answer to a hypothetically biased pollster than “I’m not sure.” If anything “I’m not sure” is slightly more generous. It’s euphemistic. It affords the utterly clueless with the fig leaf of being able to assert uncertainty rather than dirt ignorance. > [@](#): > > When the “not sure” demographic gets lumped in with the Yes or No vote to skew debate falls with your way of thinking there is no reason for distinction. I am saying there is reason for distinction. Once more, “I’m not sure” is not a demographic, it’s an answer to a poll question, and I don’t understand what you mean by “lumped in with Yes or No,” or how you think it “skews” anything. Skews it how? To put it bluntly, how is “I don’t know” whether Barack Obama is a natural born citizen a less stupid answer than “I’m not sure?” ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2010, 5:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-republicans-so-obtuse/527412/147 "2010-02-04T17:36:51Z")
Because ‘I don’t know’ is an admission of ignorance of the subject, where as ‘I’m not sure’ means that the person may have a little knowledge on the subject but is uncertain where they stand on it. It’s a subtle difference, but there IS a difference. I’m not sure (;)) how this may or may not skew the results though… -XT ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2010, 5:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-republicans-so-obtuse/527412/148 "2010-02-04T17:43:05Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > To put it bluntly, how is “I don’t know” whether Barack Obama is a natural born citizen a less stupid answer than “I’m not sure?” Well, strictly speaking, none of us _know._ We can be (and should be) reasonably certain, but that’s not the same as absolute knowledge. I doubt anyone responding to the poll read into it that much, of course, but the distinction does exist. ---
**Author:** ![Jack\_Batty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jack_batty/32/3201_2.png) [@Jack\_Batty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jack_Batty)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2010, 5:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-republicans-so-obtuse/527412/149 "2010-02-04T17:43:48Z")
The phrasing of the question has to come into play. “Is there life outside our solar system?” “I’m not sure,” is a perfectly valid response, mostly because there is just no evidence one way or another. “Was Obama born in America?” “I’m not sure” is an answer born of willful ignorance, mostly because there \*is \*a pile of evidence one way or another. My point being, “I’m not sure,” to the second question may as well be lumped in with, or at least associated with, a “No,” as they are ignoring the same facts to come up with a response. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2010, 5:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-republicans-so-obtuse/527412/150 "2010-02-04T17:52:20Z")
Some people are just that poorly informed, though. They may not even have heard of the controversy (I use the term advisedly) over Obama’s birthright citizenship. I bet if the same question were posed to self-described Democrats you’d get a similar number of “not sure” responses. ---
**Author:** ![Kearsen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/82dd89/32.png) [@Kearsen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kearsen)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2010, 5:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-republicans-so-obtuse/527412/151 "2010-02-04T17:52:25Z")
> [@Jack\_Batty](#): > > The phrasing of the question has to come into play. > > “Is there life outside our solar system?” “I’m not sure,” is a perfectly valid response, mostly because there is just no evidence one way or another. > “Was Obama born in America?” “I’m not sure” is an answer born of willful ignorance, mostly because there \*is \*a pile of evidence one way or another. > My point being, “I’m not sure,” to the second question may as well be lumped in with, or at least associated with, a “No,” as they are ignoring the same facts to come up with a response. I’d agree with all points raised with one exception: The distinction is only necessary when one side or the other lays claim to the “not sure” or “I don’t know” category as their own ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2010, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-republicans-so-obtuse/527412/152 "2010-02-04T17:57:32Z")
> [@Perciful](#): > > So what does science teach us about creation? That we came from Apes? Is that the best we can do? > > We really don’t know and until we do we should keep an open mind. If you want to discuss this, I suggest you start a new thread and tell us what you think evolution is about. My sense is you don’t understand it very well. ---
**Author:** ![Jack\_Batty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jack_batty/32/3201_2.png) [@Jack\_Batty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jack_Batty)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2010, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-republicans-so-obtuse/527412/153 "2010-02-04T17:57:44Z")
What side is there to take? The question, at least as I laid it out, doesn’t beg a side. It begs truth. If I were to conduct a poll in which the question was, “Is the sky blue?” I would feel quite confident in lumping the “Noes” in with the “Not Sures,” notwithstanding the ones who see a sky that is gray, or azule, or whatever other rationalization might be trotted out to avoid the spirit of the question. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2010, 5:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-republicans-so-obtuse/527412/154 "2010-02-04T17:59:30Z")
[QUOTE=Voyager] If you want to discuss this, I suggest you start a new thread and tell us what you think evolution is about. My sense is you don’t understand it very well. [/QUOTE] You win the understatement of the year award! Your ceramic dog and SDMB board game will be available after the show… -XT ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2010, 6:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-republicans-so-obtuse/527412/155 "2010-02-04T18:14:50Z")
So now we _finally_ figured out the cause of Americans’ seemingly colossal ignorance! They lie to pollsters as their roundabout way of helping America: > [@Chessic\_Sense](#): > > … they do one of two things: > > 1. Pretend that the question _is_ one of the big ones. They say “No, I disapprove of the job the president is doing”, and in order to express that, they say “No, he’s not a citizen.” It doesn’t matter what the question is. You can ask “Does Obama eat babies for breakfast?” and you’ll get his enemies to say “…with relish!” because what they really mean is “I disapprove of his policies.” > > 2. Fuck with the poll out of annoyance. No matter what question you ask, if it’s something a simpleton could get right, they’ll give you the stupid answer just to jerk around the numbers. It’s a data point in the shape of the middle finger. Ask people if grass is green and you’ll get 35% saying “Nope. It’s red.” because they’re offended that you’ve bothered them over such a stupid question. “_And Martha, tell that pollster we don’t believe in evolution either. When ‘they’ hear that, they’ll finally increase funding for public education._” Of course this doesn’t always work out: “_Well Martha, maybe voting for Bonzo the Chimp wasn’t such a smart way to send a signal after all. **Never** thought he’d actually win the election!_” Ah … Great Moments in Political Science. 😃 :smack: ---
**Author:** ![Kearsen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/82dd89/32.png) [@Kearsen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kearsen)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2010, 7:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-republicans-so-obtuse/527412/156 "2010-02-04T19:32:08Z")
> [@Jack\_Batty](#): > > What side is there to take? The question, at least as I laid it out, doesn’t beg a side. It begs truth. > > If I were to conduct a poll in which the question was, “Is the sky blue?” I would feel quite confident in lumping the “Noes” in with the “Not Sures,” notwithstanding the ones who see a sky that is gray, or azule, or whatever other rationalization might be trotted out to avoid the spirit of the question. YOU might be begging fro truth but pollsters merely want to make a point (or three) Lumping in the not Sure with the Yes’s could just as easily be justifiable. ---
**Author:** ![Cort](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/77aa72/32.png) [@Cort](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cort)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2010, 7:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-republicans-so-obtuse/527412/157 "2010-02-04T19:39:57Z")
> [@Kearsen](#): > > Not sure doesn’t mean that I agree or disagree with the facts presented, it simply means “unsure” , not “I DON’T KNOW” And if you “Don’t know” whether or not _“Obama wants the terrorists to win”_ then there’s something wrong with you and it’s worth including in the results. For the record, there is only one acceptable answer to that question and that is “Fuck you, Mr. Pollster”. ---
**Author:** ![Perciful](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/b38774/32.png) [@Perciful](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Perciful)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2010, 7:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-republicans-so-obtuse/527412/158 "2010-02-04T19:53:36Z")
> [@The\_Tooth](#): > > Evolutionary processes are understood a little more deeply than that. And it’s a far more interesting story than some creation myth. But what do you mean “best”? You expected to be the descendant of a spiffier creature? What is it about being descended from, say, seabass that would be better? > > But we shouldn’t pretend an opinion has merit just because someone holds it. Nor do I see a reason to think this universe creator would have anything to do with what Christians or Jews or Muslims or Hindus believe. Even if we grant you the assumption that there’s a god, why should we take the word of Christians as to what, if anything, this god thinks and does? I am open to ideas. Skipping human evolution how does science explain how the earth was created and can it be proven? If I am unsure of something then why bother debating? I thought debating was about exchanging ideas and learning from it. Does someone always have to be right? ---
**Author:** ![DanBlather](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f4b2a3/32.png) [@DanBlather](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DanBlather)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2010, 8:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-republicans-so-obtuse/527412/159 "2010-02-04T20:05:22Z")
> [@Perciful](#): > > I am open to ideas. Skipping human evolution how does science explain how the earth was created and can it be proven? If I am unsure of something then why bother debating? I thought debating was about exchanging ideas and learning from it. Does someone always have to be right? If you are open to ideas how about opening a book on science? Do you think scientists don’t have ideas on the origin of the earth and the solar system in general? Start [here](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Earth#Origin_of_the_Earth.27s_core_and_first_atmosphere). In this day and age, you have to willfully not want to learn to remain clueless on a subject like this. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Tooth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/c67d28/32.png) [@The\_Tooth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Tooth)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2010, 8:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-republicans-so-obtuse/527412/160 "2010-02-04T20:15:01Z")
> [@Perciful](#): > > I am open to ideas. Skipping human evolution how does science explain how the earth was created and can it be proven? Through the accretion of dust and gases in the protoplanetary disc around the young sun, why? As for proof, it certainly holds up in terms of explaining observed facts, although there are interesting details to be worked out. Creationists cannot same the same. Creationism is just a story. No, neither party has to be right. We could both be wrong, although the odds of you being wrong are much, much higher than mine. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-republicans-so-obtuse/527412.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-republicans-so-obtuse/527412.md?page=9)