IQ vs Election Results

[rchadd]

  State Avg. IQ Won by
1 Connecticut 113 Kerry
2 Massachusetts 111 Kerry
3 New Jersey 111 Kerry
4 New York 109 Kerry
5 Rhode Island 107 Kerry
6 Hawaii 106 Kerry
7 Maryland 105 Kerry
8 New Hampshire 105 Kerry
9 Illinois 104 Kerry
10 Delaware 103 Kerry
11 Minnesota 102 Kerry
12 Vermont 102 Kerry
13 Washington 102 Kerry
14 California 101 Kerry
15 Pennsylvania 101 Kerry
16 Maine 100 Kerry
17 Virginia 100 Bush
18 Wisconsin 100 Kerry
19 Colorado 99 Bush
20 Iowa 99 Bush
21 Michigan 99 Kerry
22 Nevada 99 Bush
23 Ohio 99 Bush
24 Oregon 99 Kerry
25 Alaska 98 Bush
26 Florida 98 Bush
27 Missouri 98 Bush
28 Kansas 96 Bush
29 Nebraska 95 Bush
30 Arizona 94 Bush
31 Indiana 94 Bush
32 Tennessee 94 Bush
33 North Carolina 93 Bush
34 West Virginia 93 Bush
35 Arkansas 92 Bush
36 Georgia 92 Bush
37 Kentucky 92 Bush
38 New Mexico 92 Bush
39 North Dakota 92 Bush
40 Texas 92 Bush
41 Alabama 90 Bush
42 Louisiana 90 Bush
43 Montana 90 Bush
44 Oklahoma 90 Bush
45 South Dakota 90 Bush
46 South Carolina 89 Bush
47 Wyoming 89 Bush
48 Idaho 87 Bush
49 Utah 87 Bush
50 Mississippi 85 Bush

[Goz]

Still looks like the majority elected Bush

Funny I don't see Cornwall on the list. Oh yeah.... it doesn't get to vote

Can we please move on

-Goz

[Minwah]

Funny I don't see Cornwall on the list. Oh yeah.... it doesn't get to vote

It does...just not for either of those chimps.  We have our own English clowns to vote for  

[Goz]

Funny I don't see Cornwall on the list. Oh yeah.... it doesn't get to vote

It does...just not for either of those chimps.  We have our own English clowns to vote for  

I stand corrected. Sorry for not stating voting in the US election.  

-Goz

[rchadd]

Still looks like the majority elected Bush

Funny I don't see Cornwall on the list. Oh yeah.... it doesn't get to vote

Can we please move on

-Goz

so where you from? Mississippi?  

just thought it is interesting stats. you must admit, there is an obvious correlation between average IQ and who won the state.

[Goz]

Still looks like the majority elected Bush

Funny I don't see Cornwall on the list. Oh yeah.... it doesn't get to vote

Can we please move on

-Goz

so where you from? Mississippi?

California, but I'm not a liberal whackjob. My state voted Kerry, but I am not complaining as the majority has spoken.

 

-Goz

[rchadd]

This applies to all elections US,UK, wherever...

It has always been my opinion that it should not be "one person - one vote".

clearly each person is different and each have different intelligence levels.

i think there should be minimum IQ level at which you become entitled to vote, and those with proven higher intellectual levels should have 2 votes.

this would help to protect against a ignorant majority voting and making big mistakes...  

[JackTucky]

You don't have to know how to pass a test to be a decent person.  Get off your high horse.

This is the democrats problem, only they are smart enough to know what we need.

I've met a lot of "smart" people in board rooms who can't articulate a thought without boring the entire room to death.

On the other hand, I've met a lot of "average joes" who can light up a room when they come in.  

I'd rather be "Lit" than "bored"

Damn these these political posts for finally bringing me in.  

Art

[JoyMonkey]

This applies to all elections US,UK, wherever...

It has always been my opinion that it should not be "one person - one vote".

clearly each person is different and each have different intelligence levels.

i think there should be minimum IQ level at which you become entitled to vote, and those with proven higher intellectual levels should have 2 votes.

this would help to protect against a ignorant majority voting and making big mistakes...  

What about parenting?
Maybe there should be a minimum IQ requirement if you want to have a child. All men with IQs lower than 90 will be castrated. Much the same effect as taking away someones vote.

I think the IQ stats are very interesting, but you can't descriminate on something like IQ. Not allowing someone to voice their opinion just because they're not considered to be as intelligent as the majority is retarded. Wicked retarded.  

[MrTroy]

I'm sorry but allow me to say this.

I'm not stating which branch I voted for. But I'm annoyed at people saying stuff like "You should have a certain IQ in order to vote."

People with low IQs are annoying, yes. But in a country where there's suppose to be as much diversity as possible Americans sure do try to single people out all the darn time.

Maybe a test should be given, and how you answer the questions, determines where your vote goes.

That'll annoy people who don't really care out of voting. And you'll get more acurate results.

[Pieman2004]

I don't really like politics but I do think this was an interesting stat. There was also a map in another thread about the level of peoples education and such. blah blah.

Anyways here is my opinion on that(I know my opinion doesn't matter, but I like to type):

People with higher IQs go to college, that would also account for the level of education. College has a way of corrupting the minds of its students. They think the things their professors tell them are insightful or some crap.

People with low IQa aren't stupid(Though they could be). People with high IQs could be stupid as well. As long as you can think for yourself it should justify your right to vote.

btw I don't really care but as I said I like to type.

[btoddkelley]

It's amazing how people with a political agenda create "Urban legends" to forward there position. There is no cross sectional study that has EVER been done to compare IQ between states. (There has never been IQ tests done to compare the IQ's of presidents either if you can remember that one from last summer. Bush was 97, Clinton 180)
     There are a multitude of statistical reasons why this data would be nearly impossible to compile. I will be glad explain if anyone really believes this BS and cares.
     BTW I teach at a college.

Todd

[Santoro]

This applies to all elections US,UK, wherever...

It has always been my opinion that it should not be "one person - one vote".

clearly each person is different and each have different intelligence levels.

i think there should be minimum IQ level at which you become entitled to vote, and those with proven higher intellectual levels should have 2 votes.

this would help to protect against a ignorant majority voting and making big mistakes...  

Sorry had to jump back in for this one.   The moronic nature of this statement is too much to ignore.

Book Knowledge and IQ are completely separate from Emotional Intelligence and Common Sense.  That you were able to utter the elitist words you just did says to me that you lack the latter two.  Thankfully for you,IQ doesn't measure those.

You probably think you'd get three votes, right?  

[fredster]

I can't believe it either.  I'm afraid that this anti bush group thinks that people could possibly disagree with them.  Their viewpoint is the only viewpoint.

The extent of the win is more than state by state.  When you look at the county by county map, it becomes more clear.

[Luxury]

Thats a pretty interesting map.  I've never seen a map of counties before.  

But when looking at it i couldn't help but wonder:

Why on earth does Kentucky have so many counties!?!?  My god - it has about 1 county every 5 miles!  

[Witchboard]

That'll annoy people who don't really care out of voting. And you'll get more acurate results.

People that don't really care don't vote in the first place.  That too is their right.

[Goz]

Thats a pretty interesting map.  I've never seen a map of counties before.  

But when looking at it i couldn't help but wonder:

Why on earth does Kentucky have so many counties!?!?  My god - it has about 1 county every 5 miles!  

1 county per inbred set of kinfolk.  

Just kidding Kentucky


-Goz

[LeedsFan]

Actually... my I.Q. has been officially tested at 132. I could have joined Mensa if I'd wanted. I live in the UK..... and I fully support President Bush and I'm so pleased at his magnificent victory!

If people need to dig up stats like this then they'd be better off working for the BBC..... or the Daily Mirror...... or living iin France!!!

[Crazy Cooter]

That map is deceiving, it's been discussed in another thread.  It just shows that low population counties voted for bush.

Think about how close the election was, half the people voted each way.  Maybe if some of those people in the red had someone within a 4 mile radius, they could have been more informed.

btw LeedsFan, your IQ is probably lower than that now.  Your age factors into it.  No offense intended.

[LeedsFan]

btw LeedsFan, your IQ is probably lower than that now.  Your age factors into it.  No offense intended.

No offence taken.   But I've taken about five of these tests (different tests use different scoring) and the last one was about two months ago. But my official scoring was about 8 years ago. I had to go to Sheffield for a supervised test to get access to Mensa...... but I wasn't prepared to pay for the membership.  I was just pleased to be able to join.  

[LeedsFan]

Let me give you an example of how biased the BBC are..... take a look at this thread from their official website.

And a point of note.... you can't post on this site like you do here. Any posts have to be "vetted" first.  Wankers!!!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/talking_point/3981519.stm

[namzep]

The minimum IQ thing is a bad idea.  I also think that the data is suspect (since I've seen it pop up on several sites but have yet to see any reference to where/how it was obtained).  However, I do believe that people should have to answer a few simple questions about government (# of senators per state, # of branches of government, names of a few supreme court justices, etc..).  This would keep anyone who has no clue about government from  adding to the ignorance level of those casting a vote for democracy.

[Mameotron]

IQ tests only measure your ability to take an IQ test.  There really is no way to quantify "intelligence" , it is like trying to quantify "beauty" or "art".

It doesn't matter how smart you are, if I give you an IQ test written in a language that you cannot read, then you will score very low.  The test can only measure how well you can take it.

[spocktwin]

  I am a mensa member and I voted for Bush......could this stuff have any more spin to it??

[mr.Curmudgeon]

Still looks like the majority elected Bush

With the above IQ results, it begs the question:

[fredster]

Comments like this show the depth of Arrogance of these people.  The "my way or the highway" mentality. Most won't even sit and talk about the issues.  They just don't want to see the other side, but you have to see theirs.  Argue with them and you are a bigot or an idiot or simply uneducated. They see only one side to any argument, theirs.

It also shows the lack of problem solving skills and outright oblivious disregard of reality. They show just exactly how little they can understand about communication.

I've seen it over and over in these threads.  "There's not point in us talking if I can't change your mind" was in one or two.  Say anything aginst affirmative action and you are a racist.  Speak your views on Gays and Gay rights and you are a homophobe.  

For "progressive" people it sure seems like they are intolerant of other ideas.  Arrogant and isolated in thier own world I'd say. For people who profess free speech, they don't want to hear the differing opinion.  After all, they think the source is so unlightened there is no way they can be correct, since they aren't one of them. Agree with them and they are your friend and protector.  Disagree and you are the scum of the earth. No middle ground.

If the left wants to win, they have to learn how to lose. If they want to give orders, it's important to learn to take them. Learn from history, real history, not some "version of the truth" history.

This county by county map should tell them more than the IQ is lacking.  It should tell them the vast majority of the people of the US supported President Bush.  It should tell them that their message is wrong for everybody. It should tell them that people outside the beltway aren't buying what they want to sell.  They have to understand why not rationalize away with self serving excuses.  

There is a lot more they have to research in order to understand why they lost.  Quit being arrogant and even bend and blend to what the vast majority of the US wants.
For every left there is a right.  The truth is seldom on either end, but somewhere in the middle.  When you shut off a discussion and turn it into a lecture, the class is over.  You lose every time.

[nipsmg]

Comments like this show the depth of Arrogance of these people.  The "my way or the highway" mentality. Most won't even sit and talk about the issues.  They just don't want to see the other side, but you have to see theirs.  Argue with them and you are a bigot or an idiot or simply uneducated. They see only one side to any argument, theirs.

It also shows the lack of problem solving skills and outright oblivious disregard of reality. They show just exactly how little they can understand about communication.

I've seen it over and over in these threads.  "There's not point in us talking if I can't change your mind" was in one or two.  Say anything aginst affirmative action and you are a racist.  Speak your views on Gays and Gay rights and you are a homophobe.  

For "progressive" people it sure seems like they are intolerant of other ideas.  Arrogant and isolated in thier own world I'd say. For people who profess free speech, they don't want to hear the differing opinion.  After all, they think the source is so unlightened there is no way they can be correct, since they aren't one of them. Agree with them and they are your friend and protector.  Disagree and you are the scum of the earth. No middle ground.

If the left wants to win, they have to learn how to lose. If they want to give orders, it's important to learn to take them. Learn from history, real history, not some "version of the truth" history.

This county by county map should tell them more than the IQ is lacking.  It should tell them the vast majority of the people of the US supported President Bush.  It should tell them that their message is wrong for everybody. It should tell them that people outside the beltway aren't buying what they want to sell.  They have to understand why not rationalize away with self serving excuses.  

There is a lot more they have to research in order to understand why they lost.  Quit being arrogant and even bend and blend to what the vast majority of the US wants.
For every left there is a right.  The truth is seldom on either end, but somewhere in the middle.  When you shut off a discussion and turn it into a lecture, the class is over.  You lose every time.

Fredster,

You bring up good points.

However, let me again correct the misconception put forth in this statement:

"This county by county map should tell them more than the IQ is lacking.  It should tell them the vast majority of the people of the US supported President Bush. "


The popular vote statistics show that Bush captured 51% of the popular vote.  This is NOT a VAST majority.  This map shows the counties where Bush won.  That does not by any stretch of the imagination mean that a VAST MAJORITY of votes, even in these Bush-won counties were for Bush.

I'm attempting to make a factual statement here, not a biased political one.  It's very dangerous to make assumptions on visual aids like this.  It's results like this that cause many people to make uninformed decisions about very very serious issues.

--NipsMG

[spocktwin]

  Mr C. respectfully you don't get it.  The majority voted for GW because we don't want or care about what the europeans think of us.  I work with the French everyday and believe me if you really believe that they want the best for us please grow up.  If that headline bothers you well Canada awaits!  again respectfully

[TA Pilot]

just thought it is interesting stats. you must admit, there is an obvious correlation between average IQ and who won the state


Yeahright.

Now, show us why we should believe the posted numbers are anywhere near correct.   I mean, I can make up numbers, too.


Gotta love you liberals - "The country is too stupid to vote for us!"

And you wonder why you lost the election.

[nipsmg]

just thought it is interesting stats. you must admit, there is an obvious correlation between average IQ and who won the state


Yeahright.

Now, show us why we should believe the posted numbers are anywhere near correct.   I mean, I can make up numbers, too.


Gotta love you liberals - "The country is too stupid to vote for us!"

And you wonder why you lost the election.

Even though me and TA Pilot are in COMPLETE AND UTTER DISAGREEMENT about nearly all of the issues we've been discussing, I've got to agree with him on the first part of his statement.

Go out and ask 100 people what their IQ is.  I guarantee you that MAYBE 1 of them do. (And I don't mean from a cheezy online IQ test either). So MAYBE 1% of people know their IQ.  Even if these stats were obtained by asking 100% of the people who KNEW their IQ for their score, it would still be a wholly inaccurate representation of IQ by state.

--NipsMG

[spocktwin]

  Just another note on Mr C's last post......tough run country huH?  do you know the publisher of the Daily Mirror is the owner of Fox News?   The evil conservative media outlet??  Seems he is living within the American ideal of publishing news even if distasteful to his own views.   Purely a capitalist cover who got the liberals to buy his magazine so he can contribute to the Republican party......oooh scandal in the making or are the liberals IQ just too low?

[fredster]

NipsMg,

Ok, I concede the "vast Majority" comment. How about "most areas of the US". Or "most of the country save the costal areas"

How about "most geographical regions prefered the President.."

Or "59 million of 117 million",  or " 3 1/2 million more people", or simply "more people in much broader areas"

We could say "51% and 90% of the country's vast landscape.."

Or more people voted for the president than any since the 80's.  He held more of the popular vote than the last 2 democratic presidents.  Or one could say the President carried more popular support than any democrat in the last 40 years.

How about he won with a larger mandate than any president since his father?  These are all facts too.  

What is interesting I haven't heard mention of is the fact that Bush could have lost in Ohio.  His 3.5 million votes would have been useless if he had lost 100,000 in Ohio.

For some reason, I don't think the fact he would have won the popular vote and lost because of the electorial college would have been a big issue with the left this year.

Also, it really wasn't necessary to requote the whole post, most people can scroll up.

[shmokes]

... the country's vast landscape.."

Once again, good job on adhearing to your oath for a good few hours.

Anyway....I love this line.  It's so ironic.  Who would have thought that trees and lakes and moutains and wilderness would be pro-Bush.  Maybe environmentalists have it wrong...

According to the map it would indeed appear that the country's vast landscape favored Bush.

[nipsmg]

NipsMg,

Ok, I concede the "vast Majority" comment. How about "most areas of the US". Or "most of the country save the costal areas"

How about "most geographical regions prefered the President.."

Or "59 million of 117 million",  or " 3 1/2 million more people", or simply "more people in much broader areas"

We could say "51% and 90% of the country's vast landscape.."

Or more people voted for the president than any since the 80's.  He held more of the popular vote than the last 2 democratic presidents.  Or one could say the President carried more popular support than any democrat in the last 40 years.

How about he won with a larger mandate than any president since his father?  These are all facts too.  

What is interesting I haven't heard mention of is the fact that Bush could have lost in Ohio.  His 3.5 million votes would have been useless if he had lost 100,000 in Ohio.

For some reason, I don't think the fact he would have won the popular vote and lost because of the electorial college would have been a big issue with the left this year.

Also, it really wasn't necessary to requote the whole post, most people can scroll up.

I wasn't trying to put down the rest of your comment.  Nor was I trying to paint some illusion that the president didn't win.  I keep seeing that map however and hearing "look at how big of a margin the president won by", and it gets annoying.

Bush could have lost w/ Ohio.  The fact that Bush won the popular and lost the Electoral votes would have been just as big an issue with the "left" as it was with the "right" last time.  

The other issue I have is classifying all Kerry voters as "left" and all Bush voters as "right".  I'm an independent.  I don't lean heavily towards either side.  I'm a catholic, I have strong beliefs that disagree with some Democratic views.  I also have some strong beliefs that disagree with some Republican views.  That's why I refuse to affiliate myself with either party.  Bi-partisanship is the one major problem with this political system.  I'd be all for "parties" being abolished, and having presidents be elected on issues, not party.

--NipsMG

[TA Pilot]

What is interesting I haven't heard mention of is the fact that Bush could have lost in Ohio.  His 3.5 million votes would have been useless if he had lost 100,000 in Ohio.

This would bring great supprt for the electoral college from the liberals, including those here who are not from the US.  All talk of its reformation and/or elimination would cease, instantly.

[nipsmg]

TA Pilot:

That map in your Sig is great!  

--NipsMG

[shmokes]

A more accurate statement, TA, is that it would bring great support for the electoral college from political hacks.  I'd still think it was lame.  I'd be happy that it worked for me instead of against me this time, but I'd still think it was lame.

[nipsmg]

A more accurate statement, TA, is that it would bring great support for the electoral college from political hacks.  I'd still think it was lame.  I'd be happy that it worked for me instead of against me this time, but I'd still think it was lame.

Absolutely.

I doubt most people are intelligent enough to share in this view, however (yes that includes Democrats and Republicans).

--NipsMG

[TA Pilot]

TA Pilot:

That map in your Sig is great!  

Thanks.   It was time for a change.   Plenty more where that came from.

[Mameotron]

TA Pilot:

That map in your Sig is great!  

--NipsMG

I second that!!  Great stuff, did you make that up yourself?