Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Dems and Reps at age 3?
anglagard
Member (Idle past 836 days)
Posts: 2339
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 61 of 61 (397237)
04-25-2007 5:28 AM
Reply to: Message 15 by nator
04-23-2007 9:12 AM


Clarifications
Obviously I should have worded these responses better as my intended meaning has somehow been lost.
When I listed the 3 small problems, evidently I should have used the term minor or minute to indicate that I meant the opposite of large, or major.
anglagard writes:
1. It acts as a propaganda instrument against independent and third-party movements by implying one must either be a conservative/republican or liberal/democrat or be in some mushy middle.
quote:
No, it doesn't.
It is a scientific study. If the results are used that way by others, it is in no way an invalidation of the results any more than if people use results of gender difference studies to justify sexism.
There is at least one alternative to a two-dimensional chart:
So yes, I am arguing that a line is simpler than a two axes chart and therefore conveys less information. I suppose one could argue that either may be used for propaganda purposes.
2. By being from 1989, it does not take into account any clusters of political beliefs that may have developed since that time, which somewhat limits it's applicability to the current situation.
quote:
So? Studies of any magnitude and extending over decades will always lag behind current conditions. Does that mean the results are invalid?
It may be the most recently available, but that doesn't mean perfect. A minor quibble, but I mistakenly thought that the OP asked for discussion rather than a simple yes-no answer.
3. It may hurt the cause of the Democratic Party in the next election by turning off fiscal conservatives and quasi-libertarians through implying they have negative behavioral characteristics.
quote:
So what, we should bury the results because you don't like the political ramifications?
Jesus!
I can't believe I'm reading this.
Here's the one where misunderstanding as to my meaning has really been blown out of proportion IMO. Please allow me to clarify my exact meaning.
I think that demonizing the word liberal has had a negative effect upon political debate and therefore demonizing the word conservative would have the same effect.
After all, it was Bill Clinton's conservative fiscal policies that led to balanced budgets and were likely a factor in economic prosperity in the late 1990s. I would hate to think that people would think that a balanced budget is bad because it is due to conservative fiscal policies and the word conservative means bad.
After all, some people are quite susceptible to such grand generalizations and oversimplifications.
Also notice the use of the term, 'may' hurt. At any rate, another minor quibble.
What I did not mean was the article is a direct and immediate threat to any Democratic victory as has been implied. However, demonizing the term conservative may be a problem as it is as dishonest as demonizing the term liberal.
To conclude, I am not mainly saying the study is 'right' or 'wrong,' I'm just saying it could have been better designed.
quote:
I think, angla, that your political agenda is getting in the way of your scientific thinking.
I am a Syndico-Anarchist Libertarian, my primary agenda is to remove two subsets of what may be called the conservative movement from power, namely the evangelicals and neocons. I do not have any problems with balanced budgets or increased human liberties.
I consider the removal of neocons and evangelicals from any political power so important, I would much prefer to bring fiscal conservatives and possibly 'described as conservative' libertarians into the struggle than I am to demonize them or falsely ascribe to these subsets characteristics that are only present in neocons and evangelicals.
But I guess that's just my opinion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by nator, posted 04-23-2007 9:12 AM nator has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024