2024 ELECTION THREAD
The next presidential race will be here soon! Please see current Bovada odds. Thoughts?
It's the ratio of registered democrats to republicans of tenured professors at a bunch of institutions.
It's the ratio of registered democrats to republicans of tenured professors at a bunch of institutions.
Got it, thanks. So, I mean, if that is to be believed, the ratio of democrats to republicans for faculty in various STEM subjects* is at least 1.6:1 and goes up to about 6:1 and Luciom, you are saying for alumni of these institutions in the same subjects these ratios are 1:1 or less?
Surprised about religion, why is that 70:1? Are we sure about these numbers?
*I am taking engineering, chemistry, maths, physics, computers. Just the hardcore stuff.
I guess you come from the "Iowa +3 for Harris" school of applied statistics , because your proposed method wouldn't inform us at all about STEM degree holders specifically.
No. It’s really the only way we can hope to get decent data on something specific like that. It’s not perfect but it’s how I know you were wrong by double digits on Hilary barely winning white college grads or whatever which I honestly still don’t think you understand.
Conservatives crap upon those institutions TODAY because they are pro-Hamas & Marx indoctrination centers TODAY, which doesn't mean that a ton of PREVIOUS ALUMNI that graduates a while ago don't agree.
Which is why you get the Bill Ackman types saying "enough to the horrors of leftism" .
No normal distribution was "controversial", you can keep banging your head on the wall chanting it was though if that makes you happier. I am for freedom after all.
your pro Hamas you are indoctrinated.
you are pro maga you are not indoctrinated.
Even tho both use similar narrative on how anyone different from them are so evil …
Got it, thanks. So, I mean, if that is to be believed, the ratio of democrats to republicans for faculty in various STEM subjects* is at least 1.6:1 and goes up to about 6:1 and Luciom, you are saying for alumni of these institutions in the same subjects these ratios are 1:1 or less?
Surprised about religion, why is that 70:1? Are we sure about these numbers?
*I am taking engineering, chemistry, maths, physics, computers. Just the hard stuff.
Yes. Keep in mind that 1) independents aren't counted above 2) choosing to live as an academic is already an overwhelmingly ultra-radical-leftist choice by itself especially these day.
It's basically impossible for any self-respecting rightwing individual to even consider the possibility of working in academia now, and that has been the case for quite a long time already. In very rare cases there might be a chance in some fields but it's vanishingly rare.
But the qualitative proportions will vaguely hold in real life. Fields where it's not impossible to find non-marxists will get picked by students who are on the right of the *generic student*, which was my claim.
That data very strongly implies that majors in STEM do skew to the right of majors in the rest of disciplines, which was the original claim.
And given people with a degree skew democrat "only" by 10-12-14 points...
No. It’s really the only way we can hope to get decent data on something specific like that. It’s not perfect but it’s how I know you were wrong by double digits on Hilary barely winning white college grads or whatever which I honestly still don’t think you understand.
Hillary barely won white college graduates
your pro Hamas you are indoctrinated.
you are pro maga you are not indoctrinated.
Even tho both use similar narrative on how anyone different from them are so evil …
There are no pro maga professors in academia that indoctrinate students.
At least if you get indoctrinated by MAGA on social media you don't end up with 100k in student loans for that.
the fantasy is trying to act like Trump or anyone could be non-negligibly worse. this is bc you are likely ignorant of what is actually going in West Asia and the USA's role in it.
if the choice was super Pol Pot vs regular Pol Pot then what? anyway theres a meme about this sort of 1% expected candidate but we probably are not allowed to link it.
Helping to deal guaranteed big Ls to reg working people plus all of the other things the Rs will do to screw people over while hoping for the massive longshot trump won't be worse(especially when all signs point to the exact opposite) is just dumb thinking dude. No matter how many lies you keep telling yourself.
What secret info do you think have about west asia? lol
Seems like a lot of establishment figures, including Dems,are investing in this narrative of having lost due to the "extreme left" or "progressive" wing. An Orwelian trick of oversimplified language to stiffle thought.
Gender ideology, especially, is being permanently fused to basic material concerns. It sounds like fox News. A better HC system is inseparable from your 15 year old daughter having to undress in front of someone of the male sex.
And, sadly, a lot of people on the material left (bernie types) are in fact still too afraid to say things like "being taller is an advantage in basketball."
Nonetheless, these are two mostly separate areas of politics. It is possible to dismiss the ravings of post colonial basket weaving professors, and be in favor of paid vacations, or better hc. This is precisely what most people do.
Obviously, only derranged RWers from online echo chambers actually think PTO or family leave is 'Marxism.' Or that ____ studies profs represent all academics.
Culture war moderate, material "left" (policies favored by 60-80%, that every other country has already) is a winning strat, as people are distraught by declining quality of life, and strongly favor policies that bring better material conditions. But they hate it when some gender fanatic is like,"I order you to start calling yourselves Latinx and stop saying things like ladies and gentlemen."
But the DNC is going to use this canard to keep moving farther into neo liberal, right, hawk territory because winning elections isn't worth standing up to donors who make them rich either way. Maybe Trump will be so bad they can even win.
Anyway, Dems are making it clear that no defeat is severe enough for them to even entertain making significant material concessions to their ostensible base.
It is pretty much game over for any real democratic influence. From now on, you can choose between Trump types, and kind of post democratic system of technocrats who operate under legalized corruption, and will sporadically do things like slightly reduce student debt for marketing purposes, and wear African scarves as they continue the drug war.
Nonetheless, these are two mostly separate areas of politics. It is possible to dismiss the ravings of post colonial basket weaving professors, and be in favor of paid vacations, or better hc. This is precisely what most people do.
Obviously, only derranged RWers from online echo chambers actually think PTO or family leave is 'Marxism.' Or that ____ studies profs represent all academics.
Culture war moderate, material "left" (policies favored by 60-80%, that every other country has already) is a
lol seems like you're just defining democrats as how the right wing portrays them. Who are these professors saying objectionable things? Or are you just uncritically accepting far right narratives?
lol seems like you're just defining democrats as how the right wing portrays them. Who are these professors saying objectionable things? Or are you just uncritically accepting far right narratives?
What I'm saying is that a lot of "centrist" figures are now using this rhetoric against those who want material policies that benefit poor-mc. "We have to move away from the extremists in the party who want males in women's sports and a better hc system." Conflating extreme ID pols with what are rather moderate positions on material concerns.
I'm surprised you're unaware of extreme ID pols views in and around universities. Andrea Dworkin, Judith Butler, Kathrine McKinnon etc were prominent figures in my day. Robin DiAngelo seems popular rn.
Of course, professors in other areas are different. Econ profs are often libertarian, etc.
Having this discussion elsewhere, I searched "do you have to have gender dysphoria to be trans" Here is the AI overview, of course drawn from many articles.
So, people are promoting these views and unfortunately, many have come under their influence. However, they are still pretty unpopular with the GP.
By contrast, ending drug war, pto, hc, etc are popular. These are mostly different domains but they are being conflated.
Dems are making it clear that, if anything, they will go harder on neo liberal, center right, very hawkish. If you don't hold those views, you will not have representation.
Who is against PTO?
Identifying as trans due to seeing gender as oppressive? Wtf?
What I'm saying is that a lot of "centrist" figures are now using this rhetoric against those who want material policies that benefit poor-mc. "We have to move away from the extremists in the party who want males in women's sports and a better hc system." Conflating extreme ID pols with what are rather moderate positions on material concerns.
I'm surprised you're unaware of extreme ID pols views in and around universities. Andrea Dworkin, Judith Butler, Kathrine McKinnon etc were prominent figu
So people who were around when Dems had a super majority are now magically causing dems to lose. Interesting theory professor. I'm sure someone like you you could always find talking points to to be offended by in front of your fainting coach. No reason to think it is any more relevant now than when Obama was winning easily. That's my point. Everyones advice on what Dems should do magically equals what they happen to think is most important personally.
Company I work for now has vacation + sick but the sick doesn't roll over and I can never take my sick so it's basically useless. Having it all be PTO would be so much better.
So people who were around when Dems had a super majority are now magically causing dems to lose. Interesting theory professor. I'm sure someone like you you could always find talking points to to be offended by in front of your fainting coach. No reason to think it is any more relevant now than when Obama was winning easily. That's my point. Everyones advice on what Dems should do magically equals what they happen to think is most important personally.
I'm actually ineligible for PTO as I just gamble.
The reasons I think it's a good policy are: every rich country and many poor have it. Something like 70% of Americans favor it.
I also, subjectivity, think it is pretty obvious that having time away from work is better than not. In the past, I have been one of the 28 million with zero pto. I would have been happy if I was given some and inclined to vote for a politician who made it happen.
Maybe people would be outraged by getting to have vacations, but I doubt it.
There's no need to be snarky. I'm just trying to explain the difference between ID pols and material pols. You seem smart enough to learn that.
Got it. Just the same reheated analysis we read every year passed off as insight. Just the buzzwords (ID vs material, elite vs working class 1 vs 99%) seem to change. It's just more complicated than this shallow level of thinking..... lol at anyone not being "smart" enough to get it. Pretty much the number one thing people should do, which they won't, is vote in every election especially primaries where each individual vote matter so much more in setting a parties agenda. Beyond that we'll mire along in the era of Reagan for a while. The FDR era lasted 50 years, no reason this one can't go longer.
Everyone always says this year is the biggest election ever, whatever the year. But really looking back, the crushing of democrats in 2010 might really be the most important in the last 40. Pretty much set the stage for the stagnation we've seen since Obamacare, where almost nothing important has passed in congress.
So people who were around when Dems had a super majority are now magically causing dems to lose. Interesting theory professor. I'm sure someone like you you could always find talking points to to be offended by in front of your fainting coach. No reason to think it is any more relevant now than when Obama was winning easily. That's my point. Everyones advice on what Dems should do magically equals what they happen to think is most important personally.
Only if you've been living on desert island for the past ten years.
People were not allowed to criticize Obama back then because he was black and conservatives and both sides bros would come up with the most erudite, valid critiques and their lives would be ruined after somone called them a racist.
