Quote (ThatAlex @ 21 Aug 2018 01:02)
I think you're reading too much into it.
The fact that the ratio in which Clinton beat Trump in non-college educated minorities was bigger than her edge in college-educated minorities vs Trump's doesn't really mean anything except that Clinton was super successful with uneducated brown people but only very successful with college-educated brown people.
If you want to consider education, I think the better way to examine this is Trump and Clinton's voting groups as a whole (i.e. 43% of Clinton's voters were college educated and only 29% of Trump's were).
In a simar way to your point, Clinton was also relativey more successful with college whites vs her total white voters vs Trump despite Trump being more successful with college whites as a whole 48% vs 45%. I'm not going to draw too much information about each candidate's voters' education with those relative values when we have the raw educational info available.
well, clinton was more successful with brown people, and with highly educated people. so I found it interesting that the interaction term between those two factors seems to have the opposite sign. but yeah, it's probably better not to read too much into it.
Quote (excellence @ 21 Aug 2018 01:03)
fairly sure “white ppl” have the highest turnout rate other than prob black people in 2008 and 2012
whites generally have higher turnout. in 2016, the break was like this (2nd column):
note, however, that minorities are overrepresented in safe states and thus have less incentive to go to vote. neither the latino in california nor the black in mississippi will make a difference, so why bother going to the polling station?
Quote (ChrisKz @ 21 Aug 2018 01:07)
I think you should look at college education as more of a liberal mind sink rather than a true educated force. People with bachelor's, and even some with Master's, aren't all that smarter than people who are generally successful in sales and other businesses.... Only the PH.D.'s can really claim to be 'smarter' than the average American, and only in their specialized field.
nah. I've seen enough (upper-level) M.Sc. students who were smarter than many (lower-level) PhD candidates I worked with. the overlap in intellectual capability between these two groups is quite big. but PhDs on average certainly have the higher IQ than MScs, and everything BSc and below is generally quite limited intellectually. the smartest people I've known were all PhDs though.
and no, they are not just smarter in their specialized field. "One-track specialists" do exist, but despite all the TV tropes, they are not the norm.
Quote
People in general aren't all that stupid and unless they are growing up in some shit environment people end up around the same level of intelligence as they get older, as long as they are willing to experience different things.
most smarter people eventually settle into a life where their intellectual potential isnt nearly exhausted by their everyday routines and tasks. their intellect fades due to a lack of stimulation, and sooner or later becomes invisible. this doesnt mean that differences in intellectual
potential dont exist anymore, it just means that some people cant tap into their full potential on the spot, cant go from 0 to 100 if needed.
This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Aug 20 2018 05:51pm