Your thoughts needed: using Star Trek to solve today's problems?

[Sci]

I don't have polls or numbers or statistics, all of which are meaningless anyway and can be doctored or fudged or whatever to "prove" any point the presenter of said statistics wants.

In other words, you have no evidence for your assertion that a majority of Obama supporters in 2008 voted for him because of his race and are now attempting to cast doubt on the methodology used to gather information about numbers of people that vast.

All I have is my common sense that tells me how people behave and my observations of how people behave

Which is to say, you have no evidence.

 

[Bishop76]

Okay, since you love numbers so much 95% of black voters voted for Obama, 4% for McCain, 1% for other candidates.

Source: Associated Press

 

[Sci]

Okay, since you love numbers so much 95% of black voters voted for Obama, 4% for McCain, 1% for other candidates. Tell me that's not meaningful.

Source: Associated Press

95% is in line with the percentages of the African-American vote that goes to the Democratic candidate every election cycle. 88% voted for Kerry, for instance, 90% voted for Gore in 2000, 84% for Clinton in 1996, 83% for Clinton in 1992, 89% for Dukakis in 1988, 91% for Mondale in 1984.

Unless you're trying to claim that the vast majority of African-Americans were under the impression that Al Gore and Walter Mondale were black, I don't think it's reasonable to attribute the fact that an overwhelming majority of African-Americans voted for Obama to the fact that Obama is black. It may be reasonable to attribute the extra 5-10% of the black vote that Obama picked up from previous Democrats to Obama's race. Maybe. But blacks tend to vote overwhelmingly Democratic because the vast majority of blacks tend to agree with Democratic policies more than Republican policies.

 

[Bishop76]

What's that, you say? I used statistics to try to prove a point without providing other useful statistics that may have invalidated my numbers? Amazing how useless statistics, numbers and polls are in an argument about motives, eh?

Which brings me back to my original premise that the MOTIVE and REASON people voted the way they did is not so much on the issues or platform of the democratic party. It's because most people tend to vote based on very shallow things like race or party (without even understanding necessarily what a party stands for) or even the fact that he wasn't George Bush (something a lot of people interviewed were saying at the time). And as much as you keep demanding I prove peoples' motives, I just can't do it with polls or numbers - guess I'll just have to do with my common sense, observations, and general lack of naivete.

 

[Sci]

What's that, you say? I used statistics to try to prove a point without providing other useful statistics that may have invalidated my numbers? Amazing how useless statistics, numbers and polls are in an argument about motives, eh?

It would be more accurate to say that you did not actually provide adequate evidence for your assertion.

And as much as you keep demanding I prove peoples' motives, I just can't do it with polls or numbers

Which is to say, you're making shit up.

 

[Bishop76]

Listen, I'm not going to argue with you any more. Clearly we just need to agree to disagree.

I'm not "making shit up", I'm making an assertion based on (again) my experiences, observations, conversations, etc with a lot of people about just this issue. Speculation based on observation isn't a new thing, chief, and I never once claimed my point of view as a fact. In fact, "Yeah, I'm pretty sure our current president was elected almost entirely because of his race." was my initial premise. Bolded so that you might understand better that it's an assertion of opinion rather than a statement of fact.

 

[Sci]

I'm not "making shit up",

You're making a claim about the motivations of over one hundred million people without any evidence. That's making shit up.

I'm making an assertion based on (again) my experiences, observations, conversations, etc with a lot of people about just this issue.

"A lot of" being, what, 0.0000001% of the electorate? How does that give you a useful idea of what the majority of voters were thinking in 2008?

 

[Bishop76]

No, it was actually only 0.00000000000001% of the electorate. How do you feel now, smart guy? You can't win this argument and I can't because it's a god damn opinion. There are no numbers to back it up, rain man.

 

[Myasishchev]

I voted for Obama. Does that mean I'm black?

 

[Bishop76]

Reading comprehension is not at a premium around here, is it? I don't think I ever asserted that all people who voted for Obama were... Oh, nevermind - not like you'll pay attention anyway. Yes, you're black.

 

[Sci]

You can't win this argument and I can't because it's a god damn opinion.

I don't care if I "win." I'm just demonstrating that you are full of bullshit.

This isn't an opinion. The motivation of the majority of Obama voters in 2008 is a matter of objective fact, not a matter of opinion. Those people actually exist, and they had actual reasons for voting for Obama that they rather extensively documented over the course of 2008 and in subsequent years. You can find numerous testimonials about why they voted as they did, and numerous polls indicating their opinions of Obama. The same is true of McCain voters.

And guess what? There's no evidence that a relevant percentage of Obama voters voted for him because he was black.

 

[Bishop76]

That's because no one will admit to voting for that reason. If I voted for McCain because I was a racist KKK grand dragon, do you think that's what I'd tell people? The majority of voters barely understand the issues anyway, so most votes are cast for fantastically superficial reasons, in my very cynical opinion.

 

[Sci]

That's because no one will admit to voting for that reason.

You are now engaging in circular logic. "They voted for him because he's black! There's no evidence because they won't admit that they did it!"

 

[Bishop76]

It's not circular logic, it's human behavior. If I vote for Obama because I want to be able to tell my grandkids that I voted for the first black president, I'm going to come up with another reason for that vote to justify it to myself and other people. It is wildly illogical, I'll grant you that much. But again, as much as you love numbers, I can't show you any regarding behavior.

 

[Sci]

It's not circular logic, it's human behavior. If I vote for Obama because I want to be able to tell my grandkids that I voted for the first black president, I'm going to come up with another reason for that vote to justify it to myself and other people. It is wildly illogical, I'll grant you that much. But again, as much as you love numbers, I can't show you any regarding behavior.

Which means, again, you're making shit up.

 

[Bishop76]

Not even a little bit. It's fact, champ.

 

[Myasishchev]

Reading comprehension is not at a premium around here, is it? I don't think I ever asserted that all people who voted for Obama were... Oh, nevermind - not like you'll pay attention anyway. Yes, you're black.

I don't feel any different.

 

[RandyS]

The way to solve today's health care problem is to invent the replicator.

Robert

The way to solve MOST of today's problems is to invent the replicator.

And eliminate money.

And even with these, it doesn't even scratch the surface.

 

[ReadyAndWilling]

i don't even know if this type of society is possible in a country like the USA. the USA is basically the definition of 'super-abundance'. sure, there are poor US states, but look at california. i visited cali a few years ago and i couldn't get over how many homeless people there were. cali is the 6th wealthiest economy in the world. i went into places like beverly hills and the homes were just astonishing. then you had homeless people living about 15 minutes away.

 

[sojourner]

^don't confuse rich with super abundance.