View Full Version : What Makes People Vote Republican?
An outstanding article (http://edge.org/3rd_culture/haidt08/haidt08_index.html).
Conza88
09-12-2008, 08:24 AM
What Makes People Vote Democrat? (http://books.google.com/books?id=yhOOvF61XKgC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_summary_r&cad=0)
An abysmal piece of shit, that is best used as a fire starter.
What Makes People Vote Democrat? (http://books.google.com/books?id=yhOOvF61XKgC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_summary_r&cad=0)
An abysmal piece of shit, that is best used as a fire starter.
You could have taken the time to read what I posted before responding. Your behavior is defined quite well in that essay, and your response is typical.
acptulsa
09-12-2008, 08:30 AM
Very good find. There's a lot to explain Ron Paul's lack of success in here. We need to learn these principles and use them, because that would be a much better recipe for success than expecting to change human nature.
The statement I just made above feels like a foot on a slippery slope. If we are to accomplish our goals, we need to make our principles "feel good" to people--and specifically, to these people. Doing it specifically this way (wrapping our core principles in a feel-good package) is the only way to innoculate our movement against the sort of hijacking that seems to have finally killed the "moral majority" movement. It is not currently too late, as it was not all that long ago that the principles of the founding fathers were drilled into school children. But we had better hurry...
Conza88
09-12-2008, 08:31 AM
You could have taken the time to read what I posted before responding. Your behavior is defined quite well in that essay, and your response is typical.
That I will do now. I just thought I should destroy the gap that 'manifested' itself there.. ;)
No it's not actually... I'm not a slave to emotion. Sorry. I'm a slave to reason. :cool:
You're a tool Kade. Going to answer those questions yet? :rolleyes:
Very good find. There's a lot to explain Ron Paul's lack of success in here. We need to learn these principles and use them, because that would be a much better recipe for success than expecting to change human nature.
The statement I just made above feels like a foot on a slippery slope. If we are to accomplish our goals, we need to make our principles "feel good" to people--and specifically, to these people. Doing it specifically this way (wrapping our core principles in a feel-good package) is the only way to innoculate our movement against the sort of hijacking that seems to have finally killed the "moral majority" movement. It is not currently too late, as it was not all that long ago that the principles of the founding fathers were drilled into school children. But we had better hurry...
Exactly. Ignore that this guy speaks positively about Democrats and focus on the the ideas on why people vote the way they do... we could replace "Democrats" with any rational political movement, and the essay is still valid.
dirknb@hotmail.com
09-12-2008, 08:35 AM
Keep in mind, that which the sheep can't be persuaded to do will be taken care of by Diebold.
ShowMeLiberty
09-12-2008, 08:36 AM
What Makes People Vote Democrat (http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=56494)
Anyone who blindly follows any political party is treating politics like religion or sports. I don't honestly believe it goes any deeper than that. Actually, that's plenty deep as it is and studies like the above and the one in the OP completely miss the point.
Keep in mind, that which the sheep can't be persuaded to do will be taken care of by Diebold.
I laughed.
http://z.about.com/d/politicalhumor/1/0/1/6/diebold_ad_charm.jpg
What Makes People Vote Democrat (http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=56494)
I read that book myself, and as a student of psychology myself, there was no case made...
None.
Dr. Lyle Rossiter is actually a Forensic Psychiatrist, not a Psychologist, and he has become far too influenced by spiritual absolutism to be of any concern in the scientific community. His papers are rejected, so he does what all other failed scientists do, he ignores scientific peer review and appeals to the public instead. Bravo.
Welcome to the Behe Club.
ShowMeLiberty
09-12-2008, 08:44 AM
I read that book myself, and as a student of psychology myself, there was no case made...
None.
Dr. Lyle Rossiter is actually a Forensic Psychiatrist, not a Psychologist, and he has become far too influenced by spiritual absolutism to be of any concern in the scientific community. His papers are rejected, so he does what all other failed scientists do, he ignores scientific peer review and appeals to the public instead. Bravo.
Welcome to the Behe Club.
Not saying I thought that article was correct. I think it's every bit as foolish as the one you linked is all. I went back and added this to my post, fyi:
Anyone who blindly follows any political party is treating politics like religion or sports. I don't honestly believe it goes any deeper than that. Actually, that's plenty deep as it is and studies like the above and the one in the OP completely miss the point.
acptulsa
09-12-2008, 08:45 AM
I read that book myself, and as a student of psychology myself, there was no case made...
None.
But you must admit that it is a fine example of how to push the very buttons the other guy was describing... :D
acptulsa
09-12-2008, 08:48 AM
Not saying I thought that article was correct. I think it's every bit as foolish as the one you linked is all. I went back and added this to my post, fyi:
Anyone who blindly follows any political party is treating politics like religion or sports. I don't honestly believe it goes any deeper than that. Actually, that's plenty deep as it is and studies like the above and the one in the OP completely miss the point.
Well, they do. And yet, maybe not. The point was, if I read it correctly, that the politician who focuses on principles and issues exclusively and ignores human nature is, at best, fighting an uphill battle.
Not saying I thought that article was correct. I think it's every bit as foolish as the one you linked is all. I went back and added this to my post, fyi:
Anyone who blindly follows any political party is treating politics like religion or sports. I don't honestly believe it goes any deeper than that. Actually, that's plenty deep as it is and studies like the above and the one in the OP completely miss the point.
I don't follow political parties either. Acptulsa was correct when he pointed out that this was more about thinking behaviors... most conservatives have a sense of moral absolutism that anyone thinking about going against the Conservative Juggernaut, ought to consider..
cindy25
09-12-2008, 08:49 AM
because the Dems keep nominating morons.
and not every district has a Libertarian candidate
But you must admit that it is a fine example of how to push the very buttons the other guy was describing... :D
Like spoiled, angry children, they rebel against the normal responsibilities of adulthood and demand that a parental government meet their needs from cradle to grave.
Yea, that pushes a few buttons. I don't see this working in context with the "Question Authority" bumper sticker.
ShowMeLiberty
09-12-2008, 08:51 AM
Well, they do. And yet, maybe not. The point was, if I read it correctly, that the politician who focuses on principles and issues exclusively and ignores human nature is, at best, fighting an uphill battle.
I can agree with that in theory.
I don't follow political parties either. Acptulsa was correct when he pointed out that this was more about thinking behaviors... most conservatives have a sense of moral absolutism that anyone thinking about going against the Conservative Juggernaut, ought to consider..
I can also agree with this as long as we add that the same can be said of liberals. I've experienced "moral absolutism" in both the left and right extremes.
I can agree with that in theory.
I can also agree with this as long as we add that the same can be said of liberals. I've experienced "moral absolutism" in both the left and right extremes.
If they are not called Liberals, then we do not have a word for the distinction made in the case brought up in the article... for instance, the thought experiments on the Dog and the Flag.
acptulsa
09-12-2008, 08:57 AM
I can agree with that in theory.
I can also agree with this as long as we add that the same can be said of liberals. I've experienced "moral absolutism" in both the left and right extremes.
To be sure. And we could stand to explore the minds of both.
But 'conservatives' are our target audience, and if we're to win them we had damned well better look at them with clear eyes and understand them in a deep and meaningful way, hadn't we?
Truth Warrior
09-12-2008, 09:00 AM
The Difference between Democrats and Republicans
http://differencebetweendemocratsandrepublicans.com/
An accurate, quick and easy read.<IMHO>
Conza88
09-12-2008, 09:01 AM
"This is the first rule of moral psychology: feelings come first and tilt the mental playing field on which reasons and arguments compete. If people want to reach a conclusion, they can usually find a way to do so."Who else only thinks with emotion? Socialists anyone? :rolleyes:
Kades favorite part of the article:
Mill's vision appeals to many liberals and libertarians; a Millian society at its best would be a peaceful, open, and creative place where diverse individuals respect each other's rights and band together voluntarily (as in Obama's calls for "unity") to help those in need or to change the laws for the common good.
But now imagine society not as an agreement among individuals but as something that emerged organically over time as people found ways of living together, binding themselves to each other, suppressing each other's selfishness,
Utopian aka against human nature... he's living in a dream world, like all socialists are..
The basic social unit is not the individual
Like music to Kade's ears.
The Democrats could close much of the gap if they simply learned to see society not just as a collection of individuals—each with a panoply of rights--but as an entity in itself, an entity that needs some tending and caring. Our national motto is e pluribus unum ("from many, one"). Whenever Democrats support policies that weaken the integrity and identity of the collective (such as multiculturalism, bilingualism, and immigration), they show that they care more about pluribus than unum. They widen the sacredness gap.
Hahah... collectivismmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.
The miracle of turning individuals into groups can only be performed by groups that impose costs on cheaters and slackers. You can do this the authoritarian way (with strict rules and harsh penalties) or you can do it using the fairness/reciprocity foundation by stressing personal responsibility and the beneficence of the nation towards those who "work hard and play by the rules." But if you don't do it at all—if you seem to tolerate or enable cheaters and slackers -- then you are committing a kind of sacrilege.
Edward Griffin - Seduction of a Generation (Sensitivity Training, Brainwashing) (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5300142475723291102)
- Here is pretty much how to do what he calls a "miracle".
Until Democrats understand this point, they will be vulnerable to the seductive but false belief that Americans vote for Republicans primarily because they have been duped into doing so
Until both these retards that continue to vote for either of them wake up... we ain't going ANYWHERE. Fail.
acptulsa
09-12-2008, 09:03 AM
The Difference between Democrats and Republicans
http://differencebetweendemocratsandrepublicans.com/
An accurate, quick and easy read.<IMHO>
But that refers to the politicians, not the voters IMHO.
p.s. :rolleyes:
Truth Warrior
09-12-2008, 09:05 AM
But that refers to the politicians, not the voters IMHO.
p.s. :rolleyes: Mox Nix! <IMHO> < shrug > :rolleyes:
The Difference between Democrats and Republicans
http://differencebetweendemocratsandrepublicans.com/
An accurate, quick and easy read.<IMHO>
Don we now our gay apparel
http://www.mediabistro.com/fishbowlLA/original/george_clooney.jpg
acptulsa
09-12-2008, 09:16 AM
Until both these retards that continue to vote for either of them wake up... we ain't going ANYWHERE. Fail.
Well, you know, we can try (and are trying and have been trying) to wake them up, or we can try fooling them into doing the right thing--or both, depending on the individual in front of us. The more understanding we have, the more nimble we will be on our feet. I don't think anyone on this board is trying to push through such an agenda, but thinking about how people tick will help us push through our agenda.
You know, what we call grassroots is now being referred to by the major political players as 'microtargeting'. The very nature of that term indicates their complete lack of respect for the people, does it not? Or is it just me? In any case, I feel that there is stuff in that article that will help us, one, respect the voters (or at least address their concerns respectfully), and two, set our positions and our movement up in such a way that it is very hard to hijack for nefarious ends.
Some here applaud Barr for refusing to appear on stage with liberals. Well, you know, we need to be able to see the forest for the trees. If some socialist has insight that we can bend to our purposes, then why would let your desire to renounce socialism deprive you of the delicious irony of using their research and thought against their ends?
Truth Warrior
09-12-2008, 09:20 AM
Don we now our gay apparel
http://www.mediabistro.com/fishbowlLA/original/george_clooney.jpg
George Timothy Clooney (born May 6, 1961 in Lexington (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lexington,_Kentucky), Kentucky (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kentucky)) is an Academy Award (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academy_Award)- and Golden Globe (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Globe) award-winning American (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_of_America) actor, director (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_director), producer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_producer), and screenwriter (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Screenwriter). Clooney has balanced his glamorous performances in big-budget blockbusters (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blockbuster_(entertainment)) with work as a producer and director behind commercially riskier projects, as well as social (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_activism) and liberal (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberalism)political activism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_activism). On January 31, 2008, the United Nations (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations) named Clooney a "Messenger of peace".[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Clooney#cite_note-peace-1)[3] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Clooney#cite_note-bbc1-2)[4] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Clooney#cite_note-3)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Clooney (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Clooney)
I'd say he's obviously in your "flock".
I'd say he's obviously in your "flock".
Individuals do not have a flock, Clooney.
Bernays ought to have a Nobel Prize for his work.
angelatc
09-12-2008, 09:27 AM
because the Dems keep nominating morons.
and not every district has a Libertarian candidate
Not to mention their plans always fail dismally.
Conza88
09-12-2008, 09:28 AM
Well, you know, we can try (and are trying and have been trying) to wake them up, or we can try fooling them into doing the right thing--or both, depending on the individual in front of us. The more understanding we have, the more nimble we will be on our feet. I don't think anyone on this board is trying to push through such an agenda, but thinking about how people tick will help us push through our agenda.
You know, what we call grassroots is now being referred to by the major political players as 'microtargeting'. The very nature of that term indicates their complete lack of respect for the people, does it not? Or is it just me? In any case, I feel that there is stuff in that article that will help us, one, respect the voters (or at least address their concerns respectfully), and two, set our positions and our movement up in such a way that it is very hard to hijack for nefarious ends.
Some here applaud Barr for refusing to appear on stage with liberals. Well, you know, we need to be able to see the forest for the trees. If some socialist has insight that we can bend to our purposes, then why would let your desire to renounce socialism deprive you of the delicious irony of using their research and thought against their ends?
The dude needs to go learn about cognitive dissonance. Why do they vote republican? Well apart from self interest --- which a large part for these people is feeling important, and belonging to a group. Welcome to the GOP braindead. [That's within the party] external factors would differ.. but self interest remains -- Ohhh "lower taxes" >.< or "let's impose my values of everyone"... :rolleyes:
I don't see any difference at all, not a large one anyway. There may be descriptive, or subtle differences in their problem (republicans / democrats / fascists / communists) but the guy is failing to address the larger problem.. he's keeping it within the false left / right paradigm.
He's addressing why one supporter, won't vote the other... BOTH HAVE PROBLEMS obviously... and he pretty much fails to address them.
A better article would have asked; Why do people continue to vote for the one party system? ;)
In terms of know thy enemy... I don't think there was much of value in that article. I'm none the wiser anyway, maybe someone else learnt something though. :)
A better article would have asked; Why do people continue to vote for the one party system?
I think he answered that. It's a matter of pluralism versus non-pluralism. Absolutism versus non-absolutism.
Truth Warrior
09-12-2008, 09:31 AM
Individuals do not have a flock, Clooney. But, you do, guppy Vladimir. :p :rolleyes:
acptulsa
09-12-2008, 09:34 AM
The true hero of this movement will be the person who can figure out how to successfully sell the 'red pill' as candy.
The true hero of this movement will be the person who can figure out how to successfully sell the 'red pill' as candy.
And I will do it, in New England of all places. This will be the easiest place to get a liberty-minded person in a Senate Seat.
Truth Warrior
09-12-2008, 09:38 AM
originally posted by kade http://www.ronpaulforums.com/gfx_redwhiteblue/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?p=1663122#post1663122)
fine, you guys are wearing me down (not intellectually, but emotionally).
Obama is a marxist.
I am a marxist, globalist, socialist, and a fascist, probably worse than hitler. I worship the federal reserve, and i worship the censorship of ideas and thoughts. I believe in communal property. I believe that all babies should be killed, and that people should be forced to watch gays having sex right before they get married. I believe the army and police should be one, and that they should come to your house, rape your wife, and take your guns. I think we should be allowed to teach our kids to worship the flag and the king james bible only. I believe non-christians should be forced to leave this country.
You folks happy now?
< roflmao! >
< roflmao! >
I embraced your positions, Clooney.
Truth Warrior
09-12-2008, 09:45 AM
I embraced your positions, Clooney.
George Timothy Clooney (born May 6, 1961 in Lexington (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lexington,_Kentucky), Kentucky (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kentucky)) is an Academy Award (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academy_Award)- and Golden Globe (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Globe) award-winning American (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_of_America) actor, director (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_director), producer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_producer), and screenwriter (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Screenwriter). Clooney has balanced his glamorous performances in big-budget blockbusters (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blockbuster_(entertainment)) with work as a producer and director behind commercially riskier projects, as well as social (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_activism) and liberal (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberalism)political activism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_activism). On January 31, 2008, the United Nations (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations) named Clooney a "Messenger of peace".[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Clooney#cite_note-peace-1)[3] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Clooney#cite_note-bbc1-2)[4] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Clooney#cite_note-3)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Clooney (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Clooney)
Oooooh, what a guppy jump. :rolleyes:
SWATH
09-12-2008, 10:15 AM
As a native born child of Lexington, we don't claim him.
Truth Warrior
09-12-2008, 10:18 AM
As a native born child of Lexington, we don't claim him. ;)
heavenlyboy34
09-12-2008, 11:21 AM
What Makes People Vote Democrat (http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=56494)
Anyone who blindly follows any political party is treating politics like religion or sports. I don't honestly believe it goes any deeper than that. Actually, that's plenty deep as it is and studies like the above and the one in the OP completely miss the point.
+9999999!!
Partisanship leads naturally to groupthink, usually undermining individual liberty. Fuck it!
moostraks
09-12-2008, 12:12 PM
Well, you know, we can try (and are trying and have been trying) to wake them up, or we can try fooling them into doing the right thing--or both, depending on the individual in front of us. The more understanding we have, the more nimble we will be on our feet. I don't think anyone on this board is trying to push through such an agenda, but thinking about how people tick will help us push through our agenda.
You know, what we call grassroots is now being referred to by the major political players as 'microtargeting'. The very nature of that term indicates their complete lack of respect for the people, does it not? Or is it just me? In any case, I feel that there is stuff in that article that will help us, one, respect the voters (or at least address their concerns respectfully), and two, set our positions and our movement up in such a way that it is very hard to hijack for nefarious ends.
Some here applaud Barr for refusing to appear on stage with liberals. Well, you know, we need to be able to see the forest for the trees. If some socialist has insight that we can bend to our purposes, then why would let your desire to renounce socialism deprive you of the delicious irony of using their research and thought against their ends?
Well said. It was my major beef with how folks were condoning Barr's attitude when all it served to do was alienate people who have opinions, wants, and needs just as much as we do. Barr missed the whole concept of what liberty is about. It is one of the reasons that fighting for state's rights to be reinstated on most matters is the most appealing tactic to utilize. Then you can leave your concept of Utopia for your community. At least we could then target dispersing the government being in the hands of a few. Take apart the empire one little piece at a time. Much slower but more effective...imho.
Anywho, unless we understand what causes the solidarity then we cannot help them break free from the conditioning that is holding them hostage to this one party system. We don't have to agree with other people's choices but we do need to respect their right to their opinions and their motivations. THen help them see how much more they could accomplish without government interference.
The fact that we respect using numerous sources and verification before moving forward with issues will play to our benefit when targeting drawing others in to join the movement. First you have to find their emotional hook to engage them though.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.