2012 Campaign, Politics, Republican Freak Show

Election Infographic Shows Most Educated States Voted For Obama | Happy Place

>> Click the link to see the info graphic
Election Infographic Shows Most Educated States Voted For Obama | Happy Place.

This is the reason Republicans demonize teachers.

UPDATE!

Welcome to all my new readers.

Please feel free to follow this blog on Facebook or on Twitter.

I also have two other Facebook pages if you are interested in the topics.
Restore the Glass-Steagall Act!

and The Social Democratic and Labor Party

I would also like to start a Social Democratic and Labor Party. Who’s with me? Check out the website (that I haven’t done much with)! http://sdlaborparty.wordpress.com/

Some words of wisdom from Yoda:

About these ads
Standard

228 thoughts on “Election Infographic Shows Most Educated States Voted For Obama | Happy Place

  1. Pingback: Utbildning | dinosaurierobotninja

    • Demonize teachers? YOU SHOULD BE SO ASHAMED!!!! This is the biggest propaganda piece I have ever seen. Please reply to my post with a logical response. If you are not able to do so, I may go through the rest of your website and show how inaccurate and short-sighted you are, simply because now I know I can. You should go out right now and ask a teacher to help further your education, because this infograph is worthless. I am open for people to support whatever candidate they want, and to keep whatever issues are important to them as talking points. But claims like this are nuts. And we need more people to see past this type of political advertizing and brainwashing. I feel that stats like these should never be used as talking points. Nobody can argue that the educational stats and state election outcomes are a conspiracy. However, this stat, by itself, shouldn’t be used to make judgment or claims on election outcomes. None of the states listed on either side have a majority of their population as being of a higher educated. That means that even if 100% of the higher educated populations in each state did vote, they still would not make up the majority of the entire state’s population and thus would only influence a part of the states outcome. This means that potentially, 39% of the higher educated citizens in Mass could have voted red, and the rest of the population vote blue, and then claim that they voted red due to being of a higher education. Obviously this is not the case, but statistically, it is plausible.
      I looked at the US census for supplemental income benefits by states. Supplemental income benefits make up a large part of the perceived ‘entitlement programs (loose definition around what all falls into this group).’ I took the total spent for this program at the state level, and divided by the # of citizens in each state to get the $ spent per person for this program in each state. The 10 states that had the most spent per person on this particular entitlement program were all states that Obama won. The other side is true about Romney, and the 10 states that spent the least per person, he claimed. In fact, the average spent per person for all of the States that Obama won was $121 per person, compared to $51 for states that Romney won. That’s a 2.3:1 ratio of spending per person. I don’t think these stats are a conspiracy, but I don’t think they mean shit by themselves in the overall outcome of the election. I bet die-hard Republicans would love to find, and will try to find, stats like this to show that those who take ‘advantage’ of government programs vote Democrat. This is just an example of how data can show something, but tell nothing. In my opinion, infographs like this only make the perceived split between left and right even greater, even though I feel more and more people our age are mixed between parties and the social and financial issues that our country currently faces.

      • Anonymous says:

        Nice wall of text that will probably go unread by all but the excessively bored.

        More importantly, and on topic, the infograph represents data that is portrayed as a clear advantage for Obama. While you may disagree with the relevance of the data, the data does point to the fact that states with higher amounts of educated people voted for Obama. Regardless of the mathematical plausibilities that you bring up, the fact remains that states with higher levels of educated people voted Obama. You can’t argue that, as it is clearly represented in front of you, and choosing to ignore that set of data in favor of your own is a personal choice and does not cause THIS data to be biased. You’re biased; I’m biased. These are numbers, they aren’t biased.

        Get off your conservative high horse and learn to format.

        • EJL says:

          I am starting to realize that a person should stick to fancy infographs on this site to ensure everyone reads the information. I never once said the numbers were wrong or biased or not accurate. I am showing that they dont mean anything. People take an interest in politics every four years, and then talk about facts like these that dont mean anything. I am actually not on a conservative high horse, nor am I an uber conservative. Both parties are guilty of this type of propoganda, and I call them both out. I just dont understand how people can read something like this, and just assume that it means higher educated people = smarter states = voted for obama. The higher education populous makes less than 40% of the entire population. There is no correllation. The numbers are not biased, but they dont represent what people are claiming they represent. You can either see that, and agree, or sit there and throw more non-related comments and look ridiculous. Just to make sure your next reply is in response to the same conversation: Numbers shown are not biased, it shows accurate data, but that data does not represent anything about the outcome of the states victory for either candidate.

          • EJL says:

            And also, can you please respond to my graph? If you feel that numbers are not biased and IF you think they correllate any way to the outcome of the election, then my information is accurate as well that shows the highest per person SSI benefits voted for Obama. Would you at least agree that the two sets of information show information under the same assumptions. I think they are both ridiculous and unrelated to the outcome of the election, even though they are accurate, but if you dont feel that way, you should at least aknowledge my numbers for SSI benefits = voted blue.

          • Anonymous says:

            But you’re basing your argument on the assumption that these numbers “dont mean anything.” They do, and saying that they don’t is ridiculous. For instance, Romney won the “Bible Belt.” If were to tell you that the ten states with the highest Christian followings all voted for Romney (even if it was just because he was the conservative, Republican candidate) you would say that that statistic mattered. It does, but it is no more important than the statistic presented in this graphic.

            Also, higher educated DOES, in fact, mean smarter. I’ve lived in many states and I currently reside in Alabama. While there are always smart and dumb people in every population, it is abundantly clear (having lived in both places) that the average citizen in Connecticut is much more intelligent than the average citizen in Alabama. So yes, the information is relevant.

          • EJL says:

            With the small % that this population makes up (less than a majority), and the smaller variance between the final votes, they are not relevant. I will be more than glad to run the regression analysis to show. What % for each state in the bible belt is actually religious, where they have over 50% and can be the main variable in the equation of determining what influenced the outcome. We do not know the % of educated people who voted for which candidate. And this stat, is simply one variable in a long equation. One could assume: higher educated -> earn more -> want lower taxes -> voted red. There are many unknowns that need to be included with these numbers.

          • Joseph says:

            Just because the number f people with higher education is less than 40% does not mean there is not correlation. There may not be causation but if the trend consistently occurs there is a correlation. I am not going to take the time to mathematically calculate if there is a correlation(judging by the graph and past reading of journal articles on the subject I assume there is). Plus as anyone who has worked in politics knows these numbers are vitally important. They help you target voters with tailored messages. People with higher levels of education have always voted democrat, democrats customize their platform and message knowing that. There are few statistics that are unimportant in politics. Knowing them can help one understand the candidates and their message better.a

        • Logic says:

          The fact also remains that Obama carried the ‘High School or Less Vote’ as well as the ‘Less Than $36,000′. While Romney carried the ‘Some College’ and ‘College Graduate’ vote. The graph in reference does little to accurately portry the education level of those supporting each candidate. Also, I would suggest your disregard for Eric Laychock’s mathematical plausibility stems from the fact that you failed to understand his argument. To help you better understand we will break it down to layman terms. For arguments sake lets say that a state classified as the “most educated” has a population consisting of 40% college educated and 60% high school or below. If all college educated people in this state voted Romney and all high school or below people voted BO, BO would carry the state even though none of the educated people in that state voted for him. Make sense?

      • Anonymous says:

        I agree with your position. This has little to do with the direction of the electoric. However, the only reason the information was gathered was because Fox News said that people who voted for Obama were uninformed, unintelligent and persuaded by hype and misinformation.

          • Anonymous says:

            Holy shit, i went to twitter just to check it out… i regret it now, my eyes are bleeding x.x

            My IQ went to hell just reading him

        • Anonymous says:

          You can’t “make your luck” by putting yourself in a better position to have a lot of money? For eg., if you had the chance to go to college, that would open up opportunities not only in your field of work but for networking.

          Note that not everyone who can go to college actually does.

          • You don’t even understand his/her statement. It is not “all rich people got rich because of luck”. It is “Having a lot of money often has a lot more to do with luck than most people realize.” If you are born into a rich family like the Waltons, is it not luck? When opportunity comes knocking, is it not luck?

          • Joseph says:

            Evidence actually shows that the biggest indicator of a person’s success is the success of their parent. An insignificant percentage of people are able to move to a different class than their parents. Its not about education, not about intelligence, its more about who you were born.

          • jsslee says:

            Wrong.

            It’s still true that most of the 1% are educated. There are over 300 million people in the US. That means the 1% is 3 million. Even if you count up all the Paris Hiltons and athletes’ wealth, it won’t be close to the total wealth of the top three million. Most of the top three million are very very smart. Bankers, CEOs, any executive board member, most high frequency traders, all well educated.

          • Rich people = lucky
            Rich people does not equal working moral compass, and high IQ.
            They dont need to read theyll hire someone for that….. KINGS used to think in this way. Reading was beneath their status… the rich are exactly the same.

        • Anonymous says:

          No, I personally haven’t *met* one, but I’ve seen enough of them on television and heard enough of them in public to draw the obvious conclusion. Do you think Bill O’Reilly, Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter are actually intelligent? Or are you claiming that only famous 1%ers are idiots?

          • Anonymous says:

            I find it extremely hard to believe that any of those people you mentioned have an IQ of less than 70. They are extremely intelligent people. They are highly arrogant, and their views may differ wildly from yours…but that does not make them stupid(as far as IQ goes). Personally, I cannot stand Bill O’Reilly…he could take a flying leap of a cliff and I wouldn’t bat an eye. Rush Limbaugh, while I don’t always agree with him, he is very intelligent, very well informed(contrary to what you may feel), and in the event you can provide sufficient evidence to prove his views wrong…he does concede; biggest issue is providing enough evidence(he will concede, but he still doesn’t like to admit he’s wrong). Ann Coulter is also very intelligent, shockingly well informed…yet, you call them stupid because their opinions differ from yours?

            It should also be noted, Rush and Ann aren’t really in the top 1%(I’m not even sure O’Reilly is either). They are well off and make decent money, but I don’t think they are in the top 1%.

          • Berj says:

            Not sure if I’m replying to the right post, but the idea that Bill O’reilly is not in the 1% made me laugh out loud. the top 1% is anyone who makes over 250 thousand dollars a year. Billy O makes over 10 MILLION dollars a year. the 1% is a lot larger than you think. You may be confusing it with the top 0.1% which is the obscenely wealthy.

            Likewise, who decided that less than 70 was “stupid”? 95% of people fall between 70 and 130 on the IQ scale. Above that is certifiable genius, and below that is severely mentally retarded. “Stupid” is probably more like 85-95, since 100 is exactly average. If you’ve ever met a person who is exactly average, you know how infuriatingly dumb they can be. So yeah, I doubt there are all that many mentally retarded 1 percenters. You’ve proven your point =/

        • Anonymous says:

          I think what you’re trying to say is that you need an education to be rich in the sense that you have to have been educated in order to know HOW to make money. It’s important to note, though, that education is not the same thing as intelligence.

        • s.klein says:

          I’ve met plenty of professional athletes who are uneducated in everything except the one sport they are talented in.Maybe not >70 IQ, but stupid nonetheless.

          • Anonymous says:

            the fact that 3 replies in this thread have copied the >70 sign, but ment it as <70, contradicts the arguement of this article.

            btw, bill o'reilly put up a 1585/1600 on the SATs, has a BS from Marist university, and 2 masters from Boston University and Harvard. Just because someone believes in small government doesn't mean they are dumb.

            Ann coulter on the other hand… she is pretty dumb

          • Unforgiven says:

            I you are not a multi-millionaire and you voted for Romney, you actually voted against your own personal best economic interest. But Republicans, for the last 40 years have voted along racial lines even when to do so hurts them economically. So, if you are not in the top 1% and you voted Republican, regardless of your formal education, you’re demonstrably not very intelligent.

        • Anonymous says:

          FYI — stupid is probably somewhere in the 80’s. 70 is the cutoff point for mental retardation. I believe anyone under 80 is considered borderline.
          I would wager most 1% ers are around average intelligence. Being smart can get you to the top 5%, but not the top 1%. In that world, you are measured by who you know and how much money you can bring to the table.

        • Anonymous says:

          So, you said IQ>70. I think you meant IQ70, than it could be anything above 70. 140 IQ is not considered stupid.

          Also, below 70 is close to retardation. So, you’re right. Never. However, below average? <100? Often.

    • Anonymous says:

      Not really. The top 1% understand that they are in control of the legislation that allows them to concentrate their wealth/power. It’s easiest to hide that activity from the ignorant masses by keeping them focused on the political nonsense seen in every election and glued to Fox News.

  2. Anonymous says:

    not that ironic – just the easiest way to make a plutocracy. get on top, keep everyone else down, and make them think it’s for their own good.

    • Anonymous says:

      And by the time his term was up he has a meager 30-40% approval rating. He is a puppet, once he isn’t being told what to say or how to act and actually has to step and do the job he said he would do… all fails.

    • Anonymous says:

      His whole campaign was much different then – he was not nearly as conservative in his views.

      That being said almost everyone I know who voted him in as governor said they would never make the mistake of voting for him again.

    • Anonymous says:

      And Republican Scott Walker is governor of Wisconsin yet the state hasn’t voted Republican for pres since ’80 or ’84. It’s just a matter of who’s getting out to vote and when.

    • Unforgiven says:

      And with the exception of universal healthcare, he ran the state into the dirt. He was so bad that he did not run for a second term and when he left the governor’s mansion, he purchased the hard drives from EVERY computer his administration used – so that there would not be a written record of the process behind all the piss-poor policy decisions he made. The fact that every state that knew Romney best voted overwhelmingly for Obama says more about the man than the Obama campaign could ever say…

  3. Anonymous says:

    Just proves that most secondary education systems teach you to be a liberal. I have a masters degree in Advanced Thermodynamics and I will say this; over 90% of engineers voted for Romney

    • Notadumbassromneysupporter says:

      100% of Romney supporters were idiots. Who votes for someone who is caught blatantly lying and flipflopping on issues to the American public? Were Obama caught spreading the same lies Romney did, we’d have had a different reaction. Dem republican voters don’t have two brain cells to rub together though so I’m not surprised

      • Jon says:

        Your a classic lazy ass that wants to sit on your ass and collect a goverment pay check…….. P.S. Ron Paul was the best choice

        • richardbeneagle says:

          I can verify that this person doesn’t collect a government pay check, but quite likely knows more about the subject at hand than you do. Cheers.

        • Anonymous says:

          Oh yes, I’d much rather vote for the candidate that only wants to help 1% of the American population and ignore the suffering of the less fortunate. It’s a bonus that he is also a misogynist and backwards-thinking bible-pushing liar. Who needs progress when a couple lucky people are filthy rich, right?

        • Anonymous says:

          The word is “you’re”, not “your”, and you are an ignorant fool, Jon. Ron Paul *wasn’t* a choice, at least not on my ballot. In spite of his bat-shit crazy ideas I would have voted for him because he’s completely honest and actually respects the Constitution.

        • m0 says:

          You can’t even handle basic grammar you dolt, never-mind have the common sense to know who is a good candidate. You will just spout whatever crap you hear on a daily basis from your own choice of right wing outlets which are factually challenged 90% of the time. And the only reason you do, is that you, yourself are too lazy to actually go find out some truth for yourself without checking it with Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, or Glen Crazy first.

          BTW, any man that names his male child after a female political figure that has been proven so wrong has something seriously wrong going on in their head. While I like Dr. Paul, there is no way he is presidential material.

          • Anonymous says:

            Actually according to himself, Ron Paul did not name Rand after Ayn Rand. Rand’s full first name is Randal, went by Randy as a child. His mother is the one who shortened it Rand.

      • ObamaLiesAreDestoryingTheCountry says:

        Obama has flip-flopped on many issues and IS currently lying to the American people. People that voted for Obama want a hand out. They don’t understand how the economy works… Watch and see what happens when the top “1%” quits producing jobs and hides their money. The free loaders will have no income and then who will they tax or steal from.?

        • Berj says:

          The thing about straw men is that they’re easy to beat up and make you feel good, even if they are not remotely connected to reality.

          you make the positive statement about 51% of the country, claiming that “people that voted for Obama want a hand out.” this is easy to disprove with a sample size of 1. I voted for Obama, and I do not want a hand out. I understand quite well how the economy works. I read economic reports and examine all the arguments for their merits and drawbacks. The reality of the situation is that the economy has ALWAYS performed better with a higher marginal tax rate. Call it correlation rather than causation, but it is a fact that is easy to find if you are open to views that do not agree with your preconceived notions. As for the top 1% quitting and hiding their money… Good. Bring it on. If they remove themselves from the country, say, to a colony in space or something, what happens? wages go up across the board, and the country endures. We have been conned into accepting the greatest redistribution of wealth in history: from the middle class to the very rich. We’ve been working harder than ever and seeing less return for it. (http://stateofworkingamerica.org/charts/productivity-and-real-median-family-income-growth-1947-2009/) So where does that return go? I’ll give you two guesses. (http://blogs-images.forbes.com/shenegotiates/files/2011/07/IncomeGrowth1980-2000Top1Bottom99.jpg)

          • Anonymous says:

            I really appreciate your citation of sources, I hope that people that are passionate enough to post will be passionate enough to read and learn more instead of regurgitating opinions perpetuating untruths.

        • Anonymous says:

          I am not an Obama Supporter, but please stop believing and spreading the Lie that the top 1% are the job “creators” stop believing that tax cuts for the wealthy spur economic growth. In the depression, public works projects and Government employment spurred the economic Growth. Regan actually RAISED taxes. Trickle down economics do not work and deregulation creates artificial bubbles in the Market resulting in recession and depression. Jobs come from demand, Demand comes from consumerism, People consume more when they have money. http://www.kauffman.org/research-and-policy/where-will-the-jobs-come-from.aspx

      • H2theK says:

        so when Obama flip-flops he’s just changing his mind because he became more informed i.e. gay marriage? What a bunch of hypocrites! The Dems are the ones who want their foot on the necks of the poor, so they can stay in power. Dependence equals votes and votes equal power. I have an IQ of 130 and I voted for Romeny.

    • Anonymous says:

      Oh a masters in “advanced” thermodynamics! Thanks for clarifying….I would have assumed you had a masters in simple thermodynamics.

    • Anonymous says:

      I have a Doctorate in Bullsh*tting and 92.34% of Bullsh*tters voted for Obama, and the other 78.93% voted for Romney. Trust me, I know

      • Anonymous says:

        You don’t make any sense with that statement. I hope that is what you were trying to accomplish with those statistics. Otherwise you need to learn math.

    • Anonymous says:

      As an engineer I agree entirely, also the liberal arts “educated” people can’t find jobs, are in debt with school loans, and want the Government to pay for them.

      • Anonymous says:

        And what exactly is the problem with getting a little bit of help? I can’t believe the level of greed that successful people have in the United States… zero compassion for people who are less fortunate.

          • Anonymous says:

            That’s why we have these things called “constitutional amendments” and “judges” who interpret it. Not everything is written in the fricken’ constitution.

          • Anonymous says:

            So fucking what. It’s part of running a country. Take off your blinders and have a look at the top 10 most progressive countries in the world… guess what, USA isn’t on the list. But all the scandanavian countries are, as well as Switzerland, Denmark, and Canada. Guess why? Healthcare and low levels of government corruption. Look it up.

          • Sarah says:

            And separation of church and state is in the constitution but everyone ignores that. If I have to hear one more time that this nation was founded on the Christian god…..

        • H2theK says:

          not true, check out Obama’s donations to charity versus Romeny’s. Liberals talk a good game, but when it comes to money, they don’t play. Interesting how 9 of the 10 richest states by household income voted for Obama. A grand sceme at work?

      • Anonymous says:

        try this on for size: I graduated in may with a BFA (yeah, that’s fine arts), and not only do I have two jobs, but one pays me $25/hr and the other $15. all of the people I knew in my class have jobs. I do know a lot of underemployed law graduates, though… don’t generalize so much.

    • Anonymous says:

      I agree that this articles statistics don’t really mean what is being suggested here.
      Do you have a source for numbers, or do you mean 90% of the engineers you know well enough to discuss politics with? What specifically about Romney or his platform is good for engineers? (No sarcasm intended by the way.)

    • Will O'Connor says:

      How can you say that over 90% of engineers voted for Romney? Did you take a poll? How wide was this poll? Was it only thermodynamic engineers? Do you deal with electrical engineers, structural engineers? Astrophyscial engineers? I call bullshit

    • Anonymous says:

      I’m going to make a random statistic based off personal conjecture here. 100% of people that are butt hurt over Romney losing think the election was much closer than it was.

    • Anonymous says:

      Funny, I must know a disproportionate percentage of engineers. Nice to have met the spokesperson for the other 90%, though.

    • Anonymous says:

      Computer engineer responding… As an engineer of you caliber you should know not to make wild assertions. Instead for your problem, gather evidence, and propose a solution. Although it might be fun to throw at wild assertions it just makes you sound ridiculous.

    • Cynthia says:

      sorry but many engineers in Miami and New York that I know voted for Obama….what you are saying does not make any sense,….. show me the data :-)

    • Timone says:

      and Engineers are in what percentage of the socio-economic scale? you’ve proved the point about the top seeking to remain at the top sir.

    • Anonymous says:

      Well that was a bold statement…are you an engineer in, say, texas? Because here in New York most engineers (and everyone else) voted for OBAMA! WOO!

    • Anonymous says:

      I fail to understand how your engineering degree qualifies you to make the claim that 90% of engineers voted for Romney.

    • Chem E says:

      I guess I’m in the 10% of engineers that didn’t vote Romney….but I will concede that among college educated people, a larger portion of engineers tend to lean right.

      In some ways I get it, because engineering is so intertwined with big business (especially the petrochemical, paper and chemical industries) and republican policies would indirectly benefit engineers in that regard, but in other ways I don’t get it. Several of my engineer colleagues are the smartest people I know, but I cannot for the life of me understand how they can use math and science on a daily basis to perform at their job, but yet support a party that distorts, perverts, and sometimes completely disregards science and math by pretending that evolution didn’t happen, or that global warming isn’t real, or that rape is “God’s will.”

    • Anonymous says:

      I’m assuming you got this statistic by asking the other engineers you know who they voted for. So if I went about this the same way you did, asking all the engineers I know who they voted for… I would say 100% of engineers voted for Obama….

    • Anonymous says:

      Well that’s a crock of shit, because I’ve got a masters in Biomedical Engineering (my first degree was in Physics), and I sure as hell know that what you say is definitely NOT true. Just because we make money doesn’t mean we are conservatives, because we sure as hell are not even close to 1%ers.

      People aren’t “taught” to be liberal or conservative, by the way. The DATA shows that your political choices directly correlate to your parent’s views (and your relationship with your parents).

    • Anonymous says:

      90%? please provide a citation, is this a poll of you and your nine best friends? Just because you understand Advanced Thermodynamics does not mean you understand economics, political science, Business, History, or anything outside of Thermodynamics. Secondary education systems teach people to learn and to think for themselves. Try to provide factual sources for any theory you want to put forth and I believe you will change some of your views. As I do, All the time, as new information becomes available.

    • Anonymous says:

      False. Dictators and military leaders are incredibly intelligent and manipulative. Their education is fine! They’re just intolerant, which sometimes can’t be fixed no matter how much you try to educate someone.

      • richardbeneagle says:

        However there is a correlation between education level in a population and quality of life. This is just an opinion statement, but I believe raising education levels reduces intolerance because people better understand the factor that have a negative effect on their life, and find it more difficult to blame on things such as race or religion.

      • Anonymous says:

        I don’t think anyone is suggesting the dictators or leaders were uneducated. Their followers and supporters that got them to a place of power were probably uneducated.

    • Anonymous says:

      Even rocket scientists can be unemployed… schooling has everything to do with being educated!! It’s unemployment that doesn’t. Seriously dude.

      • Anonymous says:

        I think his point is that even states like Michigan, where the unemployment rate is nearly twice the national average and is known for having some of the worst public education infrastructure, still go blue every year.

    • Anonymous says:

      It’s already been said, and I’ve said this elsewhere about this same things. “Schooling” or a degree does entirely denote being educated…but being educated doesn’t necessarily imply intelligence. There is far more to intelligence than just your degree and how well you did in school.

    • Anonymous says:

      According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ preliminary, seasonally adjusted data for July 2012:
      1) North Dakota (R) 3%
      2) Nebraska (R) 4%
      3) South Dakota (R) 4.4%
      4) Oklahoma (R) 4.9%
      5) Vermont (D) 5%
      6) Iowa (R) 5.3%
      7) New Hampshire (D) 5.4%
      8) Wyoming (R) 5.6%
      9) Minnesota (D) 5.8%
      10) Virginia (R) 5.9%

    • Anonymous says:

      Or it could mean that unemployed voters are still educated enough to trust Obama to help them find jobs before believing Romney could do the same based on his track record at Bain as the only evidence to form a rational decision.

  4. Jon says:

    Just proves that most secondary education systems teach you to be a liberal. I have a masters degree in Advanced Thermodynamics and I will say this over 90% of engineers voted for Romney

    • Mike says:

      I’d disagree. At my engineering office I’d guess the mix is only about 30% pro-Romney. Education certainly reinforced that there is no magic zombie space jew here to protect you and dictate your moral behaviour. I definately fall on the financial conservative side, however Republicans haven’t shown they can balance a budget either and if their party members can’t understand evolution and that gay marriage doesn’t hurt anyone, well how can they be trusted to solve financial problems?

      • Anonymous says:

        Well said, I have some hope for humanity after reading this… I was starting to feel a bit hopeless after reading most of these other comments.

        Honestly as an engineering student myself (worked as an intern at a few engineering companies) I would expect that engineers are smart enough to vote for the candidate that will spend taxpayers dollars for the greater good of society and not just help the rich get richer. Also, Romney is a serial liar and wanted to ban contraception and abortion entirely… engineers (who for the most part try to make as much progress in the world as possible) hopefully don’t want to send the world back to the 50’s… hopefully…

        • Jon says:

          Keep that sprit and you will never get a Job and will alway rely on the government to assist you………………. lol The goverment does not need more of my money so Fuck Off

          • Anonymous says:

            Okay. So this is like the 5th time I’ve had to reply to you to try to explain why you’re an idiot, and it’s getting tiresome. Obviously there is no getting through to you, but I will try one last time.

            So what you’re saying is that because I have compassion and want to see the USA improve as a whole, I am lazy and unemployable and destined to be on welfare? Did you miss the part about me currently getting a decent education while already having several jobs?

            This is the reason why the whole world hates America. Because a significant portion of the population gives off a superior attitude and refuses to do anything that doesn’t directly benefit themselves. There is a difference between being lazy and being unlucky in life. You can be born into a bad situation, work hard your whole life, and still barely be able to afford food. Or, you can be born into wealth, and do nothing with your life but sit on a big pile of money. Don’t be so quick to assume that all people who recieve government assistance are lazy freeloaders. What a closed-minded attitude.

  5. Anonymous says:

    Yea Colorado is intelligent. They know that to get ahead in life you need to smoke pot everyday…yep thats intelligent

    • anonymous says:

      It has more to do with not locking people up for bullshit drug offences, wasting tax money prosecuting bullshit drug offenders, and legalizing the use of a natural substance that doesn’t kill the way alcohol and tobacco does. Seems very intelligent.

  6. Anonymous says:

    Like normal, republicans make their own facts up in order to refute any arguments against their views. Wake up, college degrees do indicate higher education. It is not news either, it has been shown in many studies that intelligence is positively correlated with being liberal and athiest.

  7. Duffy says:

    So I guess it means Dems are smart and Reps are dumb. Huh, ….this blog and comments are so very educated that I want to move to one of those states!

    You guys need to peel your onion back a few more layers. Not sure if “we the people” won this election. Romney, Obama,…..hmmmmm…..really!!!! The country nearly divided popular vote (obviously) with lean to Obama. If we continue to allow Obamas or Romneys run our country we’re “all” screwed. It’s very humorous how context of a phrase or perceived memory reduction changes when extreme libs or radical rights get hold of these fragments and skew the truths.
    Just do a fragment of homework before posting ridiculous comments. Have a great day fellow man! and may the peace be with your education. Also, while you’re doing that homework try to figure out how many Dems and Reps are betting the market against the dollar. De-value the dollar and most smart investors will move in survival direction. Good luck with your Fridays!

    • richardbeneagle says:

      It would be very interesting to see what a politician that was not associated with either party could accomplish. It won’t happen, but it would be interesting.

  8. Anonymous says:

    Just because these are the worst educated states doesn’t mean that all of the voters are uninformed. It could be that these people voted for Romney because they wanted to see an improvement in their educational systems, while the best educated states generally felt more satisfied with either their own or their children’s education. You cannot simply looked simply look at two correlationally related variables, in this example percent of people over 25 years old in a said state with a college degree and the candidate they voted, and assume that they voted this way because of their education (or lack thereof). Guess what else is correlationally related? The amount of ice cream sold and murder rates. Food for thought.

    • Anonymous says:

      Source that ice cream vs. murder rates article please, I’d be facinated as to how in the hell you know that.

      No one said every Romney supporter is stupid, btw. This is just an interesting observation. We’re supposed to draw our own conclusions from it. This is how studies are done… looking at two correlationally related variables and drawing conclusions.

  9. Pingback: Election Infographic Shows Most Educated States Voted For Obama | Happy Place | Fashion and the girl

  10. Anonymous says:

    What boggles my mind is how so many of those intelligent and educated people think there’s any difference between Democrats and Republicans. You’re arguing over a puppet show put on by the real people who own your country outright, the Federal Reserve. You haven’t had a real politician with any major say in about a hundred years. Why is it so easy to find atheism, but not the truth behind the monetary pyramid scheme that has your country enslaved? God or no God, people suffer every day for THAT. There are better things to argue about, donkeys and elephants. Find your real enemy.

  11. Our maybe we demonize teacher UNIONS because they don’t aid the students and lead to policy such as rubber rooming, or that better teachers are let go because seniority means more than merit.

  12. Fred says:

    This chart is biased and draws a very big conclusion on a small pool of data. Not to mention that states like Indiana are still building cars and have hard blue collar working people in them. Do you think looking down on them is going to make them agree with your views? It’s arrogant and it’s what I’ve come to expect from liberals.

  13. JimR says:

    I’ve been around a lot longer than most people and lived in more places. I can say without a doubt that education does NOT guarantee intelligence!

    • richardbeneagle says:

      I’d argue that intelligence and understanding are two different things though. You can be a brilliant person and not understand something until you learn about it, which is where education comes in.

  14. Pingback: “History is a race between education and destruction” – Karl Marx

    • Anonymous(STL) says:

      Bill Gates was still accepted and attended college in his teens. He only paused his higher education b/c he was starting Microsoft. Once MS was stable enough, he went back and completed his degree.

  15. Anonymous says:

    I sure do hate it when people correlate education to income. Is that all people think education is worth today? A paycheck? Capitalism has destroyed the American dream.

    • Tom says:

      Capitalism has destroyed the American dream? Are your stupid? Capitalism is one of the few systems that allows there to even be an American dream. In capitalism the hardest working and smartest (and entertainers) rise to the top while lazy ass dumb shits remain at the bottom, AND THAT IT HOW IT SHOULD BE. You probably think greed and pride (pride for sane people not murderous idiots) are bad,but if it wasn’t for greed or pride there would be very little to no incentive to do anything. Get your shit straight retard.

  16. Eddie says:

    Guys, all of the idiots vote Republican, and then all of the 1%ers vote Republican. The 1%ers don’t vote this way because they’re necessarily uneducated, it’s because they don’t give a fuck about anything but their money. Gays, women, teachers, etc. can all go fuck themselves, they just want the guy who is going to tax them the least.

    • Tom says:

      Hey, mr. typical-uneducated-know-nothing-about-economics-liberal, did you know that in economics having lower tax rates allow for faster economic growth. No you didn’t because you are another liberal that doesn’t even know what a conservative/republican is. You probably get your learning from the tube. And BTW republicans are for the hard working not the rich, it just so happens that in order to get rich requires hard work. Explain to me why it is good for liberals to jack up taxes to support the bad habits of the poor? Why are liberals increasing food stamp hand outs, the amount of time one can remain on welfare, cutting our military’s budget…. it seems as if they want America to turn into China as China turns into America. First off we shouldn’t encourage bad habits like not working, second welfare is a crutch to help get one through while looking for a job, third our military is the only reason we are such a powerful country. Obama is a terrible president. Our economic growth is so slow right now and it is because of his policies. Liberals turn and say “hey we have positive growth” republicans turn and say ” at point one percent, good job, dumb fuck” Just remember Bush did a great job until 2007 when his congress shifted from republican to democrat majority, go ahead look it up. It wasn’t until congress started battling Bush that we saw unemployment sky rocket, the dowj start to go down, the housing market crash, the price of gas go back up and stay up. Gas spiked once under Bush and he increased drilling permits 67% until we saw gas go back down. Obama has decreased drilling permits by roughly 34% and we have been seeing gas at 4 a gallon for over a year. Good job liberals…. keep up the good work and good brain washing. Just because one is educated doesn’t mean they understand politics or economics.

      • Tom says:

        Sorry I grabbed the wrong stats, let me give you the correct information. Under George W. Bush, the number of drilling permits approved rose by 116 percent. Under Barack Obama, the number of drilling permits approved decreased by 36 percent. There ya go. Sleep tight sweet heart, knowing that you are a giant idiot, who thinks republicans would ruin the world. Shit over the last 20 years our economy did the best when congress had a republican majority.

  17. Michael Smith says:

    Kind of ironic since these states are filled with rich, white people. That’s interesting considering those are the people everyone says only support republicans.

  18. Anonymous says:

    It’s obvious to me that a college education doesn’t guarantee intelligence. As a recent engineering graduate, I know numerous people who are not intelligent and easily graduated from college. A degree is earned with hard work and little intelligence just as much as excessive intelligence and little work…..Also, I live in West Virginia. The lower-middle class people here that voted for Romney stated, for the most part, their reasoning was that they work hard to earn a living and they’re tired of people who do not work receiving government help that they can not get. This is just the general population of West Virginia talking, not me…..

  19. Ron says:

    This is outrageously offensive and completely misleading. Just because the Electoral Vote in each of these states went to a given candidate does not mean that every single person in the state voted that way, which is what you’re implying here.

    West Virigina, for example, is considered one of the least educated states, and had a 35/62 split between Obama and Romney, respectively. Not the closest race, but surely some of the “under educated” people you’re talking about would land on both sides of the aisle.

    New Jersey, a “more educated” state, and my home, had an even closer 58 Obama / 40 Romney result. Even more to my point, NJ’s presidential election results are pretty consistently swayed to the democrats by the more populated urban areas, which also tend to have some of the worst school systems in the state. So one could argue that the democratic vote that almost always wins our state in Pres. elections, is primarily coming from some of the least educated areas.

    To argue that based on ELECTORAL COLLEGE results, you can infer that all republicans are idiots is ridiculous and honestly just deplorable. You should be ashamed to post such slanted filth on your site.

    And for the record, I voted for Obama.

  20. Anonymous says:

    None of those states which voted for Obama have Voter ID laws either. Coincidence? I think not. Fits right in with the Democrat Mantra ” Vote Early, and Often”

  21. Anonymous says:

    Here’s a reason for more people with college degrees voting for Obama: liberal professors have been indoctrinating college students with liberal / borderline socialist-communist ideals for decades. When I was in college 20 years ago (in a large east-coast university) the mechanism was well in place. Anyone who had a viewpoint that was different from the politically correct agenda was squelched and forced to comply. Concluding that most ‘intelligent’ people voted for Obama based on the percent of college-educated voters doing so is an irresponsible ‘statistic’ to publish.

  22. Anonymous says:

    Obviously, what this shows is that a college degree doesn’t make someone smart. What this really speaks to is the fact that colleges have become such slanted, liberal institutions. They’ve brainwashed students into thinking that the Democratic Party is the way to go. The truth is a liberal is someone who watches the conservatives help the poor.

    • James says:

      I’m a liberal. Not only am I completely okay with where my taxes are but I also donate 10% of my gross income to a local shelter.

      This party vs party generalizations is the worst thing you can do in this country. There are good and bad people on each side of the line. The real problem is that many of those bad people are our elected officials.

  23. Ty says:

    The funny part is, most areas in most states voted red! Look at your maps, its the truth. The states that won, won on votes from the hi welfare areas, inner city, and hi unemployment areas. Again look at your map. So what your saying is that most ( well 50%) of the people should sit on their ass while the working true Americans work, pay the taxes that feed the waste of your Democrat style of society. Sorry, do not ask me for pitty!

    • James says:

      That’s because those areas are rural areas where not a lot of people live. Suburban areas (where a lot of hard working folks live) voted 48% for Obama and 50% for Romney. (a statistical split). Urban areas voted 62% for Obama, while rural areas voted 59% for Romney. But the population in Urban areas is obviously much greater than that of the rural areas meaning that 62% is a extremely higher number of people.

      So life lesson here, even though a map may show that more counties voted red than blue, that’s because statistically they are rural counties that voted for Romney, while Urban counties voted for Obama.

      No one says that anyone should sit on their ass and collect a check.

      I bet you are from one of those 10 states on the right.

  24. liberty and peace says:

    This doesn’t mean anything. You have to look at each state individually and show what % of each education level voted for which pres.

  25. Ravine says:

    Does this chart help our President’s dismal record? His complete disregard for the Constitution? His abject hatred of anyone in fly over country? Or maybe we should pose the question if whether or not the best educated people in the country want four more years of policies that destroy Black America’s hope for better schools, greater personal freedom, and more opportunities to rise to their potential.

  26. Pingback: Most educated states voted for obama - City-Data Forum

  27. joe says:

    This is a misleading article. Its a stat about how many have a college degree. Doesnt state about intelligence nor competency. Its about who has more education. Truly a misrepresentation of stats.

    • Anonymous says:

      @JOE, Ummm.. the tittle doesn’t say most intelligent or competent, it says Most Educated. how is that mis-leading? I think that you mis-read it. Also it is not an article, it is a graph representing purely statistical data … I would ask what state you’re in, but no need now.

  28. SmittyJohansen says:

    I would like to see research regarding international travel/living (excluding military & business) abroad and the parties they tend to vote for. I suspect that would be telling as well.

  29. Works to hard to vote democrat says:

    This article is completely worthless and bogus. BTW Clinton was the president who delcared Glass Steagal as inappropriate.

  30. Bernie Fradkin says:

    Unfortunately, states don’t vote. People do.

    If you’ll look at actual exit polls instead of these contrived statistics, you will see that Romney got a majority of the vote from those who have bachelor’s degrees.

  31. Pingback: Barack Obama blunders again on the world stage - Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians, Conservatives, Liberals, Third Parties, Left-Wing, Right-Wing, Congress, President - Page 13 - City-Data Forum

  32. I went a step further and spelled it out http://www.kalenkimm.wordpress.com
    This is as much about education as it is about religion. I do find the claim from Eric Laychock’s comment about $ spent per citizen on supplemental income programs interesting. I would like to learn more about that – does it include welfare and disability? Medicare? Social security? What is all included in this? While it could be construed that the states w/ a higher $/citizen are “takers”, as suggested, it could also mean they have the money to do it (since they have the higher incomes as shown in my data) and the compassion (since they are more educated as shown in my data). The irony is that you would think the more religious people were, the more they would take care of their sick and their poor.

  33. Pingback: The Freckled FoodieElection Infographic Shows Most Educated States Voted For Obama | Happy Place | The Freckled Foodie

  34. Tom says:

    You want to know the truth….here it is…. being educated doesn’t mean you have a good understanding of politics or economics at all. From what I have experienced certain fields tend to hold more conservatives than others. For instance Math and Economics hold a lot more conservatives than Psychology and English. Regardless of what degree these graduates obtain, they will have one thing in common, they are all considered educated. Now there are 2 recent studies that show the relationship between political party and education. The first one stated that Liberals held majorities in the most educated population and the least educated population and that conservatives had a majority in the “average/middle” educated population (whatever that means). The next study showed that on average conservatives knew as much as 20% more about economics and politics than liberals did. A lot of Liberals didn’t even know what side Nancy Pelosi was on and if you don’t know which party that crazy liberal bitch is on you are far from knowing anything about politics. I myself am graduating in May with a Bachelor’s in Mathematics, concentration: actuarial sciences, from UB and I am conservative. All of my closest friends are very educated and very conservative. We all know how to read and interpret data. We all pay close attention to important economic factors like the unemployment rate, GDP, velocity of money, the inflation rate, national debt, average price of gas, etc. Not only that if you look at a graph of party division in congress by years and compare it with lets say graphs of unemployment rates, gas prices, or stocks like the DOWJ, whenever conservatives held a majority we did better as a country over the last 20 years. Sorry… I use a lot of run-on sentences. Too much information, too little time. BTW shit started going downhill for Bush in 2007, right around the time when congress shifted from conservative to liberal. Up until then Bush did a pretty good job.

  35. Anonymous says:

    Wouldn’t making another political party just stray the really left winged people from voting for the Democratic Party, thus giving the Republican Party more votes and ultimately, the presidency? That happened to Al Gore with the Green Party, didn’t it? Making George Bush win the election…
    George Washington was right in his Second Farewell Address, saying that the creation of political parties would divide the American people. And his other peace of advice may have stopped WWI from happening if the European/ Middle Eastern/ Russia would have listened to him. The second piece of advice was to not make long lasting treaties with foreign countries. If only Germany didn’t have a treaty with Austria-Hungary, Russia didn’t have a treaty with France, and France didn’t have a treaty with Great Britain, the mess wouldn’t have exploded into the mess it became.
    Sorry for the rant, just blowing off fumes…

  36. Pingback: War On Drugs At War With War On Cancer - Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians, Conservatives, Liberals, Third Parties, Left-Wing, Right-Wing, Congress, President - City-Data Forum

  37. Pingback: Tea Party GOP Sen. Johson plans to mansplain budget to Tammy Baldwin

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s