The least educated and unhealthiest states vote for the Republican

[cawacko]

Kids at lower grades tend to have more homework. By the time they get to high school they are required to do much less except for the honor students who are often highly motivated. The average high school kid can do little and still make B's. C's are supposedly average but a C is considered a bad grade today. If you know any typical high school students ask them how much they actually have to read to pass. I had college students tell me they had never read a book before.

I don't think it was that different when I went to high school except for the grade inflation. Today parents or administrators will be all over the teacher who gives too many low grades. I knew professors who taught many years who told me they had never failed a student.

Interesting. It’s definitely possible those I’m talking to are more the parents of the honor students and thus aren’t reflective of kids overall.

I think of a school like San Diego State or Chico St that I had a few classmates go to. My classmates went with like a 2.0 GPA. I’m only partially tongue in cheek saying you could get in if you could sign your name. Today you hear kids saying you need a 3.5 to get in. That’s crazy. And that’s serious grade inflation.

 

[Flash]

Interesting. It’s definitely possible those I’m talking to are more the parents of the honor students and thus aren’t reflective of kids overall.

I think of a school like San Diego State or Chico St that I had a few classmates go to. My classmates went with like a 2.0 GPA. I’m only partially tongue in cheek saying you could get in if you could sign your name. Today you hear kids saying you need a 3.5 to get in. That’s crazy. And that’s serious grade inflation.

The homework issue applies to all students, but it mostly occurs at the lower levels. Some schools today are choosing to eliminate homework. Originally it was because those with computers or internet access at home had an unfair advantage.

"You Graduated Cum Laude? So Did Everyone Else"

"Nearly half of students who graduated from Lehigh University, Princeton University and the University of Southern California this year did so with cum laude, magna cum laude or summa cum laude honors, or their equivalents. At Harvard and Johns Hopkins, more got the designations than didn’t."

https://www.wsj.com/articles/you-graduated-cum-laude-so-did-everyone-else-1530523801

Some Ivy League schools have put limits (50%) on the number of honor graduates. Some considered putting some regulations on course grades but it would put that school's graduates at a disadvantage in getting in graduate and professional schools.

For the private for-profit schools and community colleges a lot has to do with money. The more students they admit and retain the more state money they receive or federal loans/grants. Some of the accreditation agencies now include retention ("success") rate as part of the process. The college I retired from put in study skills classes as a way to show they are doing something to help retain students.

Some states include retention rate as part of the funding process. The result, of course, is that teachers pass more students.

 

[evince]

There is a clear correlation between a person’s level of education and his or her likelihood to vote for a right wing party. The lower the level of education, the more likely it is that that person votes Republican (or UKIP in Britain or for Le Pen in France or Wilders in the Netherlands etc). Put bluntly, people who aren’t very well-educated are more likely to believe in simplistic solutions, above all solutions that blame “the other” (eg immigrants or ethnic minorities).

This is being proven out everyday with the trumpanzees

its the result of Fox news targeting the stupid to get them to vote repuyblican

It was a plan created by Roger Ailes and Nixon


They found their daddy in Murdock

 

[cawacko]

The homework issue applies to all students, but it mostly occurs at the lower levels. Some schools today are choosing to eliminate homework. Originally it was because those with computers or internet access at home had an unfair advantage.

"You Graduated Cum Laude? So Did Everyone Else"

"Nearly half of students who graduated from Lehigh University, Princeton University and the University of Southern California this year did so with cum laude, magna cum laude or summa cum laude honors, or their equivalents. At Harvard and Johns Hopkins, more got the designations than didn’t."

https://www.wsj.com/articles/you-graduated-cum-laude-so-did-everyone-else-1530523801

Some Ivy League schools have put limits (50%) on the number of honor graduates. Some considered putting some regulations on course grades but it would put that school's graduates at a disadvantage in getting in graduate and professional schools.

For the private for-profit schools and community colleges a lot has to do with money. The more students they admit and retain the more state money they receive or federal loans/grants. Some of the accreditation agencies now include retention ("success") rate as part of the process. The college I retired from put in study skills classes as a way to show they are doing something to help retain students.

Some states include retention rate as part of the funding process. The result, of course, is that teachers pass more students.

Thanks for the info. Interesting to see my beloved alma mater on that list for having nearly half the students graduate with honors.

 

[Flash]

its the result of Fox news targeting the stupid to get them to vote repuyblican

It was a plan created by Roger Ailes and Nixon


They found their daddy in Murdock

Fox didn't make people vote Republican. Republicans chose to watch Fox News. The effect of the propaganda hate networks (Fox, CNN, MSNBC) has been to reduce the number of viewers who watch news leaving only the least informed to watch those stations.

 

[evince]

its based on grades

that is fair

 

[PoliTalker]

Hello Gonzomin,

This board shows the difference between rightys and leftys. You get real discussion and debate from most Dems. The rightys post one-liner drive-by insults and declare themselves winners. The Republican party is the home of bigots and haters. They have a religious attachment to Trump no matter what stupid shit he does.

I would say that is true of the far right but I regularly enjoy very spirited discussions here with those who are right of center.

Conversely, we have some lefties here who show no respect to anyone to the right of them.

My view is that anyone who disrespects others simply for their view is poisoning needed discussion.

Bitter polarization is poisoning the country and falls right into Putin's plan to destabilize America.

We each want to believe we are right, but none of us should be so sure that we are unwilling to listen to respectfully presented opposing views. Everything should always be open to discussion. Anyone who is absolutely convinced they are correct is absolutely mistaken.

I believe what I believe until I find out I was wrong. Then I change what I believe until I learn better yet. We must always be open to constructive criticism of our views. Everyone's perspective is unique, based on the things they have seen and learned. No two individuals experience the same input of information. Together, we represent more knowledge than any of us do alone.

Diversity makes America great.

Diversity of views makes us better informed.

IF we listen to what others have to say.

 

[zymurgy]

There are idiots on both sides, but there are also smart people on the Left. I can't think of a single Righty here that has real discussions. All they do is sperg out.

hmmm,.

you are one of the ones on the left I think of as being especially stupid.

 

[PoliTalker]

Hello anonymoose,

As compared with most Americans, Trump’s voters are better off. The median household income of a Trump voter so far in the primaries is about $72,000.

It is no surprise that the rich vote for Trump as they overlook his glaringly obvious faults. It is a mistake to assume that wealth and education level are strictly synonymous.

 

[PoliTalker]

Hello StoneByStone,

There are idiots on both sides, but there are also smart people on the Left. I can't think of a single Righty here that has real discussions. All they do is sperg out.

I can right off the top of my head,

Cawacko, Flash, annonymoose, gfm7175...

I'm sure there are more I have overlooked...

 

[PoliTalker]

Hello Flash,

Public school funding per pupil has increased substantially over the years adjusted for inflation. The schools with the higher expenditures are often the poorest performers because they are in low-income inner cities. Certainly performance has not improved in good or poor schools as expenditures have increased.

Students are working more, studying less, arriving at college less prepared, but grade point averages have inflated and college graduation rates are higher. That tells us something about standards.

As far as spending, look at the various state salary data bases. The highest paid state employees are almost always coaches.

Parenting plays a bigger part. People who are born into cross-generational poverty are poorly equipped to raise children with a focus on the success which as eluded them, and they lacked such role models as children themselves. Add to that the fact that they frequently have to work longer hours and are able to spend less time with their kids than the affluent.

The result of that effect logically means that when schools have to take on more of the parenting, that it costs more to do that extra work (which they are unable to do as well as the real thing.)

Also, it is difficult for students to excel when they live in a stressful environment, don't eat as healthy a diet, and are constantly threatened with violence.

Logically, with these considerations, struggling schools should receive extra funding above what the best schools get.

 

[anonymoose]

Hello anonymoose,



It is no surprise that the rich vote for Trump as they overlook his glaringly obvious faults. It is a mistake to assume that wealth and education level are strictly synonymous.

The median household income of a Trump voter so far in the primaries is about $72,000.

Wow. You consider a household income of $72,000 rich???

the general portrayal of Trump’s voters as uneducated also failed to conform to the facts: “About 44 percent of Trump supporters have college degrees… higher than the 33 percent of non-Hispanic white adults, or the 29 percent of American adults overall, who have at least a bachelor’s degree.

A higher education level is synonymous with a higher income, but if you consider a household income of $72,000 as being rich then I'd say yes it is synonymous.
Personally I consider $72,000 pretty low, but to each their own.

 

[PoliTalker]

Hello anonymoose,

Wow. You consider a household income of $72,000 rich???

Please go back and read what I said again, which wasn't that.

A higher education level is synonymous with a higher income,

There are many examples to dispute that. Doctors don't make as much as executives, but they have more education. Scientists are usually more educated than executives, but frequently are not paid as much. It seems if you sit on boards which determine each other's salary, you make more than people who work for the organizations the boards oversee. Big surprise.

but if you consider a household income as being rich then I'd say yes it is synonymous.
Personally I consider $72,000 pretty low, but to each their own.

It would help if you were to argue against what I actually said.

 

[MAGA MAN]

This board shows the difference between rightys and leftys. You get real discussion and debate from most Dems. The rightys post one-liner drive-by insults and declare themselves winners. The Republican party is the home of bigots and haters. They have a religious attachment to Trump no matter what stupid shit he does.

That's rich, based on the OP alone.

 

[anonymoose]

Hello anonymoose,

Hello.

Please go back and read what I said again, which wasn't that.

You either implied it or deflected by changing the subject. I took that you implied it. Sorry.

There are many examples to dispute that. Doctors don't make as much as executives, but they have more education. Scientists are usually more educated than executives, but frequently are not paid as much. It seems if you sit on boards which determine each other's salary, you make more than people who work for the organizations the boards oversee. Big surprise.

Of course there are always exceptions. I know a guy that owns a pizza joint in San Diego that nets almost a $million/yr. in taxable income from his restaurant. Bronx Pizza .
But in general education level is positively correlated with earnings. I'm pretty sure you know that but if you don't I'll provide a chart from the bureau of Labor Statistics.


So basically it's a myth that Trump voters are generally uneducated, low income hicks. Just like the polls that said there was a 90% chance hrc would be our next president.

 

[Flash]

Hello Flash,



Parenting plays a bigger part. People who are born into cross-generational poverty are poorly equipped to raise children with a focus on the success which as eluded them, and they lacked such role models as children themselves. Add to that the fact that they frequently have to work longer hours and are able to spend less time with their kids than the affluent.

The result of that effect logically means that when schools have to take on more of the parenting, that it costs more to do that extra work (which they are unable to do as well as the real thing.)

Also, it is difficult for students to excel when they live in a stressful environment, don't eat as healthy a diet, and are constantly threatened with violence.

Logically, with these considerations, struggling schools should receive extra funding above what the best schools get.

Agreed, although it ignores the great majority of the students who fall between the affluent and those in poverty. For those children the greatest (predictable) parenting issue is those who came from single-parent families.

I realize the added expenses for educating the poor, but my point was that those increased expenditures have not resulted in improved performance. Unfortunately, for many of the inner cities the number of faculty and students have declined while the number of administrators has increased. So, (to exaggerate a little), the number of after school or tutoring programs are less likely to succeed when they are run by a director with three assistant directors and five associate directors. I have been involved in some of those federal educational programs and they are viewed as ways to get money for renovation and equipment the school can keep even when the program is finished.

 

[Adolf_Twitler]

Not entirely true, there are intelligent conservatives, George Wills and David Brooks come to mind, both interesting columnists, and "the Hill" plus "WSJ" will often offer sharp conservative analysis.

But you are correct, on this Forum you aren't going to see many of those type conservatives, "cawacko" is about as close as you will get, this vehicle is full of Trumpkins regurgitating talking points they heard, saw, or read from the demogogues

The Republican Party has been destroyed! They have no one to blame but their hateful selves.

2020 will be their wake-up call! Trust me- there will be some Republicans Drunk on Donald Trump starting to sober up after 2020!

 

[StoneByStone]

Hello StoneByStone,



I can right off the top of my head,

Cawacko, Flash, annonymoose, gfm7175...

I'm sure there are more I have overlooked...

Cawacko and Flash, I'll give you. Are they Trump supporters?
Annonymoose, nooo.

 

[Flash]

So basically it's a myth that Trump voters are generally uneducated, low income hicks.

I have made numerous posts proving this is a myth. But it is a way for the haters to denigrate those who voted for him.

You know you will be accused of being a Trump supporter for correcting a bigoted myth. I have been accused of this several times although I have repeatedly stated I do not support Trump or agree with this supporters. It seems that you have to believe all the lies about the other side to prove yourself loyal.

Just like the polls that said there was a 90% chance hrc would be our next president.

The polls did not predict Hillary would win. They estimated the popular vote results very closely: 46% Clinton v. 44% Trump. Writers took those results and used them to try to predict the election results using those polls for purposes they were not intended. Pollsters cannot dictate how others will their results.

 

[cawacko]

I have made numerous posts proving this is a myth. But it is a way for the haters to denigrate those who voted for him.

You know you will be accused of being a Trump supporter for correcting a bigoted myth. I have been accused of this several times although I have repeatedly stated I do not support Trump or agree with this supporters. It seems that you have to believe all the lies about the other side to prove yourself loyal.



The polls did not predict Hillary would win. They estimated the popular vote results very closely: 46% Clinton v. 44% Trump. Writers took those results and used them to try to predict the election results using those polls for purposes they were not intended. Pollsters cannot dictate how others will their results.

Man, isn't that the truth. Now I can be just as partisan as the next guy so I'm not holier than thou when it comes to this. But it's not just enough to disagree with someone today you also have to want to bury them or on the fringes want them all to die even.