This wouldn't really surprise me. The GOP has been running on an anti-intellectual platform for years and actively alienating the scientific community. That doesn't necessarily mean that the believers aren't as intelligent, but it does suggest a biased sample, for lack of a better word, comprising a larger selection of unintelligent people than the population at large.

Also, a lot of the positions they take are vapid and fall apart with even a cursory examination of the facts.

That being said, I don't really know if it's correct, it's just consistent with the types of positions that the GOP has taken.

I'm not sure what to think of GOP supporters anymore. Problem is basically the all versus few method politics. The few method is the GOP method, usually looking to support industry, loosen regulation and prevent anything that either costs money, or is substantially different from old world views. The liberal All method looks largely to supporting the lower and middle class citizens through support in work benefits, programs that assist low income families, and funding through increased taxation.

Not to say that they always follow that, it's just that's what I've seen for the past 10 years that I've actually followed all this political warfare. There's going to be good and bad on both sides. I prefer the liberal method because it just makes sense. It doesn't always work and it isn't always as good as what it can be. But the GOP party is the one that tends to be much stronger and much quicker at changing regulation, law, method, whatever, to what it is they prefer, and even in the minority strong at preventing what they don't want.

People with more education are more likely to have been exposed to opposing view points during the process. I know my views changed significantly during my time in college.

What's more college, when done properly, gives one more tools for seeing through the lies that the GOP is presently using to justify some pretty ridiculous positions. For instance a recent bit of legislation that would require doctors to forcibly penetrate women planning to get an abortion whether or not it's medically necessary and whether or not there's any consent by the parties involved. I forget which state it is, and AFAIK it hasn't yet been signed into law, but those sorts of positions are completely unconscionable to anybody with the slightest amount of ethical integrity. Agreeing to sleep with the QB shouldn't require one to then sleep with all the other football players, likewise agreeing to have sex should not represent permission to be penetrated by a doctor for no good reason.

And that assumes the sex was consensual in the first place, AFAIK, that bit of legislation doesn't make any distinctions between consensual sex and rape or molestation.

As for remaining prejudice, nothing's perfect, we all do live in our own subjective bubble. Zen and Ch'an are the only paths that offer any meaningful hope of seeing the world as it is, and even those take decades and most people don't have the time or discipline. The question probably shouldn't be why do some people remain biased, it probably should be how significant is the bias and how closely does it reflect reality.

The GOP base of support is getting crazier and crazier as the various lines of sense that the former GOP voters had get violated in the name of solidifying the base. The GOP is going to have to adapt or die ultimately if it can't find a way of reaching out to independents and moderates.

This isn't necessarily much better for Democrats who now have to deal with even more diversity, but as long as the GOP is continuing to shrink it's base, there isn't much in the way of other options.

DAMN YOU JSTOR!!!!


It's common knowledge that a majority of higher IQ persons tend to be left leaning, but this is the first time I've seen something that links lower IQ persons to being right leaning...that is except the South.

Then this will amuse you:
http://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/post.cfm?id=are-you-more-likely-to-be-political-2008-09-18

Article back in 2008. Apparently, people who tend to have higher "startle" reactions to scary noises/images are generally more conservative.

Spiders!

Did that startle you?

Maybe you're a republican.

And there i was, beleiving they were actually off their meds. And my friends always told me i'm over-analyzing things.

But...how big are their biceps?

I think it's referring to quantifiable intelligence rather than education. By that same logic men are smarter than women, and therefore more liberal, because they have higher levels of education.

But I do agree, if this study is to tell us anything it must be applied to a greater and more diverse sample. It would be interesting if they took it to a diverse society, like New Guinea or India, the UK and the US are too mono-cultural for there to be a huge sweeping statement like prejudiced conservatives are stupid.

Eh... Right-wing doesn't necessarily mean socially conservative, nor does it necessarily mean racist.
That's like saying that if you aren't right-right wing, you must be opposed to personal property.
It's a stupid and patronising generalisation.

edit: let me explain further. The study defines right wing as having 'greater prejudice,' as 'social conservatism' and as 'right-wing authoritarianism.'
All this does is simply demonstrate an utter lack of knowledge about what this person is talking about. Thereby, his effective conclusion is: "bigotry is unintelligent.' No shit son, what else is new?

edit2: ultimately, his conclusion is wonderfully ironic.

Yeah I consider myself a moderate liberal and I found this study's definition of "right-wing" to be pretty offensive. Apparently you have to be a bigot to even be considered! And the inclusion of authoritarianism into "right-wing" is also a little odd, considering how many conservatives are opposed to industry regulations (for any industry) and the like.

I must be an outlier ;-)

I think extremists on either side are equally full of shit and keep the US circling the drain. One side comes in, bickers and gets nothing productive done, gets voted out by the public for the other side who get tired of them. Lather rinse repeat. At their cores, both parties are run by career politicians who acquire power for power's sake, no matter their banner.

Didn't read it, doesn't matter, this shit almost always turns out to be a hoax. Sometimes it even turns out to be clever. I always suspect anything pandering to my preconceived notions like I expect the Spanish Inquisition, which is to say, I expect it like VD from a lot of really fun but stupid and irresponsible sex.