Dean Says Dems Must Change Their Outreach to Blacks and Other Minorities

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

High education is correlated with low birth rates.


Here are teen birth rates. They're above 38 per thousand in all Bush states except MT, ND, UT, NE, IA, and below 38 per thousand in all Kerry states except CA, HI, DE, DC.
http://www.teenpregnancy.org/america/statisticsDisplay.asp?ID=4&sID=44

Um, I wasn't disputing that the bulk of them are in "Bush states". I was making the point that a great deal of these births happened among people likely to vote Democratic.

Oh, and I'll quote myself here:

And I'm still waiting for that no brilliant analysis of "uneducated conservatives" and "educated liberals" you hinted at. Come on. I'd love to see you explain it.

Although I won't bump the thread up and call you a "g liar" if you don't answer within 15 minutes (as you did with Carl Hayden once), I really would like to see your reasoning here.

Carl Hayden had lied about me, so I only had to wait 0 seconds to call him a ing liar.

Obviously educated people have fewer children. Do I really have to find the statistics that prove that?

Gore state women have 1.89 children per capita vs. 2.11 children for the Bush 2000 states. I can't find any actual numbers comparing liberals and conservatives.

[Beet]

Bob, did you see my post? The extremity of Utah is pretty glaring. Also, it's possible that religiousity and not conservatism could be what is really important.

[Ebowed]

Utah is an exception because it's 75% Mormon.  Don't compare Utah and Alabama, it's apples & oranges.

[Rob]

Bob, did you see my post? The extremity of Utah is pretty glaring. Also, it's possible that religiousity and not conservatism could be what is really important.

I actually didn't see your post. It's true that Utah is a major example of conservative virility, but that is due to the peculiarities of the Mormon religion rather than any traits of conservatism.

Jfern, I wasn't arguing that more educated people don't have fewer children on average. I was arguing that those educated people you praise were likely to vote for Bush (excepting those with post-graduate degrees, a small percentage), while the "uneducated people" you denigrate were likely to vote for Kerry.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Bob, did you see my post? The extremity of Utah is pretty glaring. Also, it's possible that religiousity and not conservatism could be what is really important.

I actually didn't see your post. It's true that Utah is a a major example of conservative virility, but as you rightly point out, that is due to the peculiarities of the Mormon religion rather than any traits of conservatism.

I wouldn't dispute that religion is the deciding factor of birth rates, but this issue deserves a major study rather than an argument on a political forum.

Jfern, I wasn't arguing that more educated people don't have fewer children on average. I was arguing that those educated people you praise were likely to vote for Bush (excepting those with post-graduate degrees, a small percentage), while the "uneducated people" you denigrate were likely to vote for Kerry.

Education was positively correlated with voting for Kerry in the nation as a whole, although it's negatively correlated in the South.

[Rob]

Education was positively correlated with voting for Kerry in the nation as a whole, although it's negatively correlated in the South.

That statistic is skewed due to those with post-graduate degrees. Bush won a majority of college graduates and those with some college. Kerry's best education level besides post-graduates was the group with no high school diplomas.

My main problem with what you were saying is that you trying to lump everyone into two categories: "educated liberals" and "uneducated conservatives". That is a gross oversimplification.

[Beet]

Bob, did you see my post? The extremity of Utah is pretty glaring. Also, it's possible that religiousity and not conservatism could be what is really important.

I actually didn't see your post. It's true that Utah is a a major example of conservative virility, but that is due to the peculiarities of the Mormon religion rather than any traits of conservatism.

Actually there was a book out lately entitled "The Empty Cradle" that talks about the decline of birth rates and the relation of that with a secular society. The main study is Europe and Japan, where the phenomenon is more obvious. The Bible tells us to go and spread our seed throughout the earth. For secular people, they just see having children as a burden. Children are no longer helpful economically because of the welfare state, but they are still a burden. This is an example of the state screwing up society by screwing up the incentives. One reason why I support substantial social security reductions.

The other option though might be better which is to provide major financial incentives, for those who can afford it (middle class) towards having children, in the form of tax credits which could be used to procure child care. It's a difficult problem, but the trends seem to show that the current welfare setup in the industrial economies isn't suitable for sustaining a growing labor force in the long run without large scale immigration.

[Lincoln Republican]

The Democratic Party has been taking the African American vote for granted for generations, providing lip service to a large extent.

The Republican Party is making inroads into this important community, and I trust they continue to do so.

The GOP wants their support, and will continue to earn it.