Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: combjelly who wrote (693952)	1/19/2013 9:35:25 PM
From: Bilow	1 Recommendation Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 1575938

Hi combjelly; Re: "Scientists tend to be apolitical." They vote Democratic. They give money to Democratic candidates. They have leftist beliefs. Yes, scientists are very political. Here, read the NY Times article: "In a separate study of voter registration records, Professor Klein found a nine-to-one ratio of Democrats to Republicans on the faculties of Berkeley and Stanford. That study, which included professors from the hard sciences, engineering and professional schools as well as the humanities and social sciences, also found the ratio especially lopsided among the younger professors of assistant or associate rank: 183 Democrats versus 6 Republicans." nytimes.com I mean really. How many academics do you know? Re: "This is incorrect. DW-NOMINATE measures roll call votes on a host of issues of that particular Congress." You've given a link but I doubt that you read it. If you read it, you didn't comprehend it. Let me quote you from your own link: Poole and Rosenthal demonstrate that—despite the many complexities of congressional representation and politics—roll call voting in both the House and the Senate can be organized and explained by no more than two dimensions throughout the sweep of American history. The first dimension (horizontal or x-axis) is the familiar left-right (or liberal-conservative) spectrum on economic matters. The second dimension (vertical or y-axis) picks up attitudes on cross-cutting, salient issues of the day (which include or have included slavery, bimetallism, civil rights, regional, and social/lifestyle issues). For the most part, congressional voting is uni-dimensional, with most of the variation in voting patterns explained by placement along the liberal-conservative first dimension. en.wikipedia.org If someone reading this has trouble with reading comprehension and logic, let me spell it out more clearly: (1) The dimension that matters is about "economic matters". (2) The issue at hand is how the congressperson votes. (3) Votes are about laws. (4) Laws control what people do. (5) Therefore, the graph is mostly about how the government writes laws, that control people's actions, having to do with economic matters. It's about government control of the economy. Go to the link and look at the 6 graphs. There are only two where there is a wide difference between the Republicans and Democrats. It's not "Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity". It's not "Require waiting period for handgun purchase". It's in the chart on "Balanced budget constitutional amendment." The split between the parties is mostly about voting on economics issues, not gun grabbing or gays in the military. -- Carl