Just how stupid are American voters?

"My name it means nothing, my age it means less
The country I was born in is called the midwest
I was born and raised there the laws to abide
And the the county I live in HAS GOD ON ITS SIDE."

Bob Dylan

I think it's a combination of Americans just not caring, and our media making sure it stays that way.

The answer .. Georgie Boy had two full terms ..

If you're too smart and logical a Republican voter will call you an "elitist" and punch you in the face!

"Stop making me feel stupid you elitist!" BAM!

This ties in nicely with the debate raging on another thread discussing how a shocking number of journalists (should I put that in quotes?) never actually went to college.

There is also another discussion revolving around how John McCain -- a man who can vote on laws regulating the Internet itself -- has no idea how to use a computer!

What about the former head of FEMA Michael Brown? This guy was a salt of the earth workin' man who, uh, well, um, didn't have a fucking clue how to run an incredibly complex agency and a lot of innocent people paid the price for it.

I don't think voters are "stupid" so much as they are making a lot of fatal assumptions about people in power.

They are assuming (and can be forgiven for it) that if you're an elected politican that you actually are a smart person.

You would naturally assume that McCain would know how to operate a computer....or understand economics, or have a solid grasp of military strategy and tactics.

None of the assumptions are actually true.

Americans also assume (and can be forgiven for it) that if your a news anchor and pontificating about the days events that you actually have a degree in journalism and have a solid education in some of the topics (like economics and history) that you're lecturing the audience about. FOX viewers are the worst at assuming that Hannity and O'Reily must be smarter than they are because, well, they're on TV and we aren't.

I don't think voters are dumb so much as they are way, way waaaaaay to trusting that the people in power actually know what the fuck their talking about. So they end of deferring to them when they should be questioning them.

Instead of deffering to Bush and Cheney on their Iraq strategy -- they should have been questioned. But both the voters and the journalists just ASSUMED that, well, these guys must know more than we do so we better go along.

Even today as President Bush is crashing to the ground in flames -- there are still people who insist Bush must be a "military genius" and totally support him using the logic of: he's President therefore he must be really, really smart and therefore I must defer my judgement to his!

News flash: there is no IQ test to be President.

I don't think this is a question of intelligence or education level of the voters so much as a case of making fatal assumption about the people in positions of authority (be it journalism or politics or running a company)

Take Sen. James Inhofe.

No one knew who the hell this guy was prior to his making some outlandish comments regarding global warming. We knew he was elected and we just ASSUMED he was a resonably intelligent man. Why wouldn't we assume that? Why wouldn't you assume that the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works wasn't intelligent??

And yet he argued that the current wave of unprecedented warming is due to “natural changes such as the sun being warm.” and “God’s still up there!"

Is this a case of voters being "stupid" or just makign the fatal assumption that politicans in extremely high offices are intelligent enough to be there?

Unfortunately we never really know until after the fact just how idiotic these people are.

We don't know the CEO's are idiots (or croooks) until AFTER Enron.

We don't know the politicans are idiots until after they declare their entire military strategy for Iraq boils down to: dude, it'll just magically work out! Trust me!

I think Shenkman makes an interesting case. I understand that people have priorities in terms of who they support in politics. Some people support Obama only because he is black. Some people are behind McCain because he is a war hero. Some people voted for Bush because he is the guy they would want to have a beer with. And unfortunately, the discussion ends there.

If the level of discourse was raised to where people could debate about relevant issues, American voters would be able to make a better assessment of the political sphere. It is too easy to blame the media, education, politicians and corporations all the time. It is true that in this money-driven world, information will be filtered, dissected, downplayed, and sometimes ignored. However, people who do care should take responsibility and seek out that information or at least get different perspectives on the matter and make their own decision.

The problem is that most people don't. They don't care to know. Sometimes even when their livelihood is at stake. Ignorance is bliss but in this day and age, people have no excuse for being so ignorant.

How many actually read the contents of the link associated with this?

I would not say they are "stupid" but I can certainly say they are "misinformed."

I wouldn't go as far as saying stupid, but we definitely lack the ability to make decisions based on something substantial as opposed to, how cute they are, color of their skin, what you saw on tv, etc. But this attitude is only a microcosm of our xenophobia in general. For the most part, Americans only care for people who fit their views, wether it be international or right across the street...

Even if voters are "smart" and know all the facts they can still be misled. I don't think this necessarily makes them stupid.

In 2000 Bush ran as a moderate fiscal conservative who seemed really, really reluctant to get involved in nation-building or committing troops to foreign countries. He was a uniter, not a divider!

Many really smart voters who have memorized the entire contents of the Constitution and can name all the signers of the Declaration of Independence (in alaphabetical order!) voted for Bush and then....fuck! Turns out the facts they were presented with were not true. Bush was, basically, none of the things he said he was.

And then what happens when these smart voters come to believe that Bush's military strategy in Iraq is illogical and unworkable, but then he gives a Press Confence implying he and his Generals have developed a "double top secret" plan to stabalize Iraq and withdraw within 6 months because the insurgency is in it's last gasps? What do you do then? You have the "facts" he gave you, but are they accurate? Are they true?

So you consult the talking heads and newspapers. Judith Miller is insisting that Iraq still has stockpiles of nuclear weapons and the insurgents are days away from discovering them. Is this a fact? Is it true? Does she know what she's talking about? Another new anchor says it's all false? Is he telling the truth? Whose telling the truth and who isn't?

How is even a smart voter supposed to figure out what's true when everyone in positions of authority is saying something contradictory?

And is it really resonable to demand voters be expert on all things? We've already determined that even if you DID know the complete bio of every member of Congress you'd still cast the wrong vote in 2000 because the guy misled you about his true intentions once in office.

Voters are in an almost untenable sitatution because they're never going to know ALL the facts until after it's all over.

It's only after the fact that we know Bush lied about Iraq's WMD's and their connection to 9/11.

It's only after the fact (after the 2000 debacle) that we know Bush is a sumbitch with a god complex who wanted to invade Iraq within the first month of his taking office.

It's only after the fact that we know Judy Miller was full of shit on her WMD stories.

So I take contention with placing the burden on the voters because even if they are really, really smart by the book authors definition and even if they made a major effort to investigate and verify the facts on their own -- they are still going to come up with insufficent information.

We as a voting public are 'the people.' If we don't call the shots, then somebody else just will have to step in to fill the vacuum. And that's just what happens.

The vacuum is filled with elitists who do give a shit. Trouble is, they almost always give a shit about something that isn't in 'the people's best interests. Things like tax loopholes, securing oil and mineral rights, downsizing, globalization and trickle down economics.

And now, endless war.

We, the people, have a responsibility to run this nation. As a people we are not answering to that responsibility. Yes, it takes brains and time to learn how to write your congressmen -- and compose a thoughtful message. But we just don't do it.

But even worse, I am totally uncomfortable with an American public that would be so incredibly fear motivated as to play into the hands of the tricksters in power. And the tricksters to come.

If we have a million heads like you Jahbini, I think we can get the work done just fine!

No one motivates them to care. They just want what they can get and once something hinders their WANTS they start caring. But once that's fix they go right back to not caring.

Apathy at work.

Perhaps the American voter is waking up a bit. If you weren't insulted by the flag pin "debate," then you weren't paying attention. How many newspaper column inches have talked about the ACTUAL ISSUES the candidates are campaigning on? And how many talk about what they're wearing, who cheered for them, or what age group and race and gender should or did vote for which in which exit poll? Seriously. They're not telling you the information you should be asking for!

Everybody likes to think they are so smart and everyone else is so stupid. This book looks like another I am right and you are wrong rant. If you do not like the way an election turns out, you want to label the voters as stupid. Americans are smart and that is why we are #1!

Personally, I enjoyed watching rick on the daily show with jon stewart. to quote stewart..

"Americans are defined as people willing to be involved in the pursuit of happiness and ignorance is bliss. Therefore, the founding fathers have put us on this path. We are pursuing ignorance to get to that happiness. Check mate."

and to quote shenkmans quote from ambrose bierce...

"War is God's way of teaching Americans geography."

so sad. so true.

Well, alot ofAmericans would to let Bush contine...then again, so would all of us...everyone should've stopped him at all costs!

I'm British, and I have to admit out of all that I could only find Iraq on the map, read a newspaper daily in that age range and I did'nt blame Saddam Hussain fo 9/11. So I myself am also pretty stupid, while I am also sad to sayalotof people I personally know over here know alot less then me! You're not alone! But the less reasuring on that thing is, we're all doomed in that case!

American politics founded in myths? And other countries politics aren't? At least we can vote for our executive officer unlike some countries. Then there was that time extreme rightwinger (and possible holocaust denier) Le Pen came close to winning the presidency in France. How stupid were the voters there?

I get the point of the author but I find myself rolling my eyes at these so-called statistics. I think people need to look harder at these surverys and their results. It's interesting that he uses the word myth to describe people's political views when he himself subscribes to these "cherished" myths of American stupidity in the form of dubious stats.

I wish people would put more thought into these stats rather taking them verbatim as the quote truth unquote.

Personally I think the main problem with American politics in concern with the general populance is severe overwhelming apathy rather than ignorance.