A question on a political theory.. how politically smart are you???
106025
It is a sound theory, but you need to fill some gaps.  \n\nThere is no direct causal relationship between R&D and consumer confidence.  But you can still make a connection by assuming that when government encourages or funds R&D, its results (say, gene therapy) gives public a sense of hope and progress, which in turn increases consumer confidence and improves economy. \n\nYour second statement is a generally true proposition.  Voters tend to re-elect the same president if the economy was good.  However, the most recent presidential election disproves that theory.  Economy is not the only or determining factors in presidential elections, but it’s an important one.
316743
Yes, but would any of us know which side we're on? Message boards and emails do not give a valid reflection of intelligence. In fact, there are some grammatical and spelling errors on your question. Does that mean you're stupid? Probably not.\n\nI think the idea is less than intelligent, but segregating by superiority/inferiority has been going on for centuries. Every heard of the Egyptians and the slaves? How about the Nazis? They liked the idea of the tags also, but they used stars...
11158
"Smart" is such a general word. He's not a literary genius. But if you ask me, you have to have some degree of "smarts" to get in the position he is now in. He didn't gain his presidency by luck. No matter what you think of him, he was "smart" enough to get elected. Whether you think the was by pretending to be someone he isn't or not--he has done something that only 43 other men have done in the last 200 years. \n\nSo has he pretended to be smart? I don't think so. I think he really is smart. Just not in ways people can agree on.
1177446
I believe your hypothesis is flawed. Do you watch the news, read the newspaper, read blogs, political books,etc? Yep, you must believe what you are hearing. Where do you live? Do you think that the news might be biased where you are? When have you last heard a BBC newscast, or watched Al-Jazzerah? \nWhat is your definition of Progressive? If it is the Teddy Roosevelt definition, then you adhere to a more classical conservative approach. If you are comparing yourself to modern liberals, then you just need to call yourself that.\nU.S. politics is not divided, just people don't care about the close similarities they share. Even most Political Scientists believe there is an increased volatility in the world democracies, but they ain't asking the right questions. \nInstead of trying to label yourself, why not ask yourself why you believe what you do, and how important those beliefs are.\nIf your definition is hoping for change, then no, conservatives and pregressives are exactly the same. why do you believe conservatives don't question thier leaders? Who do you think are conservatives leaders anyway? Do you think people currently in elected positions are conservative?\nI am not trying to be insulting, just when labels start getting thrown around, it narrows the scope of a question beyond any redeemable answer, and just becomes an opportunity to posture. If you really want to find answers, open up a bit more.
371567
I think it is meant to be a paradox.. you are putting two descriptions together that are contradictory...by saying "smart" and then saying "a-s-s," you are saying they are not smart at all..
601542
On the one hand, I applaud the concept of making every participate in our democracy.  No one should feel marginalized if they had a hand in electing their leader.\n\nOn the other hand, I am like a lot of the Founding Fathers who expressed severe doubts that the average person could make intelligent decisions.  I live in a typically middle class area where you would expect people would have the education and the interest in politics to understand the issues.  However, the amount of fallacious thinking I encounter is downright scary.\n\nI'd have to consider your idea further, but right now my gut tells me this: If someone isn't interested enough to vote of their own volition, how meaningful will making them put an "X" in Box-A, or Box-B ?  A lot of these people would know nothing about the candidates.  I think it would encourage candidates to "dumb down" their campaigns, and pander to certain groups.
988392
wy {why} is are govement so stuped?{stupid}\n\n    It seams {seems}like everone {every one} in govement {government} is stuped {stupid}. Wy{Why} did thay{they} git {get}allected {elected}? im {I'm} sick of it!\n Hope this helps you out!
1110600
Though I am not a liberal, I have found that wacko conservatives are more stubborn know it alls than are liberals. Personally, I think both are retarded, but that's just the opinion of a hard line moderate.
1084569
LOL!!  That's a great point, I hadn't read those statistics.  I guess it's 'cause the Lib's have made a smoke and mirror's campaign suggesting that they fight for the "working man", and since the vast majority of the population makes less then 70K per year, that's who the Dem's try to appeal to.  It makes them look good I suppose to bash people like me, who put themselves through school, worked hard, and now has a job well above the national average.  It's a snow job.  I've always thought that the major distinction between Dem's and Repubs is that Repubs believe it's the governments job to create and sustain a country where you can achieve happiness, while the Dem's of today believe its the governments job to try and provide it.  If you work towards achieving your own happiness, I think you often fall into a higher tax bracket because of your ambition and work ethic.  Good question, thanks!
1095657
Very perceptive grasshopper.  It is ridiculous, I think that Politics makes me nuts.  It goes all the way down to local government.  It is almost as soon as they get into office they forget about all the people and only care for the few. I hate to get started, you never know who's tapping into your conversations anymore: in the name of security we lose our voice.  You gotta say they have some slick moves.
450049
This is an interesting subject for sure. You may want to now or in the future take a political science class. It teaches you that in-fact, there are several very wealthy families in the U.S. who, with their power of money, can indeed be very persuasive in there political beliefs. It is great that you have an interest in this country and how it work. But don't forget, it is also the common people, who take the time to study and vote who also have a voice.
834012
Actually, it has.  Logic and reason have enhanced perspective.  When I was younger, I was supposed to accept the views of adults and peers at school because our teachers were trusted purveyors of information.  I'm glad I questioned authority.  I shed that democratic crap after personally finding each tenet wrong and empty of reason in a thorough examination of my life.  Liberal ideology supports egos, not real living.
935392
You're the self-employed democrat right?  Is it welfare or a mental disability that funding this kind of intelligence?  You just proved my point, darlin'.
1100053
This is funny, I'm sorry but it's SO true! Liberals think they are smart or "educated" and yet they are total fools! Very funny!
661725
Due to the fact that the president's intelligence quotient is 96, a bum on the street has a good chance of being smarter than our president.\n\nPatriotic Man:  How can you be so "smart" to say that you are more intelligent than someone you have never met when you are ridiculing Daniel for doing the same thing?  You are what me and Daniel in Wisconsin call a DUMBASS.
69787
To prove your point...they don't know crap.\n"Politically Stupid"
844821
Papacito gave good advice.\n\nThis is a school day!  What are you doing on the net?\n\nJ. Kerry warned you about your fate if you have a poor education.\n\nBut, on the flip side, G. Bush proved that you don't have to be smart...\n\nFor future voting reference: \n\nExamine your values.  Learn about the candidates and issues.  Try to weed out the "media spin".  Vote with your brain.