[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Gunman Ambushes Border Patrol Agents In Texas Amid Anti-ICE Rhetoric From Democrats Texas Flood Why America Built A Forest From Canada To Texas Tucker Carlson Interviews President of Iran Mosoud Pezeshkian PROOF Netanyahu Wants US To Fight His Wars RAPID CRUSTAL MOVEMENT DETECTED- Are the Unusual Earthquakes TRIGGER for MORE (in Japan and Italy) ? Google Bets Big On Nuclear Fusion Iran sets a world record by deporting 300,000 illegal refugees in 14 days Brazilian Women Soccer Players (in Bikinis) Incredible Skills Watch: Mexico City Protest Against American Ex-Pat 'Invasion' Turns Viole Kazakhstan Just BETRAYED Russia - Takes gunpowder out of Putin’s Hands Why CNN & Fareed Zakaria are Wrong About Iran and Trump Something Is Going Deeply WRONG In Russia 329 Rivers in China Exceed Flood Warnings, With 75,000 Dams in Critical Condition Command Of Russian Army 'Undermined' After 16 Of Putin's Generals Killed At War, UK Says Rickards: Superintelligence Will Never Arrive Which Countries Invest In The US The Most? The History of Barbecue ‘Pathetic’: Joe Biden tells another ‘tall tale’ during rare public appearance Lawsuit Reveals CDC Has ZERO Evidence Proving Vaccines Don't Cause Autism Trumps DOJ Reportedly Quietly Looking Into Criminal Charges Against Election Officials Volcanic Risk and Phreatic (Groundwater) eruptions at Campi Flegrei in Italy Russia Upgrades AGS-17 Automatic Grenade Launcher! They told us the chickenpox vaccine was no big deal—just a routine jab to “protect” kids from a mild childhood illness Pentagon creates new military border zone in Arizona For over 200 years neurological damage from vaccines has been noted and documented The killing of cardiologist in Gaza must be Indonesia's wake-up call Marandi: Israel Prepares Proxies for Next War with Iran? "Hitler Survived WW2 And I Brought Proof" Norman Ohler STUNS Joe Rogan CIA Finally Admits a Pyschological Warfare Agent from the Agency “Came into Contact” with Lee Harvey Oswald before JFK’s Assassination

Editorial
See other Editorial Articles

Title: Just Got a Republican Poll Call
Source: [None]
URL Source: [None]
Published: Nov 19, 2007
Author: me
Post Date: 2007-11-19 22:40:36 by tom007
Keywords: None
Views: 440
Comments: 30

Just got an automated phone poll in Colorado Springs a reliable Republican area. "If the pup primaries were held today how would you vote?

Press one for McCain, two for Juli (etc), three for (I forget) four for (I forget), five for undecided or other.

Ron Paul was not mentioned.

Seems the system is deciding for us. It was a form of advertising mascarading as a poll.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 12.

#1. To: tom007 (#0)

Tom, I read this article the other day and forgot you were in colorado - it might interest you. I saw it at tpmcafe.com

Colorado Springs and the Politics of Conformity By Cass Sunstein | bio What are the effects of the Internet on democracy? The answer depends, of course, on how people use the Internet. But let's begin with a possible clue, coming from a small experiment in democracy, held in Colorado in 2005.

About sixty American citizens were brought together and assembled into ten groups, each consisting of five or six people. Members of each group were asked to deliberate on three of the most controversial issues of the day: Should the United States sign an international treaty to combat global warming? Should states allow same-sex couples to enter into civil unions? Should employers engage in affirmative action by giving a preference to members of traditionally disadvantaged groups?

As the experiment was designed, the groups consisted of predominantly liberal or conservative members—with the liberal groups coming from Boulder, and the conservative groups from Colorado Springs. (The groups were not mixed together.) It is widely known that Boulder tends to be liberal and that Colorado Springs tends to be conservative. The groups were screened to ensure that their members conformed to these stereotypes. (For example, if people in Boulder liked Vice President Cheney, they were cordially excused from the experiment.) People were asked to state their opinions anonymously both before and after a period of group discussion, and also to try to reach a public verdict before the final anonymous statement. What was the effect of discussion?

The results were simple. In almost every group, members ended up with more extreme positions after they spoke with one another. Discussion made civil unions more popular among liberals; discussion made civil unions less popular among conservatives. Liberals favored an international treaty to control global warming before discussion; they favored it more strongly after discussion. Conservatives were neutral on that treaty before discussion; they strongly opposed it after discussion. Mildly favorable toward affirmative action before discussion, liberals became strongly favorable toward affirmative action after discussion. Firmly negative about affirmative action before discussion, conservatives became even more negative abou affirmative action after discussion.

Aside from increasing extremism, the experiment had an independent effect: it made both liberal groups and conservative groups significantly more homogeneous— and thus squelched diversity. Before members started to talk, many groups displayed a fair bit of internal disagreement. The disagreements were greatly reduced as a result of a mere fifteen-minute discussion. Even in their anonymous statements, group members showed far more consensus after discussion than before. It follows that discussion helped to widen the rift between liberals and conservatives on all three issues. Before discussion, some liberal groups were, on some issues, fairly close to some conservative groups. The result of discussion was to separate them far more sharply.

Before long, I will offer some speculations about why these effects occurred. For the moment, notice a simple fact. To the extent that geography, freedom of association, or the Internet allows people to sort themselves into groups of like- minded types, something like our Colorado experiment will be a common occurrence. In fact, the Internet is producing fascinating variations on that experiment every day.

It is not clear that anything should be done about the situation, and I am hardly contending that on balance, the Internet is bad for democracy. But it is clear that self-sorting, into groups of like-minded types, will often produce greater extremism -- and much reduce internal diversity.

kiki  posted on  2007-11-19   22:56:59 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

t effect: it made both liberal groups and conservative groups significantly more homogeneous— and thus squelched diversity. Before members started to talk, many groups displayed a fair bit of

This is an important concept.

During WWII a lot of psycologists were assigned to monitoring what was happening in the foxholes.

What they found was that, in pretty short order, the majority opinion of close bunched men became the total opinion of all the men.

Back then education was rotten, so informed critical opposition POV would have been few and far between IMO.

The real point was that most people will go along and even readily change their beliefs if the majority, or (more to the point, perhaps) a vocal minority, gain acceptance.

Pretty understandable - few want to buck the trend, and the trend is usually correct.

Not always, and the US Army saw how to use this information to control a violent bunch of rather uneducated folks - the army.

tom007  posted on  2007-11-19   23:12:06 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

This is an important concept.

it really is. I'm one of the handful of "bleeding heart liberals" here, I think. I used to spend my online time with people who had always thought just like me, but came to a realization that I learned more around people who were growing and changing just like me. I enjoy the *bush bashing* - I probably actually enjoy it more among people who once liked him and believed in him. it doesn't make me feel superior or self-righteous at all, I like to think we all learn from each other. I know I do. that's what was interesting to me about the experiment. if I only talk to people just like me, what do I learn? and more importantly, how do I validate my beliefs if they're never challenged?

kiki  posted on  2007-11-19   23:31:19 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

I'm one of the handful of "bleeding heart liberals" here, I think.

We should be more worried about one-way media like TV, film, radio, and Internet news. Forums rarely insulate one from outside influence.

buckeye  posted on  2007-11-20   0:05:58 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

#16. To: buckeye (#12)

We should be more worried about one-way media like TV, film, radio, and Internet news. Forums rarely insulate one from outside influence.

I agree. I know people who only get their *news* from fox. but I also know people who only get their *news* from freerepublic.

and I do wonder about them :)

kiki  posted on  2007-11-20 00:17:43 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]