|
Edwird -> RE: Trump's Appeal: to authoritarianism? (6/7/2016 10:44:34 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: PeonForHer
"If I asked you what most defines Donald Trump supporters, what would you say? They’re white? They’re poor? They’re uneducated?
You’d be wrong.
In fact, I’ve found a single statistically significant variable predicts whether a voter supports Trump—and it’s not race, income or education levels: It’s authoritarianism.
That’s right, Trump’s electoral strength—and his staying power—have been buoyed, above all, by Americans with authoritarian inclinations. And because of the prevalence of authoritarians in the American electorate, among Democrats as well as Republicans, it’s very possible that Trump’s fan base will continue to grow.
My finding is the result of a national poll I conducted in the last five days of December under the auspices of the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, sampling 1,800 registered voters across the country and the political spectrum. Running a standard statistical analysis, I found that education, income, gender, age, ideology and religiosity had no significant bearing on a Republican voter’s preferred candidate. Only two of the variables I looked at were statistically significant: authoritarianism, followed by fear of terrorism, though the former was far more significant than the latter."
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/01/donald-trump-2016-authoritarian-213533
Is this really what Trump's appeal is all about? If so, where does this authoritarian characteristic come from? What, in the American political culture, produces it? Educate this non-American, if you will ....
quote:
Is this really what Trump's appeal is all about?
Is it? Do you believe everything you read in the papers?
I absolutely appreciate all the work you've put into your education, but i hope you appreciate the same effort here.
I've taken the required statistics class for my major, and after seeing the details, I could never take a poll of 1,800 people as being representative of what a country of 312 million people "think." I know all about the Z scores, the margin for error vs. confidence level, etc. The Nielsen poll only accounts for those who watch TV many hours a day. There's a good reason they chose those people for that type of 'random sample.'
How many homeless were in that 'random sample' of 1,800? How many people completely politically apathetic were in that sample? A hint; only those who -chose to respond- were in that 'random sample.' The poll had whatever "statistical significance" unto itself, as suited the purpose, but an honest account of what 'Americans think' it most certainly is not. All the Z scores, confidence level, etc. only 'give probability' to some estimated outcome, but that -only- if it is a true random sample, which is in fact highly improbable in instances such as this.
But even assuming there might be some notion of authoritarianism existing 'too overly much' amongst a people, I would think that someone from a country that still serves under the Crown would much better be able to explain that particular phenomenon, as opposed to those who do not. You Canadians are welcome to chime in on that one too, as being under the Crown yourselves. (Oh! You have already. So constructive, as always.)
But ...
to get to the gist of it ...
I'll just get all the 'psychobabble' out here, and say that I think that some people who are 'out of control' lean way far in one direction or another. And no argument from me, the US has a bit more than the standard level of people out of control, even as I smack my head as to how many people can be so dull.
I can almost guarantee you, well more than half the people who voted for Reagan did this the night immediately before. Yes, not at all a scientific estimate, but what I saw with my own eyes had at least as much to do with understanding the world as what I learned at the uni.
What's going on? People unable to control themselves are screaming for someone else to just do that, possibly. Except when it interferes with their business, etc. Because they like to scream bloody murder at the least provocation or imposition as result thereby. Which inspires them to demand more authority.
In any case, ignoring the mediagopoly and their influence in all this (all the red herrings, all the misdirection, etc.) constitutes a somewhat less than scientific approach to the matter, to say the least. People can only go by what information they are given.
|
|
|
|
