k wrote:
] ] As the nation prepares to watch the presidential
] ] candidates debate foreign policy issues, a new
] ] PIPA-Knowledge Networks poll finds that Americans who
] ] plan to vote for President Bush have many incorrect
] ] assumptions about his foreign policy positions. Kerry
] ] supporters, on the other hand, are largely accurate in
] ] their assessments. The uncommitted also tend to
] ] misperceive Bush's positions, though to a smaller
] ] extent than Bush supporters, and to perceive Kerry's
] ] positions correctly.
]
] [ Framing, framing, framing, framing. Co-opt the language and
] you convince people despite facts. Luntz, Norquist and the
] network of conservative think tanks have worked for 30 years
] to set this up. These are the rewards they're reaping :
]
] "Majorities of Bush supporters incorrectly assumed that Bush
] favors including labor and environmental standards in trade
] agreements (84%), and the US being part of the Comprehensive
] Test Ban Treaty (69%), the International Criminal Court (66%),
] the treaty banning land mines (72%), and the Kyoto Treaty on
] global warming (51%). "
]
] -k]

Do you think that people backing Bush are just stupider than the people backing Kerry? Either that or they have a willful disregard for facts.

Mike the Usurper wrote:
] Do you think that people backing Bush are just stupider than
] the people backing Kerry? Either that or they have a willful
] disregard for facts.

[ I think the following :

1. Kerry supporters are more likely to be traditional liberals, who tend to believe in the primacy of facts, of logical debate and reason as the guide people use for identifying who to vote for. Thus, such people are more likely to follow the news, investigate the truth, and learn the facts.

2. Bush supporters fall into two groups :
a. Those who understand and are onboard with the actual agenda of the right, who believe in it's conceptual model (which George Lakoff calls the "strict father" model) and who will do what it takes to achieve the goals of moral supremacy which they hold most dear. These people are not stupid, but know how to show unity, accept small losses in pursuit of bigger wins, and drive the overall policy forward.
b. normal people whose mental frameworks are such that the right has been able to coopt their support on the basis of appealing to established frames, without regard to the factual content. I've been reading a lot about this lately, and it's all very well presented. Frames are difficult to change, once established, no matter how many facts are presented. Thus, they respond to questions with their knowledge of the frame which the right has installed, independent of the facts.

Obviously there are clueless folks on both sides and extremely well informed folks on both sides, but I think the above explains why there's a discrepancy. It's not stupidity, though I think it's safe to call it a lack of intellectual curiosity or skepticism. The right has been developing a very disciplined message machine for 30 years, and these stats are precicely the result.

I read an article some months ago which pointed out the the left is constantly in a tizzy about how the right can succeed despite a clear disregard for truth or fact. We want to believe that people will see the truth, reason it's import, and make the right decision, and the fact that they don't, acting and voting against their self interest, drives us nuts. At that time, in that article, i don't recall it making any explanation as to why this is the case, but it did say that we need quit bitching and learn to understand that facts simply DO NOT convince most people. What the websites and articles i've read since say, and which George Lakoff's book puts into clear form, is that the problem is one of framing the issues, linguistic control, and these tactics rely on the fact that people vote their identity, not their rational mind. -k]

k wrote:
] ] As the nation prepares to watch the presidential
] ] candidates debate foreign policy issues, a new
] ] PIPA-Knowledge Networks poll finds that Americans who
] ] plan to vote for President Bush have many incorrect
] ] assumptions about his foreign policy positions. Kerry
] ] supporters, on the other hand, are largely accurate in
] ] their assessments. The uncommitted also tend to
] ] misperceive Bush's positions, though to a smaller
] ] extent than Bush supporters, and to perceive Kerry's
] ] positions correctly.
]
] [ Framing, framing, framing, framing. Co-opt the language and
] you convince people despite facts. Luntz, Norquist and the
] network of conservative think tanks have worked for 30 years
] to set this up. These are the rewards they're reaping :
]
] "Majorities of Bush supporters incorrectly assumed that Bush
] favors including labor and environmental standards in trade
] agreements (84%), and the US being part of the Comprehensive
] Test Ban Treaty (69%), the International Criminal Court (66%),
] the treaty banning land mines (72%), and the Kyoto Treaty on
] global warming (51%). "

It may come as a shock to you, but I am glad that Bush doens't favor these things. Now, tell me about something that Kerry does favor and why he does and when he first gained that conviction?
]
] -k]