Well this explains everthying about politics

[Truthmatters]

Case Studies by Issue
Photo ID
Much of the hue and cry about voter fraud is accompanied by calls for restrictive ID requirements, like laws requiring voters to show particular photo ID documents at the polls. Some of this may be a sincere, if mistaken, belief in the need for restrictive ID measures. But this clip from a May 17, 2007, Houston Chronicle article suggests another rationale:


Among Republicans it is an 'article of religious faith that voter fraud is causing us to lose elections,' [Royal] Masset[, former political director of the Republican Party of Texas,] said. He doesn't agree with that, but does believe that requiring photo IDs could cause enough of a dropoff in legitimate Democratic voting to add 3 percent to the Republican vote.

http://www.truthaboutfraud.org/case_studies_by_issue/

 

[JBeukema]

It gives conservative a whole new light doesnt it?

Not just conservatives, my partisan friend.

Those are the words of Arthur Koestler, as compiled with six other voices in [ame="http://www.amazon.com/God-That-Failed-Arthur-Koestler/dp/0231123957?tag=amaz98-20"]The God that Failed[/ame].

 

[B. Kidd]

In a similar vein:
Recently, while perusing Wikipedia, I came across a definition for 'Denialism'.

Denialism-"choosing to deny reality as an uncomfortable truth."
It goes on to list 5 tactics:
1)-"Conspiracy Theories"
2)-"Cherry-picking"
3)-"False Experts"
4)-"Moving the Goalpost"
5)-"Other Logical Fallacies", including
a.) "false analogy"
b.) "appeal to consequences"
c.) "straw man
d.) "red herring"

Of course, very few USMB members use these.......

 

[FA_Q2]

in a similar vein:
Recently, while perusing wikipedia, i came across a definition for 'denialism'.

Denialism-"choosing to deny reality as an uncomfortable truth."
it goes on to list 5 tactics:
1)-"conspiracy theories"
2)-"cherry-picking"
3)-"false experts"
4)-"moving the goalpost"
5)-"other logical fallacies", including
a.) "false analogy"
b.) "appeal to consequences"
c.) "straw man
d.) "red herring"

of course, very few usmb members use these.......

lol

 

[Cecilie1200]

"Facts" are slippery things.
Iran is working on a nuclear bomb. THis is fact.
Iran has threatened Israel's existence. This is also fact.
Obama's response has been to set deadlines for Iran to talk. They have ignored or mocked every one of them. These are all facts.
The natural conclusion ought to be that Obama's policy here is a failure. But someone else will say the natural conclusion is we haven't dangled the right carrot just yet. These are completely opposite conclusions from the same facts.

I don't think it helps much that we live in a world where we're inundated with facts, pseudo-facts, and statistics every day, more than we could ever possibly hope to process. It makes it too easy for people to simply assume that anything they're hearing that's contrary to the worldview they wish to perpetuate is merely "one side of the argument", and that there MUST be other facts out there which support their position and which they simply haven't found yet.

 

[Cecilie1200]

The only way to deal with it is to keep to the facts yourself.

Because some are emotion driven doesnt mean you have to join them.

It gives conservative a whole new light doesnt it?

They like to conserve what used to be instead of being willing to move forward with new information.

This is why they hate education and call educated people elitists. Its why they hate science and try to rewrite history all day long. They are desperate to not change what they believe no matter what the evidence says.

I find it kind of fascinating how many people read the OP and immediately said, "That's exactly right! That's just what people who disagree with me are like!", thus proving the study's point themselves.

 

[Cecilie1200]

The Truth About Fraud



Two New Reports:


•An analysis of more than 250 claims of fraud in the Supreme Court's photo ID case
◦Finding not one proven case of a fraudulent vote that the challenged law could prevent
◦Exposing false assertions that photo ID is required for common activities

•The Truth About Voter Fraud, examining inflated claims of voter fraud nationwide
◦Debunking claims of double voting, dead voters, and more

See more about the link between voter fraud and restrictive ID rules here and here.

Are you aware that this thread is not about voter fraud, and that you are hijacking it to proselytize about your personal obsession, not to mention boring a lot of people out of their socks?

If you want to scream about voter fraud, please go to a thread about voter fraud and use THAT as your soapbox.

 

[FA_Q2]

Recently, a few political scientists have begun to discover a human tendency deeply discouraging to anyone with faith in the power of information. It’s this: Facts don’t necessarily have the power to change our minds. In fact, quite the opposite. In a series of studies in 2005 and 2006, researchers at the University of Michigan found that when misinformed people, particularly political partisans, were exposed to corrected facts in news stories, they rarely changed their minds. In fact, they often became even more strongly set in their beliefs. Facts, they found, were not curing misinformation. Like an underpowered antibiotic, facts could actually make misinformation even stronger.

(emphasis added)
How facts backfire - The Boston Globe

Somehow this does not surprise me. There is a small caveat to this though, the study seems to leave out the long term. Some of this may come to the fact that people take years building up their beliefs and political convictions. You are not going to take a single piece of info and then change someone's world view. Given time and continued exposure I believe that the facts would win out. The problem still remains though that facts can be interpreted differently and that will never go away.

 

[B. Kidd]

in a similar vein:
Recently, while perusing wikipedia, i came across a definition for 'denialism'.

Denialism-"choosing to deny reality as an uncomfortable truth."
it goes on to list 5 tactics:
1)-"conspiracy theories"
2)-"cherry-picking"
3)-"false experts"
4)-"moving the goalpost"
5)-"other logical fallacies", including
a.) "false analogy"
b.) "appeal to consequences"
c.) "straw man
d.) "red herring"

of course, very few usmb members use these.......

lol

What you put in bold black type, was sarcasm, genius.

 

[FA_Q2]

in a similar vein:
Recently, while perusing wikipedia, i came across a definition for 'denialism'.

Denialism-"choosing to deny reality as an uncomfortable truth."
it goes on to list 5 tactics:
1)-"conspiracy theories"
2)-"cherry-picking"
3)-"false experts"
4)-"moving the goalpost"
5)-"other logical fallacies", including
a.) "false analogy"
b.) "appeal to consequences"
c.) "straw man
d.) "red herring"

of course, very few usmb members use these.......

lol

What you put in bold black type, was sarcasm, genius.

Yea, I know. That is why I laughed, it was funny... what did you think I was laughing at?

Is it wrong of me to enjoy your barb?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Recently, a few political scientists have begun to discover a human tendency deeply discouraging to anyone with faith in the power of information. It’s this: Facts don’t necessarily have the power to change our minds. In fact, quite the opposite. In a series of studies in 2005 and 2006, researchers at the University of Michigan found that when misinformed people, particularly political partisans, were exposed to corrected facts in news stories, they rarely changed their minds. In fact, they often became even more strongly set in their beliefs. Facts, they found, were not curing misinformation. Like an underpowered antibiotic, facts could actually make misinformation even stronger.

(emphasis added)
How facts backfire - The Boston Globe

Why did they do this study? This has been known for ages.

I always learned you never to ask anyone in a group an opinion, or to take a stand before you lay out a case. Once an opinion or a stand is taken, it is almost impossible to move the person.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Yeah I read that, too.

Explains much about why places like these never reach consensus, doesn't it?

This is why I am so disgusted by partisans.

Once they've formed an opinion, no amount of evidence contrary to their POV seems to matter.

It's like people want simplicity and certainty so much that they'll filter out anything that challenges them to think beyond their world view.

Partisanship gets a bad rap. It has it's place in the system.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

"Facts" are slippery things.
Iran is working on a nuclear bomb. THis is fact.
Iran has threatened Israel's existence. This is also fact.
Obama's response has been to set deadlines for Iran to talk. They have ignored or mocked every one of them. These are all facts.
The natural conclusion ought to be that Obama's policy here is a failure. But someone else will say the natural conclusion is we haven't dangled the right carrot just yet. These are completely opposite conclusions from the same facts.

The facts are you have taken a snap shot in time and ignored the ongoing process.

Fact: The past efforts are failures.

Fact: Failures often lead to success later on.

Fact: A policy will not always bear fruit in the beginning.

Fact: You have taken facts and spun them into a bogus argument concerning facts, which are objective pieces of info/data, and natural conclusions, which by themselves are subjective.

Your premise about a 'natural conclusion' and what it is or should be, is an opinion and not fact.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The only way to deal with it is to keep to the facts yourself.

Because some are emotion driven doesnt mean you have to join them.

It gives conservative a whole new light doesnt it?

They like to conserve what used to be instead of being willing to move forward with new information.

This is why they hate education and call educated people elitists. Its why they hate science and try to rewrite history all day long. They are desperate to not change what they believe no matter what the evidence says.

I have no idea how to even respond to this post.

 

[Cecilie1200]

The only way to deal with it is to keep to the facts yourself.

Because some are emotion driven doesnt mean you have to join them.

It gives conservative a whole new light doesnt it?

They like to conserve what used to be instead of being willing to move forward with new information.

This is why they hate education and call educated people elitists. Its why they hate science and try to rewrite history all day long. They are desperate to not change what they believe no matter what the evidence says.

I have no idea how to even respond to this post.

Do what the rest of us do with TruthMatters, and laugh your ass off.

 

[daveman]

The only way to deal with it is to keep to the facts yourself.

Because some are emotion driven doesnt mean you have to join them.

It gives conservative a whole new light doesnt it?

They like to conserve what used to be instead of being willing to move forward with new information.

This is why they hate education and call educated people elitists. Its why they hate science and try to rewrite history all day long. They are desperate to not change what they believe no matter what the evidence says.

Your prejudice is proof of nothing but that you're prejudiced.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Recently, a few political scientists have begun to discover a human tendency deeply discouraging to anyone with faith in the power of information. It’s this: Facts don’t necessarily have the power to change our minds. In fact, quite the opposite. In a series of studies in 2005 and 2006, researchers at the University of Michigan found that when misinformed people, particularly political partisans, were exposed to corrected facts in news stories, they rarely changed their minds. In fact, they often became even more strongly set in their beliefs. Facts, they found, were not curing misinformation. Like an underpowered antibiotic, facts could actually make misinformation even stronger.

(emphasis added)
How facts backfire - The Boston Globe

Pretty funny when you think about it.



“Area Man Passionate Defender Of What He Imagines Constitution To Be,” read a recent Onion headline. Like the best satire, this nasty little gem elicits a laugh, which is then promptly muffled by the queasy feeling of recognition. The last five decades of political science have definitively established that most modern-day Americans lack even a basic understanding of how their country works. In 1996, Princeton University’s Larry M. Bartels argued, “the political ignorance of the American voter is one of the best documented data in political science.”

On its own, this might not be a problem: People ignorant of the facts could simply choose not to vote. But instead, it appears that misinformed people often have some of the strongest political opinions.

Dave, will I dream?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Recently, a few political scientists have begun to discover a human tendency deeply discouraging to anyone with faith in the power of information. It’s this: Facts don’t necessarily have the power to change our minds. In fact, quite the opposite. In a series of studies in 2005 and 2006, researchers at the University of Michigan found that when misinformed people, particularly political partisans, were exposed to corrected facts in news stories, they rarely changed their minds. In fact, they often became even more strongly set in their beliefs. Facts, they found, were not curing misinformation. Like an underpowered antibiotic, facts could actually make misinformation even stronger.

(emphasis added)
How facts backfire - The Boston Globe

What is striking is how liberals vs conservatives fared.


In 2005, amid the strident calls for better media fact-checking in the wake of the Iraq war, Michigan’s Nyhan and a colleague devised an experiment in which participants were given mock news stories, each of which contained a provably false, though nonetheless widespread, claim made by a political figure: that there were WMDs found in Iraq (there weren’t), that the Bush tax cuts increased government revenues (revenues actually fell), and that the Bush administration imposed a total ban on stem cell research (only certain federal funding was restricted). Nyhan inserted a clear, direct correction after each piece of misinformation, and then measured the study participants to see if the correction took.

For the most part, it didn’t. The participants who self-identified as conservative believed the misinformation on WMD and taxes even more strongly after being given the correction. With those two issues, the more strongly the participant cared about the topic — a factor known as salience — the stronger the backfire. The effect was slightly different on self-identified liberals: When they read corrected stories about stem cells, the corrections didn’t backfire, but the readers did still ignore the inconvenient fact that the Bush administration’s restrictions weren’t total.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

But researchers are working on it. One avenue may involve self-esteem. Nyhan worked on one study in which he showed that people who were given a self-affirmation exercise were more likely to consider new information than people who had not. In other words, if you feel good about yourself, you’ll listen — and if you feel insecure or threatened, you won’t. This would also explain why demagogues benefit from keeping people agitated. The more threatened people feel, the less likely they are to listen to dissenting opinions, and the more easily controlled they are. -How facts backfire - The Boston Globe

Dave, do you feel threatened by anything?

 

[Richard-H]

I suspect that the reason why so many people hate facts - and often cling to the opposite opinion of what ever the facts prove is becuase of something I call the superiority complex.

The people who ignore facts or who oppose them are the people who can safely ignore them or oppose them.

Ignoring facts, i.e. reality, can be a very dangerous thing for some people depending on the situation.

People LOVE to ignore reality when they can afford to and love the fact that there are many people who suffer greatly when reality is ignored. They feel theat not being negatively affected by not acknowledging reality reminds themselves and everyone else that they are in a superior position in life.

At the same time they sadistically LOVE the fact that there are other people who suffer when reality is ignored.

This is why we have most of the wing nuts today. That really aren't that stupid. They just LOVE knowing that other people will suffer from their continued denial of reality, but not themselves.

They also get a royal kick out of pissing off all the people who champion reality and seeing how they can babble us with their bullshit.

When ya nail 'em down with facts and reality, they don't care, they just move on to the next 'do-gooder' and have fun pissing them off.