Happy Constitution Day! Annenberg Annual Civics Survey

[fredtoast]

(09-21-2018, 12:12 PM)Nately120 Wrote: I will say that there might be a connection between Americans not knowing much about the government and how it works and deciding that "has no political experience" is the best reason to elect someone to be president.  We don't know anything about the government, other than it is crappy and it sucks so we elected a guy who proudly said he isn't a politician and our system sucks.

Go figure.

I wish there was such a thing as "double rep".

This is dead on accurate.

[fredtoast]

(09-21-2018, 12:42 PM)Dill Wrote: But people were also "helped" to this conclusion by other people who stood to gain from the chaos and anti-government fervor.

Could it be possible that the same people who benefit from the ignorance of the general population are the same ones that claim public school teachers are lazy over paid bums and that colleges are full of ignorant liberals who don't know anything about the "real world"?

[Dill]

(09-21-2018, 01:19 PM)PhilHos Wrote: I get what you're saying, but what I'm asking is if the difference in the people not knowing the names of the 3 branches versus knowing there's 3 branches is taken into account. People may not know that the 3 are called Executive, Legislative, and Judicial, but they may know there's the president, Congress (and even the 2 separate branches of congress, too!), and the Supreme Court without knowing the technical term for each branch. Sure, there may be more people that don't know that there are 3 branches than those who know but can't name them, but I'm just curious as to if that difference is taken into account.

Here are the two questions asked in the 2018 survey. Notice the first TELLS people there are three branches. So there is no "how many" question at all.  The follow up question does not appear in the 2017 survey.  These two could be condensed into one, better worded question. I wish they had asked "how many branches of government are there?" rather than just give that away. That would have been very useful to know.


Do you happen to know any of the three branches of government?


Would you mind naming any of them (the three branches of government)?

[*PhilHos*]

(09-21-2018, 02:42 PM)Dill Wrote: Here are the two questions asked in the 2018 survey. Notice the first TELLS people there are three branches. So there is no "how many" question at all.  The follow up question does not appear in the 2017 survey.  These two could be condensed into one, better worded question. I wish they had asked "how many branches of government are there?" rather than just give that away. That would have been very useful to know.


Do you happen to know any of the three branches of government?


Would you mind naming any of them (the three branches of government)?

For those that didn't answer the 2nd question specifically "Executive, Legislative, and Judicial": if they answered something akin to "president, congress, and Supreme Court" that counted as them knowing, correct?

[Belsnickel]

(09-21-2018, 04:17 PM)PhilHos Wrote: For those that didn't answer the 2nd question specifically "Executive, Legislative, and Judicial": if they answered something akin to "president, congress, and Supreme Court" that counted as them knowing, correct?

You're going to make us go digging into methodology.

That's okay, my motto in life is "keep calm and do statistics."

Edit: Nothing in the appendix about that. Now I'm wondering if I should email the folks that did this. I kind of want that answer, myself.

[Dill]

(09-21-2018, 05:16 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: You're going to make us go digging into methodology.

That's okay, my motto in life is "keep calm and do statistics."

Edit: Nothing in the appendix about that. Now I'm wondering if I should email the folks that did this. I kind of want that answer, myself.

While you are at it, remind them that different wording cannot hide the redundancy of two questions likely to produce substantially the same answers.

[Dill]

(09-21-2018, 04:17 PM)PhilHos Wrote: For those that didn't answer the 2nd question specifically "Executive, Legislative, and Judicial": if they answered something akin to "president, congress, and Supreme Court" that counted as them knowing, correct?

We cannot tell from their explanation of their methodology. My guess is that in a telephone interview, they would let those answers fly, though the imprecision is hardly comforting (e.g., the Judicial Branch is not just the Supreme Court).

Can't see this happening:  "Congress?"  "NO!! WRONG! Sorry sir. It's the EXECUTIVE BRANCH!!!"  

[fredtoast]

(09-21-2018, 02:42 PM)Dill Wrote: Do you happen to know any of the three branches of government?


Would you mind naming any of them (the three branches of government)?

I wonder how many people answered these questions "yes" or "no"?

[*bfine32*]

Surely all these folks complained about an uneducated voting populace, would never point to popular election being a better method of electing POTUS than the Electoral College, would they?

[Belsnickel]

(09-21-2018, 06:41 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Surely all these folks complained about an uneducated voting populace, would never point to popular election being a better method of electing POTUS than the Electoral College, would they?

Why? We are wanting a more informed and engaged electorate. We are advocating for a more democratic society, which a popular election for POTUS moves towards.

[*bfine32*]

(09-21-2018, 07:47 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Why? We are wanting a more informed and engaged electorate. We are advocating for a more democratic society, which a popular election for POTUS moves towards.

Well you can want all you want but as I said; some folks have neither the time or inclination to take a refresher civics class. Knowing the names of the 3 branches of government are not going to change that. I want every able bodied American to serve in his/her county's military for a minimum of 2 years, but some are not inclined to do so. 

It just struck me as funny that the same people moaning about an ill-informed population were the same ones cheering the popular vote results; given the original purpose of the EC

[Belsnickel]

(09-21-2018, 08:14 PM)bfine32 Wrote: It just struck me as funny that the same people moaning about an ill-informed population were the same ones cheering the popular vote results; given the original purpose of the EC

If the EC was still set up in the way it was designed, then I might have less of a problem with it. Since the states have decided to allocate electors in the way they have, the EC doesn't buffer the office of POTUS from the uninformed. If anything, it likely gives more weight to the uninformed voters than a nationwide popular election would*.


*This is merely me stating a hypothesis and I am unaware of any studies to back this up. Though this prospect does interest me and I'm probably going to look for this at some point.

[*bfine32*]

(09-21-2018, 08:21 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: If the EC was still set up in the way it was designed, then I might have less of a problem with it. Since the states have decided to allocate electors in the way they have, the EC doesn't buffer the office of POTUS from the uninformed. If anything, it likely gives more weight to the uninformed voters than a nationwide popular election would*.


*This is merely me stating a hypothesis and I am unaware of any studies to back this up. Though this prospect does interest me and I'm probably going to look for this at some point.

...and there in-lies the question; uninformed about what?

The name of the 3 branches of government

How a candidate's economic policies will affect local and global economy

The veto powers of POTUS

For everything anyone suggests we should educate the populace on when it comes to civics, I can name 5 you omit. The best we can do is hope that those that are educated on the process have a sliver of honesty. Americans are going to vote for who thinks the most like them and no class on the 15th Amendment is going to change that.

The whole thread just stinks of sour grapes and condescension.. The person I didn't want elected got elected. Now that I've played out the popular vote stance, let's go wit the population is ignorant, because if they were informed they would have voted like I wanted them to.  

[Belsnickel]

(09-19-2018, 10:44 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: The level of knowledge is disturbing.

That being said, anyone else have an issue with this sentence from the report?

Missed this earlier. That is actually the correct word choice. The noun "majority" is what is being for the word "is". Majority is singular. It does feel clunky, but it is correct.

[Belsnickel]

(09-21-2018, 08:36 PM)bfine32 Wrote: For everything anyone suggests we should educate the populace on when it comes to civics, I can name 5 you omit. The best we can do is hope that those that are educated on the process have a sliver of honesty. Americans are going to vote for who thinks the most like them and no class on the 15th Amendment is going to change that.

I don't disagree that there is a lot more out there than just what is covered by this survey. I do, though, disagree with that last statement. Americans are going to vote for the person that tells them what they want to hear. All people latch onto is small catch phrases. Most voters couldn't tell you anything about the positions of a politician other than snippets heard from the television, which doesn't say anything about their actual agenda.

(09-21-2018, 08:36 PM)bfine32 Wrote: The whole thread just stinks of sour grapes and condescension.. The person I didn't want elected got elected. Now that I've played out the popular vote stance, let's go wit the population is ignorant, because if they were informed they would have voted like I wanted them to.  

Well, some of us are focusing on this in a general way and not just about one election. Some of us have been complaining about this for years. The study has been conducted for over a decade, for instance, because there is a concern about an uninformed electorate.

[*bfine32*]

(09-21-2018, 08:54 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Well, some of us are focusing on this in a general way and not just about one election. Some of us have been complaining about this for years. The study has been conducted for over a decade, for instance, because there is a concern about an uninformed electorate.

Well then, you should have called the OP out with his bold font words that started the thread. 

As to your last: uninformed about what?

[GMDino]

(09-21-2018, 09:43 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Well then, you should have called the OP out with his bold font words that started the thread. 

As to your last: uninformed about what?

Do you scream out loud wherever you are when someone mentions the name "Trump" and then post anything negative...even if it isn't directed as something Trump did?  Or do you sit there and smolder silently?

Do you have a sign in front of you that says "I am NOT always defending Trump!" just to make yourself believe it?

Inquiring minds want to know! 

[*bfine32*]

(09-21-2018, 10:02 PM)GMDino Wrote: Do you scream out loud wherever you are when someone mentions the name "Trump" and then post anything negative...even if it isn't directed as something Trump did?  Or do you sit there and smolder silently?

Do you have a sign in front of you that says "I am NOT always defending Trump!" just to make yourself believe it?

Inquiring minds want to know! 

Nah, I usually just laugh at those that are obsessed about Trump, much like I do you and your alt.

I simply brought up to Matt that his assertion that this is "bigger than Trump" should have motivated him to shutdown the OP's partisan bold remarks that started the thread.

Once again, please point to anything I've done in this thread to defend Trump. I'm gonna bet you cannot. 

[GMDino]

(09-21-2018, 10:12 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Nah, I usually just laugh at those that are obsessed about Trump,

I take your word for it.

(09-21-2018, 10:12 PM)bfine32 Wrote: much like I do you and your alt.

You do know that that's bad form around here...right? But "deaf ears" and all...

(09-21-2018, 10:12 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I simply brought up to Matt that his assertion that this is "bigger than Trump" should have motivated him to shutdown the OP's partisan bold remarks that started the thread.

Except the OP simply stated the truth that the results are during the "Trump era". A reflection of people during that era...not on Trump himself.

(09-21-2018, 10:12 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Once again, please point to anything I've done in this thread to defend Trump. I'm gonna bet you cannot. 

Your comments on the popular vote?

(09-21-2018, 06:41 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Surely all these folks complained about an uneducated voting populace, would never point to popular election being a better method of electing POTUS than the Electoral College, would they?

(09-21-2018, 08:14 PM)bfine32 Wrote: It just struck me as funny that the same people moaning about an ill-informed population were the same ones cheering the popular vote results; given the original purpose of the EC

And then there's this beauty:

(09-21-2018, 08:36 PM)bfine32 Wrote: The whole thread just stinks of sour grapes and condescension.. The person I didn't want elected got elected. Now that I've played out the popular vote stance, let's go wit the population is ignorant, because if they were informed they would have voted like I wanted them to.  

A general conversation about voters and their lack of civics knowledge was taken, by you, as an attack on Trump because he won the last election.

You said that. No one else did.

(09-21-2018, 10:12 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Once again, please point to anything I've done in this thread to defend Trump. I'm gonna bet you cannot. 

You lose.

[NATI BENGALS]

(09-20-2018, 08:05 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: While they do, it's not just the working poor, or who we often perceive as the uninformed. Often, the more knowledgeable a person is of this sort of thing, the more partisan they become. The idea that a large electorate of informed voters provides the most democratic, responsive, representative government is based on faulty theories that just don't pan out in reality.

I disagree. 

May be drunk.. Because whiskey is good.

Ok absolutely the more informed a person is the more partisan they become. I learn more about a candidate i like or dislike them more.

A large electorate of informed voters is everything i want. And represents every thing i want my country to be. You dont have to know military and national security secrets to be an informed electorate imo.