Comments on: ELITIST SNOB DISSES THE AMERICAN VOTER

By: DoorHold

DoorHold — Tue, 29 May 2007 22:05:09 +0000

Now that I no I are two ignrant 2 vote, do the book say I shuld or shuld not vote nxt thyme? Cain’t reed no book sew let me no.

Typical elitist view, “I’m right … period.”

By: Drewsmom

Drewsmom — Tue, 29 May 2007 10:07:58 +0000

capln is just an idiotic elitist writer who has no idea how the sane middle main street folks here in America vote. The leftists don’t understand our values and what we want, that is where they make their mistake and they continue to make em on a daily basis, which is fine with me.
Rick, there are alot of folks you outta ban from your post, personal attacks on your family is not acceptable in my humble opinion, no matter what his politics may be.
Lets just all try and show some tact here, O.K.

By: John

John — Tue, 29 May 2007 04:22:29 +0000

Your post shows that you didn’t read the book…or at least, learned what the book was about by reading various sources.

Read more about who caplan is and then repost.

By: Shawn

Shawn — Mon, 28 May 2007 21:30:42 +0000

“Bush imo is the worst president ever”

You aren’t very well-read in history, then.

By: brad

brad — Mon, 28 May 2007 20:25:37 +0000

Ricky, baby, I’m not mad you deleted my comment. I’m thrilled to know you still care. Love you too, you crazy old man.
Btw, ever gonna apologize for threatening your poor would be supporter?

I deleted your comment because there was an obscenity and you know it. And WTF are you talking about? I have never threatened anyone in my life.

You are certifiable.

By: S. Knabt

S. Knabt — Mon, 28 May 2007 15:24:02 +0000

Actually, Rick, you undermine your own argument by trash-mouthing Gore. Because, as we all know, he got more votes than George. The Electoral College did Gore in, not the majority of voters.

By: Nikolay

Nikolay — Mon, 28 May 2007 11:21:32 +0000

That may be the most confused, convoluted, illogical post youâ€™ve ever left here.

And thatâ€™s saying something.

Well, did you, or did you not claim that 61% of Democrats are certifiable insane? The answer is, yes. It’s kind of inconsistent, to talk about the “wisdom of the voter” and to claim that the majority of the voters of the majority party are “certifiable insane”.

I’m not saying that “wisdom of the voter” is the wrong idea, only that you’re a wrong guy to voice that idea. The snobbishness of Caplan is probably wrong, but it is nothing compared to your open disgust for the voter.

By: Drongo

Drongo — Mon, 28 May 2007 07:00:36 +0000

“But given the track record of the American voter over 219 years, they get it right a helluva more than they get it wrong.”

(a) Given the vagueraries of the representative system in the US I would say that the “People” chose Gore (most votes) but the system chose Bush (how those votes affect the result). A minor point perhaps, but worth noting when talking about what people have chosen.

(b) Comparing what actually happened against your imagined version of history if it had gone differently is just comparing reality against your biased guesswork (all we have when judging what might have been). Hardly enough for the hard statement above.

(c) “No one knows which makes this whole idea of voter irrationality an elitist fantasy.” Just acecdotally, you think more than, say, 5% of voters could tell you even three policies of their chosen candidate? It is like saying that someone saying “I like Thursdays best because they are more sunny” is acting rationally. Just because they have a reason does not mean that they are acting rationally.

Still, I’d rather representative democracy than any set of academics running things.

By: Joe Helgerson

Joe Helgerson — Mon, 28 May 2007 05:18:01 +0000

Bush imo is the worst president ever, but Rick thinks Gore would have been worse? To be worse Gore would have to sacrifice live babies on national tv all the while praying to satan and flogging himself. Bush is an incompetent boob surrounded by incompetent boobs. How much worse can you get….jeez

By: grognard

grognard — Mon, 28 May 2007 03:52:19 +0000

Where the argument falls apart is the premise that the candidate, even with a â€œperfectâ€ idea of how to solve an issue, would somehow get the legislation passed without having to make any compromise or modifications. It could very well be that a candidate that is less knowledgeable but who has better political skills and important political allies might get more done. There are way to many other variables in voting on a candidate to boil it down to a stand on a particular group of issues.