“You can pretend that we don’t collect voting data”
How nice it would be just once to get an honest answer out of a certain cadre.
I didn’t say people weren’t collecting something; I pointed out, clearly enough for anyone to understand, that these “data” are collected for the most part by extremely untrustworthy organizations, that they are based on self-reporting, and that the sample is self-selected. If you don’t know enough about research to understand the implications of the foregoing, look it up.
“all the billions of dollars of campaigns and strategies and voting studies, and history books and analysis based on the data”
Neither all that, nor all the king’s horses and all the king’s men, were unable to get algore, bob dole, Ensign Band-Aid, or Romney elected.
“Do you think that blacks and homosexuals and Jews and atheists and Catholics are actually voting pro-liferepublican?”
If your own data are to be trusted, it is very probable that a large percentage of Catholics are.
Prejudice is an ugly thing.
Should have been, “Neither all that, nor all the king’s horses and all the king’s men, were able to get algore, bob dole, Ensign Band-Aid, or Romney elected.”
I have to assume that your only interest in this political site, is the religion section.
Certain people glom on to what they perceive as a truth but which is nothing more than a ham-handed hypothesis. They see correlation as causation. They then combine that with a little Glenn Beck-inspired flow chart/blackboard razzle dazzle and voila, you've got a psychohistorian whose able to project the trajectory of mankind from one civilization to the next. Thus sounding the alarm. A Paul Revere for the ages.