[lbo-talk] more nonvoters

[Shane Mage]

Doug wrote:
>
>>But if they *did* vote then they would, by definition, no longer be
>>"passive and disengaged," and so even by the pollsters' theory
>>they would be expected to vote in accordance with their 
>>socio-economic/racial profile!
>
>People often don't vote (or think) the way their demographic group 
>suggests they should.

Of course they "often" don't!  We're dealing with statistics of group
behavior.  If pollsters are right that voting behavior is correlated
with socio-economic/racial profile,  then that correlation must also
apply to the universe of former "nonvoters" who have become voters.

By the way, does anyone have an answer yet to my question:
"does anyone know if the 'nonvoters' were asked
whether they agreed or disagreed with the statement 'there
is no significant difference between the two parties?'  And,
if so, what the results were?"

Shane Mage

"When we read on a printed page the doctrine of Pythagoras that all 
things are made of numbers, it seems mystical, mystifying, even 
downright silly.

When we read on a computer screen the doctrine of Pythagoras that all 
things are made of numbers, it seems self-evidently true."  (N. 
Weiner)