Tea Party Supporters Richer, More Educated Than Most, Poll Finds

Tea Partiers make more money and are better educated than most Americans, a new poll out Thursday found.

The New York Times/CBS News poll took the temperature of Tea Party supporters on a number of topics, and turned up some results that might seem apparent -- Tea Partiers mostly describe themselves as "very conservative," they say President Obama's policies favor the poor and they describe the president as "very liberal."

But in a number of areas, their responses mirrored the general public's. And, according to the poll, their incomes and education levels are well above average.

Of the Tea Party supporters who responded, 20 percent make more than $100,000, versus 14 percent for the general pool of people polled. Fourteen percent of Tea Party supporters have a post-graduate education, compared with 10 percent for the general public. Twenty-three percent of Tea Party supporters have a college degree, compared with 15 percent for the general public, according to the poll.

The 18 percent of people who counted themselves among the Tea Party crowd are also mostly white, male and older than 45 years old.

The poll of 1,580 adults was conducted April 5-12. The margin of error was 3 percentage points.

But, but...

Mach always said that libs were smarter b/c they watched "The Daily Show"

(04-15-2010 07:15 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  But, but...

Mach always said that libs were smarter b/c they watched "The Daily Show"

Education doesn't = intelligence. You claim to be highly edumacated yet, your intelligence is lacking.

(04-16-2010 12:52 AM)RobertN Wrote:  Education doesn't = intelligence.

Which is ironic, given the number of tables and maps I've come across over the years offering correlations between high college-degreed states and "blue states" (not necessarily from you, but in the blogosphere and media in general).

The not-so-subtle yet erroneous inference: "Since the multi-degreed New England professor is highly educated and the Kansas small-towner is not, then the New England professor is far better qualified to tell us how the country should be run."

So I actually agree with you here.

(04-16-2010 12:52 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(04-15-2010 07:15 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  But, but...

Mach always said that libs were smarter b/c they watched "The Daily Show"

Education doesn't = intelligence. You claim to be highly edumacated yet, your intelligence is lacking.

That's funny, since libs shamelessly flaunt Obama's Ivy League pedigree and try to say that he knows so much about everything.

It's not surprising that TP supporters have more money and education that the population as a whole since it is largely made up of middle-class whites. Compare any group comprised mainly of middle-class whites to the population as a whole and you'll get the same result.

(04-16-2010 08:29 AM)BlazerFan11 Wrote:  

(04-16-2010 12:52 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(04-15-2010 07:15 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  But, but...

Mach always said that libs were smarter b/c they watched "The Daily Show"

Education doesn't = intelligence. You claim to be highly edumacated yet, your intelligence is lacking.

That's funny, since libs shamelessly flaunt Obama's Ivy League pedigree and try to say that he knows so much about everything.

Sorry. I should have said "education doesn't always = intelligence". As I said, Torchy is a good example claims to have doctorate degree but is not very intelligent.

Everything posted in this thread is racist.

(04-16-2010 09:56 AM)GilWinant Wrote:  It's not surprising that TP supporters have more money and education that the population as a whole since it is largely made up of middle-class whites. Compare any group comprised mainly of middle-class whites to the population as a whole and you'll get the same result.

As opposed to poor blacks when 98% of blacks voted for the Kenyan.

(04-16-2010 11:11 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(04-16-2010 08:29 AM)BlazerFan11 Wrote:  

(04-16-2010 12:52 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(04-15-2010 07:15 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  But, but...

Mach always said that libs were smarter b/c they watched "The Daily Show"

Education doesn't = intelligence. You claim to be highly edumacated yet, your intelligence is lacking.

That's funny, since libs shamelessly flaunt Obama's Ivy League pedigree and try to say that he knows so much about everything.

Sorry. I should have said "education doesn't always = intelligence". As I said, Torchy is a good example claims to have doctorate degree but is not very intelligent.

You know Rob, you're right. Lets see.......Torch owns a home & pays taxes. You, on the other hand, live in a government subsidized rental and pay no taxes. My initial guess is that torch leaves you in the dust on the intelligence front.

(04-16-2010 08:29 AM)BlazerFan11 Wrote:  

(04-16-2010 12:52 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(04-15-2010 07:15 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  But, but...

Mach always said that libs were smarter b/c they watched "The Daily Show"

Education doesn't = intelligence. You claim to be highly edumacated yet, your intelligence is lacking.

That's funny, since libs shamelessly flaunt Obama's Ivy League pedigree and try to say that he knows so much about everything.

Doesn't Harvard Law School just grade on "Pass/Fail"??

(04-16-2010 12:52 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(04-15-2010 07:15 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  But, but...

Mach always said that libs were smarter b/c they watched "The Daily Show"

Education doesn't = intelligence. You claim to be highly edumacated yet, your intelligence is lacking.

It doesn't take an MD in proctology to know when you're paying up the wazoo.

Many (most?) people out there formulate their political stances based on both emotion and how they were brought up. Education and real background knowledge plays a secondary role. I'd say especially among those in their 20s who haven't been exposed to a lot of real-world worklife experience yet.

If tomorrow the government required that Walmart start paying all its employees a minimum $20/hour plus top-shelf benefits, I personally know many people where if I told them this to be true, they would cheer and say this was a great idea. I mean, it's a feel-good, warm n' fuzzy story that sticks it to Walmart, and who wouldn't want to see people earning such a better income?

But then those fiscal conservative meanies would come along, bringing out their dry economics and boring theories to show how this would negatively impact the marketplace and the workers themselves. They'd be viewed as a cold-hearted buzzkill (and somehow racist, of course).

I'm not surprised at the statistics. There is a reason that they are so anti-tax and that's because they have more money to protect.

With that being said, TP'ers are also a very diverse group of people who don't fall under one part of the spectrum. Hell most of them are out there for different reasons.

(04-17-2010 03:44 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  I'm not surprised at the statistics. There is a reason that they are so anti-tax and that's because they have more money to protect.

With that being said, TP'ers are also a very diverse group of people who don't fall under one part of the spectrum. Hell most of them are out there for different reasons.

Actually, most are there for the same reason: Faux told them to go.

(04-17-2010 07:58 PM)RobertN Wrote:  

(04-17-2010 03:44 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  I'm not surprised at the statistics. There is a reason that they are so anti-tax and that's because they have more money to protect.

With that being said, TP'ers are also a very diverse group of people who don't fall under one part of the spectrum. Hell most of them are out there for different reasons.

Actually, most are there for the same reason: Faux told them to go.

I doubt that, even though they were great facilitators of events. I just think that a good number of them are out there for the wrong reasons. While the legit members are there for grassroots purposes, there are others who have infiltrated with there own agendas.

(04-17-2010 08:15 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  

(04-17-2010 07:58 PM)RobertN Wrote:  

(04-17-2010 03:44 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  I'm not surprised at the statistics. There is a reason that they are so anti-tax and that's because they have more money to protect.

With that being said, TP'ers are also a very diverse group of people who don't fall under one part of the spectrum. Hell most of them are out there for different reasons.

Actually, most are there for the same reason: Faux told them to go.

I doubt that, even though they were great facilitators of events. I just think that a good number of them are out there for the wrong reasons. While the legit members are there for grassroots purposes, there are others who have infiltrated with there own agendas.

It isn't grassroots. When are you guys going to wake up and realize you are being played by Dick Armey and the Kochs for business interests.

(04-17-2010 08:40 PM)RobertN Wrote:  It isn't grassroots. When are you guys going to wake up and realize you are being played by **** Armey and the Kochs for business interests.

Robert, do you have any FACTS to support those allegations?

(04-17-2010 08:44 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(04-17-2010 08:40 PM)RobertN Wrote:  It isn't grassroots. When are you guys going to wake up and realize you are being played by **** Armey and the Kochs for business interests.

Robert, do you have any FACTS to support those allegations?

They aren't allegations. They are facts. Do some research. I know you don't like Rachel Maddow but she has devoted a lot of time on the "grassroots" tea party groups and who is really behind them. Look it up.

(04-17-2010 08:55 PM)RobertN Wrote:  

(04-17-2010 08:44 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(04-17-2010 08:40 PM)RobertN Wrote:  It isn't grassroots. When are you guys going to wake up and realize you are being played by **** Armey and the Kochs for business interests.

Robert, do you have any FACTS to support those allegations?

They aren't allegations. They are facts. Do some research. I know you don't like Rachel Maddow but she has devoted a lot of time on the "grassroots" tea party groups and who is really behind them. Look it up.

No, I mean FACTS.
Rachel Maddow is not FACTS.