Howard Stern Interviews Obama Supporters 2012


Howard Stern contributors Sal and Richard travel to Harlem to interview Obama supporters and ask them why they are voting for Obama.

Stern and his crew ask denizens of Harlem various outrageous questions, including if they believe Obama will find and kill Osama bin Laden; if Romney is a Muslim and if Obama is a Mormon; if Obama made the right choice by picking Paul Ryan as his running mate and if he did it because he is black.

One interviewee was under the impression that 2008 Republican nominee John McCain is also running this time.

“Just trust me, not one person knew that Osama bin Laden was dead,” Stern said during the segment.

“Well, we’re obviously dealing with a whole population that doesn’t listen to the newscasts or read a newspaper,” co-host Robin Quivers said

Howard Stern Interviews Obama Supporters 2012 | RealClearPolitics

This is absolutely ridiculous. These people did not even know that Paul Ryan was a republican or that he is not running as the running mate of Obama. They did not know OBL is dead but they are going to vote for Obama because he is black.


What disturbs me most is that some of these people vote. I adamantly oppose get out the vote campaigns for this sort of reason.


Ignorant voters elect Democrats. The Democrat party knows it.


I guess I’ll post the video of someone doing the same to Mississippi republicans


According to the interviews, they ALL intend to vote, God help us all.
And I’m adamantly with you on the, “Get out the vote” campaign. When it comes to politics, NOTHING irritates me more than hearing, "I don’t care how you vote, just VOTE!"
You don’t? Then might I ask what in the blazes name is WRONG with you!!!


You mean that one Pelosi’s kid did, and edited so well for her 15 minutes of fame? Go right ahead. Most of us have already seen it. I was mighty proud of those stating that they’d rather die poor than give up their beliefs for a little bit of cushion in their lives.
Tell ya what. I’ll do it for ya.
Interview in Mississippi - YouTube


I think he’s referring to the people in the video like the person saying the president should be American, not Muslim.

I never trust street interviews. You just go out, interview a ton of people, and select the ones that give off the view you want to promote. The Mississippi one was edited to make the conservatives seem stupid, and Howard Stern edited his to make liberals seem stupid. It means nothing except that some people are stupid, which we already knew.


There are ignorant people that identify themselves as both Democrats and Republicans, just as there are well informed that identify themselves as both. For emphasis, The Straight Dope: Are blue states smarter than red states?

Are blue states smarter than red states? January 20, 2012
Dear Cecil:
Is there a difference between red (Republican heartland conservative) states and blue (Democratic coastal liberal) states in terms of IQ? The Republicans certainly seem dumber than a bag of doorknobs — for example, any of the current batch running for president. The Democrats seem smarter, if just as crooked. For the record, I’m a registered independent.
— Arthur Weissman
Cecil replies:
We need to talk about this.
Your columnist lives in a reliably blue state, Illinois, widely acknowledged as the closest approximation yet to paradise on earth. He happily subscribes to the notion that blue-state illuminati are superior to red-state Neanderthals in almost every way. Urban theorist Richard Florida nicely summarized this attitude last year in the Atlantic. I quote: “Conservatism, more and more, is the ideology of the economically left behind …. Liberalism … is stronger in richer, better-educated, more-diverse, and, especially, more prosperous places.”
I’m confident it could also be shown that blue-staters are funnier, better looking, and have more frequent and satisfying sex.
However — and here I must be frank — I’m compelled to say that when we stray into questions of intelligence, the more enthusiastic proponents of blue-state supremacy are taking the argument over a cliff.
Let me make it clear I’m not talking about Internet punditry or what passes for it — for example, widely circulated claims that virtually every state that voted Democratic in the 2000 presidential election had above-average IQ, whereas most of the Republican states were below. Published among other places in the seemingly respectable Economist magazine, this congenial tale was later shown to be a hoax.
No, I mean the ongoing efforts in the scholarly journals to show not just that red-state denizens are stupider than blue-state folk, but that they and conservatives in general suffer from debilitating psychological impairments, whereas liberals with their nimble intellects are advancing the evolution of the human race.
For example, in a 2009 article in the journal Intelligence, psychologist Lazar Stankov argues that “conservatism and cognitive ability are negatively correlated …. At the individual level of analysis, conservatism scores correlate negatively with SAT, vocabulary, and analogy test scores.” Stankov speaks of “Conservative syndrome,” which I suppose is something like Down syndrome. Conservatives are characterized by dogmatism, intolerance of ambiguity, low openness to experience, anxiety, and fear. In other words, if you’re conservative, you shouldn’t be voting, you need to see a shrink.
Perhaps the most energetic exponent of the conservatives-are-stupid school of social research is evolutionary psychologist Satoshi Kanazawa. In articles with titles like “Why Liberals and Atheists Are More Intelligent,” Kanazawa argues that outside-the-box liberal thinking is what enabled humanity to overcome new threats in a hostile environment, whereas those on the not-so-bright end of the spectrum are disposed to conservatism, poor health, and crime.
Kanazawa has been at the forefront of attempts to demonstrate that red states are awash in ignorance. One groundbreaking effort was a 2006 article entitled “IQ and the Wealth of States,” in which he tried to link intelligence with economic performance. A difficulty was the lack of a reliable measure of statewide IQ. (I’ll ignore the side issue of what IQ tests measure.) Kanazawa got around this by using SAT scores, making the simplifying assumption that if you didn’t take the SAT, you were stupid.
You can see where that approach might get you into trouble. Sure enough, Kanazawa calculated that the average IQ in Mississippi was 63. In other words, the average resident of the Magnolia State was mentally retarded.
A conservative individual seeing this result might have reflected: You know, there may be a flaw in my methodology. Maybe I should hold off publishing. Kanazawa, presumably a bold liberal thinker, didn’t do that. Instead, it was left to fellow social scientist Michael McDaniel to point out that not taking the SAT didn’t necessarily mean you were stupid; often it just meant you’d taken the ACT instead.
McDaniel thereupon produced his own more plausible set of average state IQs, ranging from a low of 94 for Mississippi to a high of 104 for Massachusetts. At first glance numbers like that might seem to support the red-states-are-dopes hypothesis. On closer examination, however, we see that blue state Illinois scores a mediocre 100. This may may be explained by the fact that while I live here, so does Rod Blagojevich. But what are we to make of blue state California, which scores a pathetic 96?
To get to the bottom of things, I had my assistant Una dump McDaniel’s state IQ numbers into a spreadsheet, weight them by population, and then divide them into three groups: red for states consistently choosing Republicans in the last three presidential elections; blue for always voting Democratic; and purple for swing states.
Result: average IQ for red states vs. blue states was essentially the same (red 99, blue 99.5). Conclusions: Are liberals smarter than conservatives? Some social scientists sure think so. Are blue states smarter than red states? Sadly for us cyanophiles, no.
But here’s the most significant data point, I think: in the purple states — the ones that swung back and forth — the average IQ according to Una’s spreadsheet was 100.9, appreciably above that for either the blue states or red states. In other words — and this has the shock of truth — the people in the purple states weren’t rigidly liberal or conservative, but rather had enough on the ball to consider the choices before them and occasionally change their minds.

— Cecil Adams


I am so ready to go back to monarchy. I have a better chance at liberty with a philosopher king than 300 million buffoons voting for the guy who will give them more free stuff.


Clearly The left states have smarter voters. I will give them the credit due. They did sign a petition that stated “by signing this petition I am verifying that I am a moron”.


I could show you an edited video like this one that shows R’s in the same idiotic light. Your point is?


So you dont believe those morons signed a petition that said they were morons?


[quote=“Dacabeti, post:12, topic:36294”]
So you dont believe those morons signed a petition that said they were morons?
[/quote] Sure, however you’re only being shown the ones that did, what they want you to see.


Well that shows you didnt watch it. He also shows the 2 people that caught it. I know you cant be hampered down with watching a video or letting something as simple as truth get in your way. Good day


[quote=“Dacabeti, post:14, topic:36294”]
Well that shows you didnt watch it. He also shows the 2 people that caught it. I know you cant be hampered down with watching a video or letting something as simple as truth get in your way. Good day
[/quote] I don’t base my opinions on edited video clips promoting agendas


First, OSB, members of BOTH parties can be and often are ignorant of current events. And that’s not just a geographical issue. This is the one problem with the voting public today , too many are just not that interested in what’s going on , they just want to be left alone. Hence the broken government we have today. It just seems that when people like Sterns or leno or other proponents of man on the street interviews, seem to fine the idiots and push them nto the limelight of infamy. Now you take those interviewers and place them into any street slum area, and no doubt they will have no idea what goes on aout beyond their ‘turf’. I saw a news item on FOX regarding an interview with the PM of England, and he was as woefully ignorant of some british history such as the Magna Carta. This is what politicians play off of. The democrat party, in league with the unions, especially the Teachers Union’ have been changing the history and socialstudies taught, so as you feed the young minds so they grow to blossum into the social ants they are expected to be.


First, OSB, members of BOTH parties can be and often are ignorant of current events. And that’s not just a geographical issue
Agreed. I made this point in an earlier post on this thread.


hey, I AM agreeing with you.


[quote=“Bremen, post:9, topic:36294”]
I am so ready to go back to monarchy. I have a better chance at liberty with a philosopher king than 300 million buffoons voting for the guy who will give them more free stuff.

You have a point.


The society is regressing. Liberties hard won through the centUries are lost and the majority could care less. My favorite thing to do if bring these issues Up with people and witness the glaze that forms over their eyes. It is as if they have been programed to turn off if anything close to truth is uttered. It is a hobby I have. We have to enjoy the small things in life and this is one of them for me.