A quick point for cyclo: you are arguing for my point, I think. You say that low SES are frequently not stupid. That's MY point. That's why I use a personal characteristic rather than a economic measure. My problem - and this may or may not apply to you - is with middle class people of the left, who believe that with more education, the scales would fall from working-class conservatives' eyes. My belief is that people ought to be held accountable for their politics, and not have it wished away in "education". Marx believed that the working class needed to attain "class-consiousness." In last week's paper, Mark Latham wrote that that Western Sydney people need to be educated to want something other than consumer goods. I am deeply uncomfortable with this view, and it seems to me - quite genuinely - as being extremely condescending.
I don't want to spam this thread, so I'll make one last effort to explain myself.
Let's take an issue like "stop the boats" or the campaign against gay marriage. These are classic wedge politics tactics, designed to exploit working-class conservative fears, and to produce a government which favours the rich. In America, issues such as abortion and gun rights are used as weapons of wedge politics in the same way that xenophobia and homophobia are used in Australia. These campaigns are driven by shock-jocks and corporate tabloids, generally owned by the same small group of rich white men, who probably despise the people they are making their fortunes from.
How do you describe someone who is inspired by the politics of fear and resentment? If you find "stupid" offensive then I challenge you to describe this group more affectionately or empathetically.
Finally - Scotty, I disagree that I define stupid as people those who disagree with me. If you and I ran Australia together, I would be perfectly happy to shake hands and hand over control of policy-making to experts and to leave politics out of it. As recently as the Hawke era, the intellectual class (academics, judiciary, civil servants from sandstone universities) would write a White Paper policy, which was generally adopted by the government, and sold to the Australian people. The Australian people then got to have their say every 3 years about whether the country was being generally well governed. Today, however, a combination of the communications revolution and global (media) corporatism mean that there is no longer any ground for independent, informed debate. The feedback loop from the people to the government is instantaneous. The public space has been "democratised" in the same way that entertainment has been democratised by reality tv and talent contests.
In summary, in my lifetime we have shifted from a liberal democracy to a populist democracy. Do I think "stupid" people should get a vote? Of course! Every citizen is an essential part of the system of checks and balances on executive power. But, should their ordinary fears and prejudices, fueled by corporate media, form policy on a daily basis? Absolutely not.