Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
August 02, 2015, 11:38:13 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Be sure to enable your "Ultimate Profile" for even more goodies on your profile page!

  Show Posts
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... 551
76  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: POST HERE IF YOU WANT TO BE CONSIDERED AS A MOD on: July 20, 2015, 11:39:51 pm
a few good options here (ex. tik, Cathcon),   but like please don't pick anyone who is constantly calling for other posters to be banned,  or is often in the habit of insulting other posters,  since we have enough of those types on the mod team already.   (I could name some people who have posted in this thread that applies to, but I don't really feel like it.)

77  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: AP Poll: Support for SSM closely divided; majority prioritize religious freedom on: July 20, 2015, 08:29:04 pm

According to the poll, 42 percent support same-sex marriage and 40 percent oppose it. The percentage saying they favor legal same-sex marriage in their state was down slightly from the 48 percent who said so in an April poll. In January, 44 percent were in favor.

Well, we know what this means. 42-40 means that they don't push leaners at all, if 18% of the public doesn't answer. What that means is that the poll is showing 42% more or less solid support of SSM, 40% opposition, and 18% wavering. This is totally believable to me, working under the assumption that, when push comes to shove the 18% will go "meh" and walk away rather than passionately oppose it. Post-Obgerfell, apathy is de facto support of SSM, much like pre-Obgerfell, apathy was de facto opposition to SSM: status quo is the result of apathy and national SSM is the status quo now.

40% of the population strongly opposing SSM makes sense alongside earlier polls.

If you compare the polls, the trend for leaners, when pushed, to support it, has been there for a year or more.  It's not a post-Obgerfell phenom.

The poll in April had opposition in the mid-30s, so this poll is a return to the results they found in January.

I wouldn't consider issuing a license to be equivalent to officiating at the ceremony.


Especially if your job is to issue licenses to people according to the law of the land, as opposed to performing marriages according to the doctrines of your church. People keep trying to elide these two.

Who is trying to elide these two?
78  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: AP Poll: Support for SSM closely divided; majority prioritize religious freedom on: July 20, 2015, 02:50:57 pm
It's all about the spin. 47% saying someone with religious objections should be required to perform an SSM is shockingly high IMO.

But yea, AP's poll looks to be behind others anyway if it was only at 48% support SSM prior to the ruling. Gallup shows the support at 58-40 right now.

I'm not sure what you mean by spin here, if you look at how the questions were worded. When lawmakers in various states have tried to say that local officials did not have to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples if they had a religious objection, it was considered extreme and many Republicans even would not have any part of it.

Gallup poll it is clear pushes leaners a great deal more than GfK does.  I've seen some numbers that suggest those who don't have a strong opinion tend to go in the direction of supporting SSM when pushed to come down one way or another.
79  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: AP Poll: Support for SSM closely divided; majority prioritize religious freedom on: July 20, 2015, 12:24:40 pm
Which contradicts virtually all other polls on the matter.

This is the first poll taken post Obergfell v. Hodges though.

Yes, we can expect there might well be an impact.  The last poll in April from Ap-GfK had a 12 point gap in favor - I think that was not too far off from other polls at the time - as opposed to a 2 now point in favor now.  Admittedly, I'm not aware of what GfK's track record is on polling.  Here's (.pdf) the detailed results for any who want to investigate this poll. 
The results from the religious liberty questions were within the general range of what I've seen elsewhere.
80  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Past Election What-ifs (US) / Re: 1924: McAdoo/Smith vs Harding/Coolidge vs La Follette/Wheeler on: July 20, 2015, 12:05:07 pm
Harding isn't quite as strong a candidate as Coolidge would be, seeing as there's still a little mistrust out of teapot dome and the like.  But it's not fatal, as Harding is generally seen as having exercised bad judgement in his trust of others rather than being corrupt himself, and economic times are good. 

McAdoo's progressive stances bite some into La Folette's strength.  The selection of Smith as his running mate is a double-edged sword: It brings in Catholics and other traditional Democratic voters in the North who are unsure about McAdoo and the party in general post-Wilson, but diminishes support in the South among the more xenophobic and elsewhere who are otherwise supporters of McAdoo. Still McAdoo does not have any trouble carrying the Solid South . . . but the Republicans are too strong in the rest of the country to be beaten.

Harding/Coolidge         51%   353
McAdoo/Smith             35%   165
La Follette/Wheeler      13%     13
81  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / AP Poll: Support for SSM closely divided; majority prioritize religious freedom on: July 20, 2015, 11:35:33 am
The Supreme Court's ruling last month legalizing same-sex marriage nationwide has left Americans sharply divided, according to an Associated Press-GfK poll that suggests support for gay unions may be down slightly from earlier this year.

The poll also found a near-even split over whether local officials with religious objections should be required to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, with 47 percent saying that should be the case and 49 percent say they should be exempt.

Overall, if there's a conflict, a majority of those questioned think religious liberties should win out over gay rights, according to the poll. While 39 percent said it's more important for the government to protect gay rights, 56 percent said protection of religious liberties should take precedence.

The poll was conducted July 9 to July 13, less than three weeks after the Supreme Court ruled states cannot ban same-sex marriage.

According to the poll, 42 percent support same-sex marriage and 40 percent oppose it. The percentage saying they favor legal same-sex marriage in their state was down slightly from the 48 percent who said so in an April poll. In January, 44 percent were in favor.

Asked specifically about the Supreme Court ruling, 39 percent said they approve and 41 percent said they disapprove.
82  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: Would you vote to get rid of mandatory minimum sentences? on: July 20, 2015, 01:08:15 am
Yes, not just for victimless crime (then why is it a crime at all?) but for all crime.  Prosecutors are very good as extending what things are punishable under a law beyond their intended understanding, which means unreasonable sentencing if there is a guilty verdict.   Judges should be allowed to consider mitigating circumstances in their sentencing.   
83  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Bill Walker will expand Medicaid without consent from legislature on: July 20, 2015, 12:57:14 am
Tbf I'm a strong believer that the American system of checks and balances is dumb as hell. You apparently can't get anything done unless every one of the eight thousand branches of government align with you by random happenstance. grim.

Strongly disagree with you on that principle, but in this case there is still some checks and balances in that the legislature could decide to reconvene to stop this, or to try and reverse it once they come back in session.    Whether this goes against the spirit of the law... it's enough for me to have mixed feelings about this, even though I think accepting Medicaid dollars is better than not if another plan to cover the population is not available.
84  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Non-Christian President on: July 20, 2015, 12:06:15 am
An atheist president is one of those thing that's unthinkable until it isn't. Like a Black president or nationwide gay marriage. Seriously, how many people who have predicted those things in the yer 2000?

And to all the people saying America is too religious, Chile has an agnostic president.

A black president in 2000 was not an unrealistic possibility.

An atheist president isn't impossible, but it would have to be a matter of someone who is really well liked, and then people find out he's an atheist and they are willing to overlook it. 

(And I say he as I think a woman atheist president might be a bit much.)
85  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: Should naturalized citizens of the US be allowed to become POTUS? on: July 19, 2015, 10:39:46 pm
No, no, yes. I don't think someone who was not born here or born abroad to American parents will ever have the "institutional understanding" of who we are as a nation and our history and values. The POTUS is the head of state and must exemplify our shared history and values. If we were a parliamentary democracy, I would be fine with a foreign-born PM and an "all-American" president.

Someone whose family did not live in America in the mid-20th century really doesn't "get" our fraught understanding of race and the role it plays in society, for example. A lot of first and second generation immigrants (including some in this forum) just don't get it and never will. The same goes for other quirky Americanisms like the role of guns in society, and the place of religion in public and private life.

Roll Eyes

wow, great rebuttal.
86  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: SC: Gov. Haley to sign bill removing Confederate flag on: July 19, 2015, 10:35:42 pm
87  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Jeb in SF: Answers questions on net neutrality and discrimination against gays on: July 19, 2015, 03:31:14 pm
So wait, he literally just contradicted himself?

No, he is defining discrimination differently than those on the left do.  To conservatives, there is a difference between discriminating towards individuals, and discriminating towards actions or events.
88  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Non-Christian President on: July 19, 2015, 03:18:26 pm
We've had a few Unitarian presidents, which are not Christians today but were at the time.

There's also the long argument of Thomas Jefferson being an atheist or not.

I thought it was accepted that he was a deist.

Jefferson has been claimed as many things, both by his enemies and those who want to claim him for themselves.  Deist is not too far off the mark, but it's probably most accurate to call him a Unitarian; he was a friend of Joseph Priestly and an admirer of his works.
89  About this Site / The Atlas / Re: Unban CCSF on: July 19, 2015, 03:01:46 pm
When are some people going to realize that he wasn't banned simply because of his opinions?

When we hear an explanation that makes sense.
90  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Sometimes, pictures are worth a thousand words.... on: July 19, 2015, 01:04:54 am

91  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: What is it with Moderate Heroes... on: July 18, 2015, 09:38:54 pm
92  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: Going out with a bang on: July 18, 2015, 09:34:47 pm

93  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: The Institute of Funny Partial Thread Titles You've Seen on Atlas on: July 18, 2015, 09:05:10 pm
Re: Jury finds Colorado
94  Atlas Fantasy Elections / Voting Booth / Re: June Mideast Assembly elections + Constitutional amendment on: July 17, 2015, 02:11:37 pm
Assembly Election:
[    ] EarlAW (Hatman)
[ 3 ] Harry S Truman
[    ] Progressive Realist
[ 4 ] vivaportugalhabs
[ 1 ] Write-In: JCL
[ 2 ] Write-In: LumineVonReuental

Please vote AYE, NAY or Abstain on this amendment to the Mideast Constitution.

95  Atlas Fantasy Elections / Atlas Fantasy Elections / Re: Mideast Record-Courier Polls: The Future of Atlasia on: July 17, 2015, 02:00:30 pm
Articles of Confederation
96  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: Rate the Presidents, Installment #40: Ronald Reagan on: July 17, 2015, 01:58:47 pm
Reagan beat LBJ. Don't anyone dare claim this is a left-wing forum again.

This wasn't a head to head. 
97  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: Stalin vs George Washington on: July 17, 2015, 01:56:12 pm
Both co-opted left-wing revolts, governing in a conservative manner far from the spirit if the revolution that had fueled their rise to power. Both used military force to quell dissent. Both favored policies harmful to the peasantry in favor of "modernization". Difficult to say.

Clever, but the American Revolution was in no way a "left-wing" revolt.

It was certainly anti-establishment in its historical context.

Depends on who you consider the "establishment."
98  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: Political Freelance Writing on: July 17, 2015, 12:23:33 pm
You should try Cartoon Network.
99  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2015 & Odd Year Gubernatorial Election Polls / Re: VA-PPP: Cooch, Herring lead primaries on: July 17, 2015, 11:13:00 am
GOP will probably stay with the convention rather than do a primary, so it's Cooch's if he wants it anyway.
100  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: A Challenge on: July 16, 2015, 03:10:33 pm
Incidentally, some scholars of Welfare policy have argued that the US' very high military spending is so high because the military-industrial complex basically works as a welfare program, providing jobs and various benefits that alleviate poverty in some area, and compensate for the lack of social spending.

As tempting as this argument can be, it is incorrect as American military spending - including all the money showered on contractors and so on here as well - is not now and never has been concentrated in areas with severe social problems. Quite the opposite actually (a couple of well-known exceptions aside). There is often a link to politics (why, yes, Congressman Dan T. Porkburger Jr. is indeed very interested in the idea of a military base/major armaments factory being built in his district) but such things go on in other countries as well, if on a smaller scale.

There are plenty of military bases in areas with significant socioeconomic problems, even as they are not concentrated around them. Many places, even if they aren't at the low end of indicators, have become very dependent on the military presence and can face major problems if it leaves, which creates a serious problem to deal with in the midst of making military downsizing happen.
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... 551

Login with username, password and session length


Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines