Who is more representative of the average American swing voter?

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

Actually a difficult choice.

[Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck]

Actually a difficult choice.

Wulfic.  People like Bushie are solidly Republican.

[All Along The Watchtower]

Bushie's type seems less common. I'm not sure how many white evangelicals can be considered "swing' voters. Especially in Oklahoma.

[Grumpier Than Thou]

Definitely Wulfric.

[checkers]

I kind of feel that without the influence of this forum, Bushie wouldn't even be a swing voter.

[Lief 🗽]

Bushie is always the correct answer: Political cluelessness is the defining feature of most swing voters.

Yeah, we make fun of Bushie's lack of coherent political ideology and wild seemingly-arbitrary swings, but most voters are exactly the same. We are, with our political compasses and our "how would you vote in 1864 through 1983 in Botswanan elections", the outliers.

[IceSpear]

Neither. The most representative American "swing voter" is one who votes in some elections but not others.

[Flake]

Bushie for three reasons.

1. He doesn't assign a certain ratio to follow to vote for candidates.
2. His political ideology is not based solely on bipartisanship.
3. He's not more right wing than Michele Bachmann on the homosexual marriage.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Bushie for three reasons.

1. He doesn't assign a certain ratio to follow to vote for candidates.
2. His political ideology is not based solely on bipartisanship.
3. He's not more right wing than Michele Bachmann on the homosexual marriage.

1. I don't have a certain ratio, that's something SWE made up based on an analysis of my positions. It's not a ratio that I officially strive to follow or endorse as fact.

2. I actually have solid positions on things. You're implying that I just take the most moderate position possible on every issue and change it frequently according to political winds, which I've never done.

3. Michele Bachmann supports a federal amendment to the U.S. Constitution banning gay marriage nationwide, and she probably supports conversion therapy. I oppose the latter, and do not support anything close to the former.

[Mr. Smith]

Neither. The most representative American "swing voter" is one who votes in some elections but not others.

And because Bushie is simply too far rightwards.

[Flake]

Bushie for three reasons.

1. He doesn't assign a certain ratio to follow to vote for candidates.
2. His political ideology is not based solely on bipartisanship.
3. He's not more right wing than Michele Bachmann on the homosexual marriage.

1. I don't have a certain ratio, that's something SWE made up based on an analysis of my positions. It's not a ratio that I officially strive to follow or endorse as fact.

2. I actually have solid positions on things. You're implying that I just take the most moderate position possible on every issue and change it frequently according to political winds, which I've never done.

3. Michele Bachmann supports a federal amendment to the U.S. Constitution banning gay marriage nationwide, and she probably supports conversion therapy. I oppose the latter, and do not support anything close to the former.

1. You've based every endorsement on being bipartisan (which is your ideology). You've admitted it before and it's just an odd position to hold.

2. As you've said in the past, you based your ideology on being bipartisan, once again, odd.

3.
Michele Bachmann: "Gay marriage is not an issue, it's boring."
Wulfric: "Gay marriage should not be protected by the federal government, marriage should be for procreation (basically Bachmann's usual position), and gay marriage will lead to polygamy and incest."

[badgate]

Wulfric - moderate to a fault and stupid enough to play the "both parties do it/are to blame" card way too often.

[Illuminati Blood Drinker]

Is this a "lol fat Americans" joke? Because Bushie seems like your garden variety rural Religious Right voter, so obviously not him.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Bushie. Most American swing voters are fairly clueless people who move around on political winds and really shallow stuff with little knowledge, not people who dissect every issue to create a synthetic position that doesn't lean too much to either side.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Bushie for three reasons.

1. He doesn't assign a certain ratio to follow to vote for candidates.
2. His political ideology is not based solely on bipartisanship.
3. He's not more right wing than Michele Bachmann on the homosexual marriage.

1. I don't have a certain ratio, that's something SWE made up based on an analysis of my positions. It's not a ratio that I officially strive to follow or endorse as fact.

2. I actually have solid positions on things. You're implying that I just take the most moderate position possible on every issue and change it frequently according to political winds, which I've never done.

3. Michele Bachmann supports a federal amendment to the U.S. Constitution banning gay marriage nationwide, and she probably supports conversion therapy. I oppose the latter, and do not support anything close to the former.

1. You've based every endorsement on being bipartisan (which is your ideology). You've admitted it before and it's just an odd position to hold.

2. As you've said in the past, you based your ideology on being bipartisan, once again, odd.

3.
Michele Bachmann: "Gay marriage is not an issue, it's boring."
Wulfric: "Gay marriage should not be protected by the federal government, marriage should be for procreation (basically Bachmann's usual position), and gay marriage will lead to polygamy and incest."

Not an issue could mean a lot of things. It could mean she doesn't vote for people based on it. It could mean that she thinks that it won't be a major issue in 2016. Perhaps it means she still opposes SSM/Civil Unions but also has a states' rights position, which is also Ted Cruz's position, interestingly. It could mean  she doesn't support it but has given up fighting against it. Given her history, I highly doubt it means her personal opinions have significantly changed.

[politicus]

Actually a difficult choice.

Wulfric.  People like Bushie are solidly Republican.

I kind of feel that without the influence of this forum, Bushie wouldn't even be a swing voter.

[ElectionsGuy]

Bushie is an Oklahoma "democrat", so clearly he's not the choice. Wulfric isn't a great representation either but a better choice than him.

[Chunk Yogurt for President!]

Bushie's type seems less common. I'm not sure how many white evangelicals can be considered "swing' voters. Especially in Oklahoma.

My mother would fit that description.

[Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck]

It truly is amazing how rarely evangelical Christians ever grapple with the two sides of the political world.  There are a few that weigh the economic message of helping the poor and downtrodden against social issues like gay marriage and abortion, but it seems to be very rare and excluisive to those who willingly engage themselves in political news and banter.  Maybe they are truly still stuck in that Cold War mentality where capitalism is always the answer and think that voting GOP really is the way to help poors.  Troubling.  I guess I find your businessman Pubies more palatable, who just admit that they are more interested in creating a freer market and better business environment and that poors gotta take care of themselves.  I mean, if evangelicals are going to buy into all this nonsense can't they at least do the "help the poors" thing?

[King]

Bushie. Wulfric is a Very Serious Swing Voter. Bushie swings on hearsay, which is more representative of the average American voter.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

It truly is amazing how rarely evangelical Christians ever grapple with the two sides of the political world.  There are a few that weigh the economic message of helping the poor and downtrodden against social issues like gay marriage and abortion, but it seems to be very rare and excluisive to those who willingly engage themselves in political news and banter.  Maybe they are truly still stuck in that Cold War mentality where capitalism is always the answer and think that voting GOP really is the way to help poors.  Troubling.  I guess I find your businessman Pubies more palatable, who just admit that they are more interested in creating a freer market and better business environment and that poors gotta take care of themselves.  I mean, if evangelicals are going to buy into all this nonsense can't they at least do the "help the poors" thing?

It's not as rare as you think. Per the CNN exit polls for 2008 (unfortunately the 2012 ones seem to be not working now) Obama won about 26% of white evangelicals. Now that doesn't sound like a lot, but consider that that both: 1-Includes the south (which is far more evangelical than most places) and 2-is better than the numbers for whites overall in the south, and no they aren't exclusively evangelical. For example in Alabama 47% of the respondents were white evangelical, but 65% were white, meaning about 28% of white voters weren't evangelical, and they were bigger for McCain than white evangelicals nationwide.

BTW in Minnesota, Obama won 35% of white evangelicals. Not a lot either, but then consider that it's better than he got overall in three states. And as I've pointed out in IRC before, when you consider that there are many evangelical churches that were near 100% McCain, to balance that out you'd have to have some that were near 100% Obama to wind up at those numbers...and now you can see how the people like me are actually not all that uncommon and concentrated well.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Bushie. Wulfric is a Very Serious Swing Voter. Bushie swings on hearsay, which is more representative of the average American voter.

Yeah people like Wulfric don't really exist outside the Internet.

[Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck]

It truly is amazing how rarely evangelical Christians ever grapple with the two sides of the political world.  There are a few that weigh the economic message of helping the poor and downtrodden against social issues like gay marriage and abortion, but it seems to be very rare and excluisive to those who willingly engage themselves in political news and banter.  Maybe they are truly still stuck in that Cold War mentality where capitalism is always the answer and think that voting GOP really is the way to help poors.  Troubling.  I guess I find your businessman Pubies more palatable, who just admit that they are more interested in creating a freer market and better business environment and that poors gotta take care of themselves.  I mean, if evangelicals are going to buy into all this nonsense can't they at least do the "help the poors" thing?

It's not as rare as you think. Per the CNN exit polls for 2008 (unfortunately the 2012 ones seem to be not working now) Obama won about 26% of white evangelicals. Now that doesn't sound like a lot, but consider that that both: 1-Includes the south (which is far more evangelical than most places) and 2-is better than the numbers for whites overall in the south, and no they aren't exclusively evangelical. For example in Alabama 47% of the respondents were white evangelical, but 65% were white, meaning about 28% of white voters weren't evangelical, and they were bigger for McCain than white evangelicals nationwide.

BTW in Minnesota, Obama won 35% of white evangelicals. Not a lot either, but then consider that it's better than he got overall in three states. And as I've pointed out in IRC before, when you consider that there are many evangelical churches that were near 100% McCain, to balance that out you'd have to have some that were near 100% Obama to wind up at those numbers...and now you can see how the people like me are actually not all that uncommon and concentrated well.

Do you have to identify as evangelical in exit polls, or do the pollsters ask about denomination and then make their own classification?  Furthermore, do all evangelicals even know that they are evangelical?  Either way, I feel like my point still stands.  If they weren't being so selective/using their faith to justify standing prejudices, you wouldn't see the party that wants to strengthen the social safety net pulling a paltry 1/4 of evangelicals.  Bushie seems like he's that 25% to me.  I'm sure no one else in his family spends 10% of the time he does on teh intarwebs, and I can only imagine what they think of Obama.

[Phony Moderate]

Swing voters don't oppose SSM nowadays, generally speaking.

[All Along The Watchtower]

Bushie. Wulfric is a Very Serious Swing Voter. Bushie swings on hearsay, which is more representative of the average American voter.

Fair enough. I change my mind. While I did think Wulfric was more representative of the average swing voter yesterday, today I think it is Bushie. Tomorrow-who knows? Only God knows, that's who.