4
4
0
Interesting statistics.
Go down to the bit where the numbers are broken down into "level of education" and you will see that there are (reasonably) consistent relationships between support for the Republicans AND the Democrats that depend on a person's level of education.
Of course the margin of error to the poll is +/- 6% so that could mean that the support for the Republicans is "really" 39% while the support for the Democrats is "really" only 39%.
[That, of course, is quite in conformity with the adage that "You could run a 'Yellow Dog' as the candidate for the __[Republicans/Democrats - Pick One]__ and you would still get around 40% of the vote."
Go down to the bit where the numbers are broken down into "level of education" and you will see that there are (reasonably) consistent relationships between support for the Republicans AND the Democrats that depend on a person's level of education.
Of course the margin of error to the poll is +/- 6% so that could mean that the support for the Republicans is "really" 39% while the support for the Democrats is "really" only 39%.
[That, of course, is quite in conformity with the adage that "You could run a 'Yellow Dog' as the candidate for the __[Republicans/Democrats - Pick One]__ and you would still get around 40% of the vote."
GOP’s Favorability Rating Edges Lower
Posted from people-press.org
Election 2016
Politics
Statistics
Republicans
Democrats
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 8
4
4
0
Shows that the GOP is in real trouble with all groups other than possibly white men without college degrees and that the GOP is in horrible shape with women, blacks and hispanics and young voters.
Of course, women traditionally have a higher voting rate than men and hispanics are the fastest growing voting block (more than 10% of the electorate in 2012).
Too bad the GOP ignored its "Autopsy" report after the 2012 election. That document prepared by the RNC recommended that the party embrace comprehensive immigration reform (essential to attract most hispanic voters) and soften its position on abortion (essential to attract more women), and instead went even harder right, which has repelled both groups as well millennials.
Of course, women traditionally have a higher voting rate than men and hispanics are the fastest growing voting block (more than 10% of the electorate in 2012).
Too bad the GOP ignored its "Autopsy" report after the 2012 election. That document prepared by the RNC recommended that the party embrace comprehensive immigration reform (essential to attract most hispanic voters) and soften its position on abortion (essential to attract more women), and instead went even harder right, which has repelled both groups as well millennials.
(4)
(0)
LTC (Join to see)
COL Ted Mc - Yup, but hispanics will never support a party that includes deporting grandma as part of its platform.
The Autopsy after the 2012 election had it right, and the GOP has ignored it at its peril.
The Autopsy after the 2012 election had it right, and the GOP has ignored it at its peril.
(0)
(0)
COL Ted Mc
Cpl (Join to see) - Corporal; Since you appear to be an expert on Marxism, possibly you would be so good as to explain how the Marx/Engels duality whereby the situation where Marx, who posited the operation of dialectic at the level of social reality, and Engels who took a position that depicted social man as subject to universally operable laws of material nature, conceived as dialectical, whereby he effectively dehumanized man of his self- and world-producing attributes by assimilating him as a totality of physical properties into the system of laws of an anthropomorphized naturalism were reconciled through using ** as well as how Marx' prerequisite of post-capitalist (defined by them as communist) society being the universal development of human abilities and all social relations but also his allegation that the abolition of private property is not only highly topical but it is also an imperative history-making task can be reconciled and how they (actually all four) can fit within "The Difference Between the Democritean and Epicurean Philosophy of Nature"?
PS - Could you please give me your explaination of what "Dialectic Materialism", "Dialectic", and "Historical Materialism" are, how they relate, and how each of them "falsifies" aspects of the others.
LTC (Join to see) - Major; The "at its peril" clause seems to have a general translation equivalent to "It doesn't matter what you believe in, do anything at all to get elected and stay in power EVEN if you have to do something that is 180 degrees opposed to what you actually believe.".
PS - Could you please give me your explaination of what "Dialectic Materialism", "Dialectic", and "Historical Materialism" are, how they relate, and how each of them "falsifies" aspects of the others.
LTC (Join to see) - Major; The "at its peril" clause seems to have a general translation equivalent to "It doesn't matter what you believe in, do anything at all to get elected and stay in power EVEN if you have to do something that is 180 degrees opposed to what you actually believe.".
(0)
(0)
LTC (Join to see)
COL Ted Mc - The GOP's current planks of rigid anti-abortion and hardline enforcement-only immigration action is a recent thing. The GOP used to be a party of fiscal conservatives, with the social conservatism creating in mostly with the arrival of Ralph Reed and the Christian Coalition in the late 1980s.
The 2012 Autopsy suggested that to remain relevant to an increasingly brown and increasingly female electorate, those positions would need to be softened. The at its peril comment relates to the party's hope of ever wining the White House. The harder right it goes, the farther it drifts from demographic realities and the less electable it becomes.
The 2012 Autopsy suggested that to remain relevant to an increasingly brown and increasingly female electorate, those positions would need to be softened. The at its peril comment relates to the party's hope of ever wining the White House. The harder right it goes, the farther it drifts from demographic realities and the less electable it becomes.
(0)
(0)
COL Ted Mc
LTC (Join to see) - The way the GOP is going to do it is to adopt the slogan "Pero no su abuela." which will keep everyone happy.
When you say that "The GOP used to be a party of fiscal conservatives ..." I have to ask you "When?". Obviously any article that disputes the thesis that "The GOP used to be a party of fiscal conservatives." is going to be "left-wing" so don't bother to tell me the linked article is and don't bother to complain that it comes from a "left-wing" source.
You might note that "... the arrival of Ralph Reed and the Christian Coalition in the late 1980s ..." corresponded almost exactly with the questioning as to whether some "Churches" were ACTUALLY churches or whether they were "Religion Vending Businesses" and whether the "Religion Vending Businesses" should enjoy the same tax-exempt status as "Churches". It also coincided with the elimination of any mention of the fact that it was the "Evangelicals" who had been the most "liberal and progressive" force in American society (pretty much) since 1607 and the advancement of the position that the "God" that America is "one nation under" is the "God" that is only correctly recognized and worshipped by "Fundamentalist, Literalist, (Baptist like), Christians" and NOT the false one worshipped by the pagan Jews and Muslims or the equally false one worshipped by the heretical so-called "Christians" such as Catholics and Methodists and Anglicans.
On the other hand, a political party can - essentially - do one of two things:
[1] Stick by its principles REGARDLESS of the effect that is going to have on its chances for electoral success,
or
[2] Toss away any principles REGARDLESS of how "fundamental" it has been maintaining those principles are if retaining those principles will adversely affect its chance of electoral success.
http://www.salon.com/2015/05/05/the_ludicrous_myth_of_republican_fiscal_responsibility_a_history_lesson_for_the_modern_gop/
When you say that "The GOP used to be a party of fiscal conservatives ..." I have to ask you "When?". Obviously any article that disputes the thesis that "The GOP used to be a party of fiscal conservatives." is going to be "left-wing" so don't bother to tell me the linked article is and don't bother to complain that it comes from a "left-wing" source.
You might note that "... the arrival of Ralph Reed and the Christian Coalition in the late 1980s ..." corresponded almost exactly with the questioning as to whether some "Churches" were ACTUALLY churches or whether they were "Religion Vending Businesses" and whether the "Religion Vending Businesses" should enjoy the same tax-exempt status as "Churches". It also coincided with the elimination of any mention of the fact that it was the "Evangelicals" who had been the most "liberal and progressive" force in American society (pretty much) since 1607 and the advancement of the position that the "God" that America is "one nation under" is the "God" that is only correctly recognized and worshipped by "Fundamentalist, Literalist, (Baptist like), Christians" and NOT the false one worshipped by the pagan Jews and Muslims or the equally false one worshipped by the heretical so-called "Christians" such as Catholics and Methodists and Anglicans.
On the other hand, a political party can - essentially - do one of two things:
[1] Stick by its principles REGARDLESS of the effect that is going to have on its chances for electoral success,
or
[2] Toss away any principles REGARDLESS of how "fundamental" it has been maintaining those principles are if retaining those principles will adversely affect its chance of electoral success.
http://www.salon.com/2015/05/05/the_ludicrous_myth_of_republican_fiscal_responsibility_a_history_lesson_for_the_modern_gop/
The ludicrous myth of Republican fiscal responsibility: A history lesson for the modern GOP
The GOP loves to insist that Democrats have caused a fiscal crisis. But the real story looks far different
(0)
(0)
4
4
0
this is true. it also proves that it will be the independents that elect the next President
(4)
(0)
PO2 Mark Saffell
Sad isn't that people will vote party line no matter who is running. Think about it. If it wasn't that way HRC wouldn't get 10% of the vote and most likely neither would Trump
(0)
(0)
3
3
0
Registered Republicans should view this report as a compliment. It appears that a greater portion of them realize that their party is failing them. It appears the same is true among Democrats, just not in the same numbers.
(3)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google