Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

Where the Deuce is the Median Voter

EddyEddy pale Gengars I lovedbeside Cerulean CaveRegistered User regular
edited September 2011 in Debate and/or Discourse
politicalCompass.gif

Results-1267397015.png

So, on everyone's favorite political graph, where do you think the median voter currently is / will be on Election Day? Where do you think Obama is? Did the placement of the median voter shift over the past decade or two, and is this going to be a critical/realigning election?

WHO ARE WE AND WHERE ARE WE GOING?!?!!!1111

«1345

Posts

  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    The median voter thinks of him/herself a centrist, has policy positions that are like a moderate Democrat, and tends to vote for Republicans.

    S/he is stupid.

    The President is a moderate liberal whose ideology doesn't matter because his political philosophy is based on what will actually pass (until the last week; they seem to be holding on this line at the moment). It's not a realigning election until Texas flips (yes, Speaker, you win). The end.

    Lose: to suffer defeat, to misplace (Ex: "I hope I don't lose the match." "Did you lose your phone again?")
    Loose: about to slip, to release (Ex: "That knot is loose." "Loose arrows.")
  • CptHamiltonCptHamilton Registered User regular
    Eddy wrote:
    Did the placement of the median voter shift over the past decade or two, and is this going to be a critical/realigning election?

    I don't imagine the placement of the median voter has shifted too much over the last decade. In the last two decades it's probably shimmied a bit down toward the liberal end of the social policy scale, as more young people become voters who were raised in the increasing socially liberal society we've got.

    As for the election... I don't think it will be critical or re-aligning. The options are, essentially, 4 More with Obama or <Some guy from the GOP>. I don't know who that guy will be, but presumably one of the less-completely-batshit-but-otherwise-basically-identical candidates. And, I suspect, Obama will win and we'll have another 4 years of the GOP bitching and whining while the Dems talk about cool stuff but can't force it through the GOP roadblock. If they continue down their current spiral into crazytown then I think the next election will be really interesting.

    OptimusZed wrote: »
    Jesus, people. This thread is like a running gunbattle with stupid bullets.
  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    The median voter shifts based on how many people the GOP can prevent from voting.

  • AtomikaAtomika YOU ARE COMPLETELY DISREGARDING THE LABOR THEORY OF VALUE YOU ARE A BARNACLERegistered User regular
    Eddy wrote:
    Did the placement of the median voter shift over the past decade or two, and is this going to be a critical/realigning election?

    I don't imagine the placement of the median voter has shifted too much over the last decade. In the last two decades it's probably shimmied a bit down toward the liberal end of the social policy scale, as more young people become voters who were raised in the increasing socially liberal society we've got.

    As for the election... I don't think it will be critical or re-aligning. The options are, essentially, 4 More with Obama or <Some guy from the GOP>. I don't know who that guy will be, but presumably one of the less-completely-batshit-but-otherwise-basically-identical candidates. And, I suspect, Obama will win and we'll have another 4 years of the GOP bitching and whining while the Dems talk about cool stuff but can't force it through the GOP roadblock. If they continue down their current spiral into crazytown then I think the next election will be really interesting.

    I think the definition of centrism is constantly changing with societal mores, so progressivism (as a metric) actually stays more-or-less stagnant. Despite recent polling data that states some 12% of Americans still think interracial marriage should be outlawed (and god, I wish that study was separated into regional values), we're a far more progressive society today than in the 1950s, where simply thinking minorities deserve better than "separate but equal" policies got you the label of a "progressive" or "radical."

    In all, however, that's good news. As the standard keeps moving leftward, the better the country will get. We're no longer talking about whether or not sodomy should be outlawed, we're arguing if all states should recognize gay marriage.

  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    I think the definition of centrism is constantly changing with societal mores, so progressivism (as a metric) actually stays more-or-less stagnant. Despite recent polling data that states some 12% of Americans still think interracial marriage should be outlawed (and god, I wish that study was separated into regional values), we're a far more progressive society today than in the 1950s, where simply thinking minorities deserve better than "separate but equal" policies got you the label of a "progressive" or "radical."

    In all, however, that's good news. As the standard keeps moving leftward, the better the country will get. We're no longer talking about whether or not sodomy should be outlawed, we're arguing if all states should recognize gay marriage.
    While this is true in blue-state land, over in the third-world tinpot oligarchy that is the red states, not so much. Texas and Montana both have Republican platforms that advocate banning sodomy/homosexuality, for instance.

  • AtomikaAtomika YOU ARE COMPLETELY DISREGARDING THE LABOR THEORY OF VALUE YOU ARE A BARNACLERegistered User regular
    Thanatos wrote:
    I think the definition of centrism is constantly changing with societal mores, so progressivism (as a metric) actually stays more-or-less stagnant. Despite recent polling data that states some 12% of Americans still think interracial marriage should be outlawed (and god, I wish that study was separated into regional values), we're a far more progressive society today than in the 1950s, where simply thinking minorities deserve better than "separate but equal" policies got you the label of a "progressive" or "radical."

    In all, however, that's good news. As the standard keeps moving leftward, the better the country will get. We're no longer talking about whether or not sodomy should be outlawed, we're arguing if all states should recognize gay marriage.
    While this is true in blue-state land, over in the third-world tinpot oligarchy that is the red states, not so much. Texas and Montana both have Republican platforms that advocate banning sodomy/homosexuality, for instance.

    Indeed.

    It's why we need executive orders or amendments defending things like that, pronto. But they're also getting help from the very-homophobic minorities over there, so it's not 100% analogous to the past.

  • SyrdonSyrdon Registered User regular
    Obama is pretty solidly somewhere in the top left corner of that graph (authoritarian left), but I'm not entirely sure exactly where (and I'm too lazy to work it out). Voters, with respect to Presidential races at least, seem to vote much more heavily on emotional and party lines than based on actual issues from what I've seen (1). As such, I'm not sold that considering policies is going to be a useful thing for this election as much as gauging the scariness of a given contestant (say ... Bachmann) and how many voters align themselves with each party (2).

    All that said, I'll bet the median voter really just wants someone they think has a credible solution for the economy and who will otherwise not wreck the country beyond repair. I suspect this will more or less put the median voter center right (lower government spending and otherwise neutral).

    1: I'd love to see some actual research on what the opinion of the median voter was/is, but I'm not even really sure where to start looking for that.
    2: I suspect this is different than what the actual enrollment in the party is

  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    Thanatos wrote:
    I think the definition of centrism is constantly changing with societal mores, so progressivism (as a metric) actually stays more-or-less stagnant. Despite recent polling data that states some 12% of Americans still think interracial marriage should be outlawed (and god, I wish that study was separated into regional values), we're a far more progressive society today than in the 1950s, where simply thinking minorities deserve better than "separate but equal" policies got you the label of a "progressive" or "radical."

    In all, however, that's good news. As the standard keeps moving leftward, the better the country will get. We're no longer talking about whether or not sodomy should be outlawed, we're arguing if all states should recognize gay marriage.
    While this is true in blue-state land, over in the third-world tinpot oligarchy that is the red states, not so much. Texas and Montana both have Republican platforms that advocate banning sodomy/homosexuality, for instance.

    Indeed.

    It's why we need executive orders or amendments defending things like that, pronto. But they're also getting help from the very-homophobic minorities over there, so it's not 100% analogous to the past.

    Wasn't there a recent poll showing huge numbers of Republicans from some southern state were STILL against interracial marriage?

  • ChanusChanus Registered User regular
  • AtomikaAtomika YOU ARE COMPLETELY DISREGARDING THE LABOR THEORY OF VALUE YOU ARE A BARNACLERegistered User regular
    shryke wrote:
    Wasn't there a recent poll showing huge numbers of Republicans from some southern state were STILL against interracial marriage?

    The poll I saw didn't have it stratified that far, but I was just skimming. But seriously, 12%? More than one in ten?

    Jesus, people.

  • RedTideRedTide Registered User regular
    Chanus wrote:
    The idea that Obama is either highly authoritarian or highly liberal is a farce at best.

    Point to a single policy that would support this idea.

    If congress had handed him a bill with single payer in it, assuming that there wasn't some poison pill attached, I'd bet my next paycheck that he would have signed it in a heartbeat. While single payer healthcare isn't exactly a far left idea on the global scale, in America the majority of people here still think it makes you Karl Marx.

  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    RedTide wrote:
    Chanus wrote:
    The idea that Obama is either highly authoritarian or highly liberal is a farce at best.

    Point to a single policy that would support this idea.

    If congress had handed him a bill with single payer in it, assuming that there wasn't some poison pill attached, I'd bet my next paycheck that he would have signed it in a heartbeat. While single payer healthcare isn't exactly a far left idea on the global scale, in America the majority of people here still think it makes you Karl Marx.

    I'm saying! And there's stuff under his control that would give you the authoritarian view like his application of the state secrets doctrine and what not. However! Really these things are incredibly complicated and you can't narrow them down to a simple two dimensional scale.

    Lose: to suffer defeat, to misplace (Ex: "I hope I don't lose the match." "Did you lose your phone again?")
    Loose: about to slip, to release (Ex: "That knot is loose." "Loose arrows.")
  • Captain CarrotCaptain Carrot Harrisonburg, VARegistered User regular
    Although if you put it to them as a universal Medicare buy-in (which would be a good way of doing it) it gets overwhelming support.

  • RedTideRedTide Registered User regular
    Although if you put it to them as a universal Medicare buy-in (which would be a good way of doing it) it gets overwhelming support.

    I don't think we're going to get much of a debate over how stupid the average voter here is. I mean if the President could figure out a way to put flame decals and truck nuts on Air Force One he'd probably keep his approval rating above 60%.

  • jothkijothki Registered User regular
    RedTide wrote:
    Although if you put it to them as a universal Medicare buy-in (which would be a good way of doing it) it gets overwhelming support.

    I don't think we're going to get much of a debate over how stupid the average voter here is. I mean if the President could figure out a way to put flame decals and truck nuts on Air Force One he'd probably keep his approval rating above 60%.

    Ah, the Teddy Roosevelt strategy.

  • HeirHeir Registered User regular
    edited September 2011
    The median voter thinks of him/herself a centrist, has policy positions that are like a moderate Democrat, and tends to vote for Republicans.

    S/he is stupid.

    I consider myself fairly moderate nowadays when I look at my political views...or rather, I identify with both parties on various issues. I grew up staunchly Republican..over time I've slowly identified more and more with the Democrats though...or at the very least I feel alienated by the current Republican party. Most likely I will be voting for Obama, though I feel that's somewhat because I can not in good faith vote for anyone running for the GOP nomination currently.

    So, in your opinion...am I stupid? I'm honestly curious on this...as I've seen this sentiment several times on these boards.

    Edit: And for reference, I tend to land smack dab at (0,0) in that graph above, though it's been a while since I've taken the test.

    Heir on
    camo_sig2.png
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    shryke wrote:
    Wasn't there a recent poll showing huge numbers of Republicans from some southern state were STILL against interracial marriage?

    The poll I saw didn't have it stratified that far, but I was just skimming. But seriously, 12%? More than one in ten?

    Jesus, people.

    Only 12%?

    http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2011/04/07/poll_mississippi_interracial_marriage
    When usual Republican primary voters in the state of Mississippi were asked if they think interracial marriage should be legal or illegal, a whopping 46 percent said it should be illegal, compared to 40 percent who think it should be legal. The remaining 14 percent were unsure.

    46% said it should be illegal and 14% weren't sure.

  • Evil MultifariousEvil Multifarious Registered User regular
    shryke wrote:
    shryke wrote:
    Wasn't there a recent poll showing huge numbers of Republicans from some southern state were STILL against interracial marriage?

    The poll I saw didn't have it stratified that far, but I was just skimming. But seriously, 12%? More than one in ten?

    Jesus, people.

    Only 12%?

    http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2011/04/07/poll_mississippi_interracial_marriage
    When usual Republican primary voters in the state of Mississippi were asked if they think interracial marriage should be legal or illegal, a whopping 46 percent said it should be illegal, compared to 40 percent who think it should be legal. The remaining 14 percent were unsure.

    46% said it should be illegal and 14% weren't sure.

    what. the. fuck.

    Inquisitor wrote: »
    I fucking hate you Canadians.
  • EddyEddy pale Gengars I loved beside Cerulean CaveRegistered User regular
    Well maybe if the question were phrased "Are you in favor of anti-miscegenation laws?"

    "is that like immigration"

  • AtomikaAtomika YOU ARE COMPLETELY DISREGARDING THE LABOR THEORY OF VALUE YOU ARE A BARNACLERegistered User regular
    Hey, big shock, they're all Huckabee/Barber/Palin voters!

    Not racist, but #1 with racists.

  • Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. 5386-8443-8937Registered User regular
    I'm curious what the question and sample size were.

    I have no great opinion of that group but it still seems high.

    sig.jpg
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    Why don't you like PPP? They are one of the better polling agencies.

    And the question was "Do you think interraccial marriage should be legal or illegal?". It doesn't get any clearer then that:
    http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/PPP_Release_MS_0407915.pdf

  • Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. 5386-8443-8937Registered User regular
    Why don't you like PPP?

    Holy leaping conclusions batman.

    sig.jpg
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    Heir wrote:
    The median voter thinks of him/herself a centrist, has policy positions that are like a moderate Democrat, and tends to vote for Republicans.

    S/he is stupid.

    I consider myself fairly moderate nowadays when I look at my political views...or rather, I identify with both parties on various issues. I grew up staunchly Republican..over time I've slowly identified more and more with the Democrats though...or at the very least I feel alienated by the current Republican party. Most likely I will be voting for Obama, though I feel that's somewhat because I can not in good faith vote for anyone running for the GOP nomination currently.

    So, in your opinion...am I stupid? I'm honestly curious on this...as I've seen this sentiment several times on these boards.

    Edit: And for reference, I tend to land smack dab at (0,0) in that graph above, though it's been a while since I've taken the test.

    There's a difference between changing views as you describe and holding positions like "I love Medicare and Social Security!" and voting for the party who wants to destroy those things. That's what is stupid.

    Lose: to suffer defeat, to misplace (Ex: "I hope I don't lose the match." "Did you lose your phone again?")
    Loose: about to slip, to release (Ex: "That knot is loose." "Loose arrows.")
  • Captain CarrotCaptain Carrot Harrisonburg, VARegistered User regular
    Why don't you like PPP?

    Holy leaping conclusions batman.

    I think he interpreted "that group" as meaning the polling agency, not the people being polled.

  • ElJeffeElJeffe Super Moderator, Moderator, ClubPA mod
    I think that, increasingly, the "median voter" doesn't exist except as the average of various extremes.

    Maddie: "I named my feet. The left one is flip and the right one is flop. Oh, and also I named my flip-flops."

    I make tweet.
  • ChanusChanus Registered User regular
    ElJeffe wrote:
    I think that, increasingly, the "median voter" doesn't exist except as the average of various extremes.

    Probably because moderates can't be bothered to vote in this country.

    They fall prey to the "Turd Sandwich/Giant Douche" bullshit.

  • SpeakerSpeaker Registered User regular
    The median voter thinks of him/herself a centrist, has policy positions that are like a moderate Democrat, and tends to vote for Republicans.

    S/he is stupid.

    The President is a moderate liberal whose ideology doesn't matter because his political philosophy is based on what will actually pass (until the last week; they seem to be holding on this line at the moment). It's not a realigning election until Texas flips (yes, Speaker, you win). The end.

    I hope they nominate Perry, lulling them into a false sense of security about Texas.

    Then in 2016 we drive terror into their hearts by flipping it.

    Being walkers with the dawn and morning,
    Walkers with the sun and morning, we are not afraid of night,
    Nor days of gloom, nor darkness -
    Being walkers with the sun and morning.
  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    ElJeffe wrote:
    I think that, increasingly, the "median voter" doesn't exist except as the average of various extremes.

    I think there are probably 35-45% of voters who will always (or almost always) vote for the Republicans, and 40-50% of voters who will always (or almost always) vote for the Democrats. I think most of the "swing voters" are just low-information ignorami who will go with the guy whose name sounds better, or who has been on the news more, or who seems more like someone they want to have a drink with.

    I think most of the meat and potatoes of an election is actually who can get more of their base to turn out, and drive more of the other base to stay home, and I think the Republicans tend to be better at this than the Democrats (especially at getting people to stay home).

  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    Chanus wrote:
    ElJeffe wrote:
    I think that, increasingly, the "median voter" doesn't exist except as the average of various extremes.

    Probably because moderates can't be bothered to vote in this country.

    They fall prey to the "Turd Sandwich/Giant Douche" bullshit.
    At this point, if you're a "moderate" on the two-party scale, you're a retard.

    "Huh, I only think we should only mostly destroy the world's economy."

  • SpeakerSpeaker Registered User regular
    shryke wrote:
    shryke wrote:
    Wasn't there a recent poll showing huge numbers of Republicans from some southern state were STILL against interracial marriage?

    The poll I saw didn't have it stratified that far, but I was just skimming. But seriously, 12%? More than one in ten?

    Jesus, people.

    Only 12%?

    http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2011/04/07/poll_mississippi_interracial_marriage
    When usual Republican primary voters in the state of Mississippi were asked if they think interracial marriage should be legal or illegal, a whopping 46 percent said it should be illegal, compared to 40 percent who think it should be legal. The remaining 14 percent were unsure.

    46% said it should be illegal and 14% weren't sure.

    what. the. fuck.

    Mississippi has a big black population, and both races are hived off into solid opposing partisan camps as I understand it. The constant political tension that is also a racial struggle makes it harder to relax social tension.

    I know nothing about Mississippi though, so that's a thesis sketched on a sticky note in crayon.

    Being walkers with the dawn and morning,
    Walkers with the sun and morning, we are not afraid of night,
    Nor days of gloom, nor darkness -
    Being walkers with the sun and morning.
  • SpeakerSpeaker Registered User regular
    Thanatos wrote:
    ElJeffe wrote:
    I think that, increasingly, the "median voter" doesn't exist except as the average of various extremes.

    I think there are probably 35-45% of voters who will always (or almost always) vote for the Republicans, and 40-50% of voters who will always (or almost always) vote for the Democrats. I think most of the "swing voters" are just low-information ignorami who will go with the guy whose name sounds better, or who has been on the news more, or who seems more like someone they want to have a drink with.

    I think most of the meat and potatoes of an election is actually who can get more of their base to turn out, and drive more of the other base to stay home, and I think the Republicans tend to be better at this than the Democrats (especially at getting people to stay home).

    I think that's right.

    It's also next to impossible to keep the Democratic base motivated though. The casually interested people don't turn out in the off years and the interested people are kind of . . . not well molded to provide sustained and unified political support/pressure.

    Being walkers with the dawn and morning,
    Walkers with the sun and morning, we are not afraid of night,
    Nor days of gloom, nor darkness -
    Being walkers with the sun and morning.
  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    Why don't you like PPP?

    Holy leaping conclusions batman.

    I think he interpreted "that group" as meaning the polling agency, not the people being polled.

    This.

  • redxredx East Bumblefuck, PARegistered User regular
    edited September 2011
    Heir wrote:
    The median voter thinks of him/herself a centrist, has policy positions that are like a moderate Democrat, and tends to vote for Republicans.

    S/he is stupid.

    I consider myself fairly moderate nowadays when I look at my political views...or rather, I identify with both parties on various issues. I grew up staunchly Republican..over time I've slowly identified more and more with the Democrats though...or at the very least I feel alienated by the current Republican party. Most likely I will be voting for Obama, though I feel that's somewhat because I can not in good faith vote for anyone running for the GOP nomination currently.

    So, in your opinion...am I stupid? I'm honestly curious on this...as I've seen this sentiment several times on these boards.

    Edit: And for reference, I tend to land smack dab at (0,0) in that graph above, though it's been a while since I've taken the test.

    On what issues do you agree with republicans and why?

    redx on
    All I've got is a snuggle hammer.
  • mcdermottmcdermott Registered User regular
    redx wrote:
    Heir wrote:
    The median voter thinks of him/herself a centrist, has policy positions that are like a moderate Democrat, and tends to vote for Republicans.

    S/he is stupid.

    I consider myself fairly moderate nowadays when I look at my political views...or rather, I identify with both parties on various issues. I grew up staunchly Republican..over time I've slowly identified more and more with the Democrats though...or at the very least I feel alienated by the current Republican party. Most likely I will be voting for Obama, though I feel that's somewhat because I can not in good faith vote for anyone running for the GOP nomination currently.

    So, in your opinion...am I stupid? I'm honestly curious on this...as I've seen this sentiment several times on these boards.

    Edit: And for reference, I tend to land smack dab at (0,0) in that graph above, though it's been a while since I've taken the test.

    On what issues do you agree with republicans and why?

    I actually agree with Republicans from time to time on some stuff. I support gun ownership and carry rights, for the why I'd point you to the last gun thread (to avoid derailing).

    Also, I fairly firmly believe that in any case in which there are not substantial interstate effects nor clear civil rights violations, it's best to let states determine their own policies (to include not withholding tax funds, funds taken from that state's citizens, to extort compliance). Though I diverge pretty quickly from Republicans as to where this applies.

    I also fall somewhere between Republicans and Democrats on the "private industry versus government intervention" argument, though I seem to be drifting more towards the D side (or rather the R's have been drifting more towards the crazy-L side).

    I actually consider myself to be a pretty damn moderate voter. Except for the fact that when the chips are down, and I'm forced to choose, I fall on the Democratic side pretty much every fucking time. Mainly because I consider the Crazy-R side to be much worse than the Crazy-D side.

  • finnithfinnith Registered User regular
    shryke wrote:
    shryke wrote:
    Wasn't there a recent poll showing huge numbers of Republicans from some southern state were STILL against interracial marriage?

    The poll I saw didn't have it stratified that far, but I was just skimming. But seriously, 12%? More than one in ten?

    Jesus, people.

    Only 12%?

    http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2011/04/07/poll_mississippi_interracial_marriage
    When usual Republican primary voters in the state of Mississippi were asked if they think interracial marriage should be legal or illegal, a whopping 46 percent said it should be illegal, compared to 40 percent who think it should be legal. The remaining 14 percent were unsure.

    46% said it should be illegal and 14% weren't sure.

    what. the. fuck.

    I wonder if it's race-specific or relating to all races. Being an Hindu Indian, I can tell you a lot of parents do their part to discourage relationships with Muslims.

  • Captain CarrotCaptain Carrot Harrisonburg, VARegistered User regular
    I wonder how that would compare to MS Republican primary voters in 1868. Reconstruction is still well underway and it's popular to support civil rights, but a lot of that consisted of not being slaves, so social enlightenment is a little doubtful.

  • IncenjucarIncenjucar QA Tester -> Game Producer Seattle, WARegistered User regular
    Thanatos wrote:
    I think most of the meat and potatoes of an election is actually who can get more of their base to turn out, and drive more of the other base to stay home, and I think the Republicans tend to be better at this than the Democrats (especially at getting people to stay home).

    This has been my observation, limited as my information may be. And every thread we have some self-proclaimed liberal who wants to "punish" the democrats by not voting for them.

    freefallagentad_zps635a83ed.png
  • a5ehrena5ehren AtlantaRegistered User regular
    finnith wrote:
    shryke wrote:
    shryke wrote:
    Wasn't there a recent poll showing huge numbers of Republicans from some southern state were STILL against interracial marriage?

    The poll I saw didn't have it stratified that far, but I was just skimming. But seriously, 12%? More than one in ten?

    Jesus, people.

    Only 12%?

    http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2011/04/07/poll_mississippi_interracial_marriage
    When usual Republican primary voters in the state of Mississippi were asked if they think interracial marriage should be legal or illegal, a whopping 46 percent said it should be illegal, compared to 40 percent who think it should be legal. The remaining 14 percent were unsure.

    46% said it should be illegal and 14% weren't sure.

    what. the. fuck.

    I wonder if it's race-specific or relating to all races. Being an Hindu Indian, I can tell you a lot of parents do their part to discourage relationships with Muslims.

    Well, in Mississippi the question is basically asking white people (aka Republican primary voters) whether or not Black or Hispanic people should be legally allowed to marry a white person. Other races are such a small part of the population there that it probably never entered into anyone's mind.

  • SyrdonSyrdon Registered User regular
    Heir wrote:
    The median voter thinks of him/herself a centrist, has policy positions that are like a moderate Democrat, and tends to vote for Republicans.

    S/he is stupid.
    I consider myself fairly moderate nowadays when I look at my political views...or rather, I identify with both parties on various issues. I grew up staunchly Republican..over time I've slowly identified more and more with the Democrats though...or at the very least I feel alienated by the current Republican party. Most likely I will be voting for Obama, though I feel that's somewhat because I can not in good faith vote for anyone running for the GOP nomination currently.

    So, in your opinion...am I stupid? I'm honestly curious on this...as I've seen this sentiment several times on these boards.
    Well, that depends. Would you be voting for Republicans because you think they will bring about more equality, a stronger middle class, decrease the screwing over of those who aren't already rich, choose a less interventionist/belligerent foreign policy (note: this one may actually be complicated)? I'm actually fairly sure your answer to at least some of those is no, simply because you said you can't find a GOP candidate you like. There's a host of other issues that you could come up with, as well as specific policies, but I'm lazy so I'm leaving finding those as an exercise for some other poster.

    Most of the time, when people on this board are complaining about centrist voters being idiots they're complaining about folks who have a reasonably specific set of political goals and are voting for the party that has a strong track record (and frequently a stated goal) of doing the opposite. Usually, its associated with making a decision about who you are voting for based more on the tone of their speeches than their actual content (that is, more concerned about how they say something than what they are saying). If you're doing any research at all then you're already out of that group. If the current GOP candidates make you uncomfortable, that also puts you out of the group. You can actually extend that to the entire party, not just the candidates to be honest.

    TL;DR: being in the middle of a reasonable political spectrum is not a problem, being lazy about your political choices is. I highly doubt you fall into the second group.

«1345
Sign In or Register to comment.