• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Obama rebounds in PEW Research poll, leading Romney 54-42 among potential voters

AdamT said:
True, but you can ferdamnedsure bet he would try to put justices on the SC who would reverse Roe.
Click to expand...

... Reversing Roe v. Wade would only make this a state's rights issue... and we would have 30 states with abortions and 20 without abortions (each with a very high incidence of deaths from back-alley procedures). So this whole posturing about SCJ changing Roe v. Wade is largely much to do about nothing. I suppose the real threat is not the reversal of Roe v. Wade, but some off-the-wall SC opinion that decides abortions are murder and then we have some pretty interesting times ahead.

Though I normally would think such an outlandish verdict would not be possible from reasonable minds, I am not comforted by just how off-the-wall debate in this country has become. I can't believe some of the things that are being discussed in the political arena and even on DP, with unfathomable seriousness. There seem to be many folks that would welcome a return of the 15th century when men were men, women were ...... and the earth was flat.
 
Last edited:
upsideguy said:
... Reversing Roe v. Wade would only make this a state's rights issue... and we would have 30 states with abortions and 20 without abortions (each with a very high incidence of deaths from back-alley procedures). So this whole posturing about SCJ changing Roe v. Wade is largely much to do about nothing.
Click to expand...

I fail to see who that constitutes "much ado about nothing." :shock:
 
johnny_rebson said:
True conservatives can't stand Romney.
Click to expand...

What is now defined by the media as "conservative" isn't conservative. As Santorum himself explained, its not "a political campaign, its a spiritual campaign." So to correct your statement, it should read "true Pentacostals and Catholic Pope-ists can't stand Romney."

In terms of Economics, Santorum is the most liberal of the 4 by far by his actually voting record, and like Romney, Santorum was pro-choice before he was pro-life.
 
AdamT said:
I fail to see who that constitutes "much ado about nothing." :shock:
Click to expand...

Reversing Roe v Wade does not make abortion illegal. It just moves the issue to the states.

Sorry, I hate the abortion issue. So, IMHO, any concern about it is much to do about nothing. At the risk of being flamed by everyone, the abortion issue is a moral issue and not a concern of government. We waste far too much time, political energy and political capital trying to protect Roe v. Wade, at the cost of not dealing with matters of substance. IMHO, the matter of abortion is between the man, the women and God; the state has no more role in this than it should in the matter of divorce, which from a biblical standpoint, God clearly detests (and given that a man and wife become one flesh, a better argument could be made for divorce being murder, than abortion). The standard of morality are always higher than the standards of law. Trying to raise law to the level of morality compromises both.
 
upsideguy said:
Reversing Roe v Wade does not make abortion illegal. It just moves the issue to the states.

Sorry, I hate the abortion issue. So, IMHO, any concern about it is much to do about nothing. At the risk of being flamed by everyone, the abortion issue is a moral issue and not a concern of government. We waste far too much time, political energy and political capital trying to protect Roe v. Wade, at the cost of not dealing with matters of substance. IMHO, the matter of abortion is between the man, the women and God; the state has no more role in this than it should in the matter of divorce, which from a biblical standpoint, God clearly detests (and given that a man and wife become one flesh, a better argument could be made for divorce being murder, than abortion). The standard of morality are always higher than the standards of law. Trying to raise law to the level of morality compromises both.
Click to expand...

I don't want to turn this into an abortion thread, either, but if Roe was overturned many states would ban the procedure and then, for millions of American women, it would no longer be between the man, the woman, and God.
 
AdamT said:
True, but you can ferdamnedsure bet he would try to put justices on the SC who would reverse Roe.
Click to expand...

And? That called politics. Every POTUS appoints who they think will lean towards their view. Obama did the same, right?
 
IndepCentristMA said:
Santorum would have no trouble making the argument that he is the "true whack-job", maybe he should take that approach...
Click to expand...

Brilliant, just brilliant. How long did it take you to come up with that?
 
BWG said:
Yep, and the same holds true for Obama banning guns, but just start a thread on it and see how many pages it garners and how impassioned the conversation gets...LOL...:lol:
Click to expand...

Of course, it's always the old "who's ox was gored" thingy. :doh
 
joko104 said:
What is now defined by the media as "conservative" isn't conservative. As Santorum himself explained, its not "a political campaign, its a spiritual campaign." So to correct your statement, it should read "true Pentacostals and Catholic Pope-ists can't stand Romney."

In terms of Economics, Santorum is the most liberal of the 4 by far by his actually voting record, and like Romney, Santorum was pro-choice before he was pro-life.
Click to expand...

The same can be said about the liberals of today. JFK must be rolling in his grave over what the Demo party has morphed into.
 
AdamT said:
I don't want to turn this into an abortion thread, either, but if Roe was overturned many states would ban the procedure and then, for millions of American women, it would no longer be between the man, the woman, and God.
Click to expand...

You think the Supremes would take a case on this question again? I don't, but I could be wrong. Rest easy libbys.
 
AdamT said:
I don't want to turn this into an abortion thread, either, but if Roe was overturned many states would ban the procedure and then, for millions of American women, it would no longer be between the man, the woman, and God.
Click to expand...

Nor do I. I was simply stating that I have no patience for the issue, so its easy for me to blow off the significance of arguments for or against, including the concern as to potential SCJ views on the subject. In explaining myself I probably did invite such a invite the side bar. I am sorry. That was not my intent.
 
Every poll that shows Obama leading seems to have an inordinate amount of democrats participating. What legitimate pollster will poll 10% more democrats than republicans and claim to have a honest picture of public opinion? This Pew poll consisted of 24% republicans and 34% democrats which is definitely not an honest reflection of registered US voters. In addition approximately 1/3 of its 1500 respondents aren't even registered which further skews the results. Just another weak attempt to influence public opinion NOT report on it. From page 66 of the poll:

ASK ALL:
PARTY In politics TODAY, do you consider yourself a Republican, Democrat, or independent?
ASK IF INDEP/NO PREF/OTHER/DK/REF (PARTY=3,4,5,9):
PARTYLN As of today do you lean more to the Republican Party or more to the Democratic Party?

No Other (VOL.) Lean Lean
Republican Democrat Independent preference party DK/Ref Rep Dem
Mar 7-11, 2012 24 34 36 3 1 2 16 17
 
jerry7 said:
Every poll that shows Obama leading seems to have an inordinate amount of democrats participating. What legitimate pollster will poll 10% more democrats than republicans and claim to have a honest picture of public opinion? This Pew poll consisted of 24% republicans and 34% democrats which is definitely not an honest reflection of registered US voters. In addition approximately 1/3 of its 1500 respondents aren't even registered which further skews the results. Just another weak attempt to influence public opinion NOT report on it. From page 66 of the poll:

ASK ALL:
PARTY In politics TODAY, do you consider yourself a Republican, Democrat, or independent?
ASK IF INDEP/NO PREF/OTHER/DK/REF (PARTY=3,4,5,9):
PARTYLN As of today do you lean more to the Republican Party or more to the Democratic Party?

No Other (VOL.) Lean Lean
Republican Democrat Independent preference party DK/Ref Rep Dem
Mar 7-11, 2012 24 34 36 3 1 2 16 17
Click to expand...

They're all skewed, are they? :lol:

RealClearPolitics - Election 2012 - General Election: Romney vs. Obama
 
I saw Romney leading Obama by 5 on Thursday 46-41.
 
Poll: Romney leads Obama by 6 points | PoliPundit.com

My mistake, this was in MI. 46-41 over an incumbent would translate to 54-45 for Romney. This would indicate that only one out of VA, PA, and OH would be necessary assuming Romney wins FL and one other battleground state.
 
OpportunityCost said:
I tell ya what, why dont you stick to representing yourself.

SypherAL from the poll :

24R 34D 36I 3 No preference 1other 2 Don't Know 16Leans R 17Leans D.

So if you poll 51 Dem you get a good result for Obama, who the **** knew?
Click to expand...

that was my immediate question. who are they polling?
 
Yea just going by people I know who aren't necessarily Democrats or Republicans, I was thinking they'd have to poll 80% Democrats in order to get the numbers they've been getting. Polls always show Democrats ahead anyways. Remember in 2008, Obama polled 4-8 points better than he did in the primaries and even in the General Election.
 
cpwill said:
that was my immediate question. who are they polling?
Click to expand...

Are you refering to the PEW poll? They are actually quite acurate. You might not like it but that also might make you more passionate on supporting your cause.
 
The Giant Noodle said:
Are you refering to the PEW poll? They are actually quite acurate. You might not like it but that also might make you more passionate on supporting your cause.
Click to expand...

It's just sad Republican sour grapes. :roll:

Republican-leaning Rasmussen presently has Obama ahead of Romney by six points, AND beating him in the battleground states by four points.
 
AdamT said:
It's just sad Republican sour grapes. :roll:

Republican-leaning Rasmussen presently has Obama ahead of Romney by six points, AND beating him in the battleground states by four points.
Click to expand...

Well it is what it is man. People on both sides are upset. But of course the folks that dont have the Presidency are very pissed. Just the circle of life. What I DONT like is the propaganda and the salesmen trying to make one American hate the other. It makes our Union weaker. I dont see a solution to it.
 
I have yet to talk to someone I associate with who is supporting Obama. That says alot because my area is purple and I know people on both sides. I don't need a poll to tell me who is up by how much unless they do it everyday and are consistent in results. In 2004 and 2008 Rasmussen was the most accurate. People can cry over them being to the right but they're the most accurate. I've also found with polling that the further to the right the numbers are, the more accurate they are. Biased? Not when it's how things really are.
 
The Giant Noodle said:
Well it is what it is man. People on both sides are upset. But of course the folks that dont have the Presidency are very pissed. Just the circle of life. What I DONT like is the propaganda and the salesmen trying to make one American hate the other. It makes our Union weaker. I dont see a solution to it.
Click to expand...

Maybe the recent Limbaugh brouhaha is the camels nose under the tent? More likely just camel toe for liberal gawkers.
 
Derek said:
I have yet to talk to someone I associate with who is supporting Obama. That says alot because my area is purple and I know people on both sides. I don't need a poll to tell me who is up by how much unless they do it everyday and are consistent in results. In 2004 and 2008 Rasmussen was the most accurate. People can cry over them being to the right but they're the most accurate. I've also found with polling that the further to the right the numbers are, the more accurate they are. Biased? Not when it's how things really are.
Click to expand...

In 2008 Rasmussen was one of the LEAST accurate throughout the primary season.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom