Lol, Rasmussen has Trump @46% as of 1/11. Rasmussen is regarded as the most accurate polling firm of the lot. Get off CNN and MSNBC, quit depending on The Huffington Post for your “facts”
Poll and Discussion. Please, let’s keep it civil
- Thread starter CU1TruTiger4Life
- Start date
Cool anecdotal evidence from you and your Jimmy Buffet-loving, flip flops with jeans-wearing Republicans.
This says that @kgwillison is more accurate than you.
He said people under 35 would never vote Republican because of Trump. Trump's approval rating is not a direct indicator that the party will be completely abandoned by an entire generation...
And I would give him a "meh" if I voted in that poll. But I will still vote republican in every presidential election unless the democrats change their economic and financial policy.
Right, and you’re an outlier. I certainly think the Republican Party will exist in 10-15 years, but they’re going to have to move left rather than the left moving right at all to attract the millennial and younger voting bloc.
I'd like to see the party move to the center socially. Marriage equality, pro-choice, etc. But I don't see the need to move left fiscally.
The vast majority of people I know are fiscally conservative and socially moderate. I think that's probably a good characterization of my overall generation (or at least my subset of it - the oldest millennials).
Do you have something to cite other than just your gut feeling and confirmation bias
They are spending money they don’t have. I’d say they are far enough to the fiscal left already.
Nope. Just talking to a bunch of bright, successful people in their mid 30s.
That is the party that’s missing- and has been for a long time as that is what I’ve longed for and I am old enough to have millennial children.
Both present parties offer something to like and something to hate, it’s just a matter of priorities. If one came along that took the best from each, both would wither. Unfortunately, we have too many people that cannot think beyond R and D at the ballot. And both parties know that allowing someone to come out of their process choosing fiscal conservatism and social moderation would be the end of THEIR party.
K well that’s a pretty unscientific and flimsy conclusion, then.
I would tend to think you’re right that the older millennial subset is more conservative, so @kgwillison was probs off to use “35” as his marker. But his larger point is correct. I think in ten years we’ll look back on Trump as backlash to a country that was moving too rapidly left for older generations that are hopefully about to die off.
Yes, they have the will to cut their revenue intake, but lack the Cajones to fight for what is actually needed in cutting expenses. One party increases taxes to cover rising expenses, the other cuts taxes and continues to let expenses rise. How would that work out for a homeowner? We are on a fixed course for National insolvency. We are Just 30years behind Venezuela. Both parties are stupid beyond belief and in need of adult supervision.
http://reason.com/poll/2014/07/17/millennials-are-social-liberals-fiscal-c
Millennials aren’t liberals; they are social liberals and fiscal centrists. And it’s largely social issues driving the distance between millennials and Republicans.
Traditional ideological labels don’t allow millennials to distinguish their positions on social tolerance from those on economics. But when given the opportunity, millennials do distinguish between the two.
Fully 62 percent of millennials identify as liberal on social issues. While considerably less—49 percent—indicate they are liberal on economic issues. In other words, the average millennial is a social liberal and a fiscal centrist.
Reason.com is pretty far from a reliable, objective source but I appreciate the link nonetheless.
Given that we are both roughly the same age, I'd like to anecdotally provide a counter example. Because I also know a great deal of bright successful 30 somethings. And every single one of them is, what you would call, fiscally liberal.
Wealthy does not equal bright. Just look at Donald goddamn Trump of all people.
Look at what America has become over the last 2 plus decades and the things happening. How long do you think any country can survive the things we’ve seen like unimaginable debt and a government that controls the people instead of the people having say over what the government does. It’s exactly what our founders warned about. Not to mention people now days literally walk into traffic because they can’t get off their phones. Social media as a whole has creating individuals who do not think critically and are more concerned with entertainment TV and posting everything they do rather than what matters in life. What do you think this will result in? How do we get out of unsustainable debt? The health care system is a disaster. Our currency holds no real value only what is perceived. Implosion can be whatever you would like to define it as. No definition is good
Do you not think there is a positive correlation between economic success and intelligence? On average, are doctors more intelligent than janitors? CEOs more intelligent than mail room staff?
Probably, if the wealth was earned by them. Sadly, there are a lot of morons living on Daddy’s money so it’s not as strong a correlation as we would hope.
Lol of course I agree with those very cherry-picked and extreme examples.
A better one would be - is someone who pursues a cushy finance job or someone that’s good at sales with a lucrative commission really smarter than someone who works at a museum? Smarter than an accomplished high school history teacher?
And then there’s this, from the Pew Research Center:
In the 2016 election, a wide gap in presidential preferences emerged between those with and without a college degree. College graduates backed Clinton by a 9-point margin (52%-43%), while those without a college degree backed Trump 52%-44%.
I saw the education one and it's fascinating that every educational group college and above skewed left and every income bracket above $50K skewed right. I suppose it's much easier to get a degree than it is to succeed in the economy though.
Or maybe people’s definitions of personal success aren’t tied to how much money they make
Take out third base family money. Degrees are earned, wealth can be inherited.
Not enough of those to even move the needle IMO. And if it's daddy's money, it probably wouldn't show up as "income" on this poll anyways.
Poll is income, not wealth. And the % that inherit money or position is very small in the grand scheme of things.
Passive income is easy with inherited wealth. Income is also easier to maintain when taking over daddy’s business, just ask DJT. Third base is a wonderful place to start.
2nd time you have linked that article. 2nd time it doesn't support your point.
That article talks about the correlation to where you start your career and where you end it. It says nothing about kids inheriting their position from their parents.
Social mobility is tied in with where you start. As in, the income level of your parents. Not sure what you’re not getting about that. Just continually moving the goalposts after I pointed out that more educated people voted overwhelmingly for Clinton.
Granted I skimmed the article very quickly, but it talks about the starting point as your first job - not your parent's job or income level. I didn't see a single reference to parent's status.
And while more "educated" people voted for Hillary, more successful people voted for Trump. It's really a fascinating trend.
that was one such article of dozens that speak to the lack of social mobility, including parents' starting point.
lol at putting "educated" in quotes and not "successful," when "successful" is the more subjective measure of the two. again, wealth does not equate to intelligence or even "success." in addition to the starting points for many of those individuals, the disparity between clinton and trump voters in income brackets is also likely tied to age. obviously those that have been in the workforce longer, i.e. boomers who overwhelmingly voted for trump, will have a higher income.
it's also clear that in whatever bubble you run in there's no one that comes from an arts/humanities background or profession. my brother is a writer and artist. finished near the top of his class in college. he's far more intelligent or "bright" than you or i. but he doesn't make shit cause he's 23 and chose to do something that was fulfilling for him, not something that will net him a lot of money.
Last edited:
Speaking of moving goalposts, here is what you quoted and responded to with that article:
And the % that inherit money or position is very small in the grand scheme of things.
So in reply to me saying that the percentage of people who inherit their position is small in the grand scheme of things, you linked an article that talks about how people who start at a certain income generally stay in that income category. Whether they do or do not, it has very little to do with the percentage of people who inherit a certain position in their career.
I fully agree that if a person has successful parents, they are more likely to be successful themselves. Factors include genetics, access to educational resources, parental involvement, etc. This is a good thing. It adds an incentive for people to succeed financially. They are able to set their children up for even greater success. One reason I work so hard is to set my son up for an amazing future. He will have a leg up on the majority of people and that's okay. That's life.
And I quoted education because there are different forms. University and real world. Ivy league and Devry. I should have used a word other than successful because you are correct, that can be measured in different ways. But financially, well that is an easy standard to compare across.
Learn to read man. I said last I saw, but I'm sure you picked the highest rating you could find. I'm sure he will go up some with the tax break which is probably a major component of the poll you referenced. He won't win in 2020. No way.
He left out that no commercial plane crashed last year. We know Trump is responsible for that because he told us so. Of course hundreds of people died from gun violence but I don’t see Trump taking blame for that.
Trump is the one who convinced me to leave the GOP. If you have followed my postings for any length of time, you would know I am not homosexual however I have come to support their right to wed. But so have most Americans. And even Trump would tell you he has bought more politicians than anyone in Washington.
No. Rasmussen has consistently been an outlier. Show me two reputable articles saying Rasmussen is the most accurate.
Similar threads
