Our City Online

Messageboard - Politics

NOTE: You are viewing an archived version of the Columbus Underground forums/messageboard. As of 05/22/16 they have been closed to new comments and replies, but will remain accessible for archived searches and reference. For more information CLICK HERE

Presidential Election Results 2012

Home Forums General Columbus Discussion Politics Presidential Election Results 2012

  • This topic is empty.
Viewing 7 posts - 301 through 307 (of 307 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #519043

    myliftkk
    Participant

    rus said:
    Possible I suppose, although ignoring homeless beggers at freeway off ramps, driving past disabled cars with people in them, not knowing your neighbors, etc. would seem to go against that.

    But hey, as speculation goes it’s as good as any.

    I’m not sure what any of that has to do with density as a factor in supporting liberal government policies. I don’t generally drive the freeways as a necessity, the my relative experience passing all of those things is limited. As for knowing ones neighbors, that has little to do with whether they are downward spiraling or not.

    As I mentioned above, liberal government policies in a densly packed environment can be completely explained as a conservative view of self-interest through the use of tax dollars to ensure a stable core of the social strata. What appears evidnent from that study is that what one believes to be in their self-interest does in fact change as population becomes denser, not that they become less self-interested. I’m not arguing that liberals are better people (which is what you seem to be falsely arguing against), I’m arguing what they believe is better for them is transformed through the experience of population density.

    #519044
    rus
    rus
    Participant

    myliftkk said:
    I’m not arguing that liberals are better people (which is what you seem to be falsely arguing against), I’m arguing what they believe is better for them is transformed through the experience of population density.

    Perhaps I read more of others comments into what you wrote. I see what you’re saying, although acting on self interest isn’t exactly how many liberals portray themselves. If anything, it’s the opposite with emphasis on compassion, empathy and the rest.

    Sounds almost objectivist, really.

    #519045
    Manatee
    Manatee
    Participant

    myliftkk said:
    I’m not sure what any of that has to do with density as a factor in supporting liberal government policies. I don’t generally drive the freeways as a necessity, the my relative experience passing all of those things is limited. As for knowing ones neighbors, that has little to do with whether they are downward spiraling or not.

    As I mentioned above, liberal government policies in a densly packed environment can be completely explained as a conservative view of self-interest through the use of tax dollars to ensure a stable core of the social strata. What appears evidnent from that study is that what one believes to be in their self-interest does in fact change as population becomes denser, not that they become less self-interested. I’m not arguing that liberals are better people (which is what you seem to be falsely arguing against), I’m arguing what they believe is better for them is transformed through the experience of population density.

    I thought that article made so much sense. It was kind of an a-ha moment for me. Also because I’ve lived in very very sparsely populated rural areas as well as very densely populated urban areas, and everything in between.

    For me, a subtle undercurrent was also that for me, in lowly-populated rural areas with lots of open space/land, there’s a psychological feeling that I could conceivably grow or make things that I need. In urban areas, other people or social services have to help me when I’m in poverty.

    #519046
    rus
    rus
    Participant

    Manatee said:
    In urban areas, other people or social services have to help me when I’m in poverty.

    Social services ( read as food stamps, SSI disability, etc. ) perhaps, but no one has to volunteer their time or money.

    I could cease all charitable donations without repercussion.

    #519047

    myliftkk
    Participant

    rus said:
    Perhaps I read more of others comments into what you wrote. I see what you’re saying, although acting on self interest isn’t exactly how many liberals portray themselves. If anything, it’s the opposite with emphasis on compassion, empathy and the rest.

    Sounds almost objectivist, really.

    There’s always an emotional payback to couching ones motives in altrustic sentiment, but I believe (and this goes for me alone) that there’s strong current of self-interest beneath most stated motives. As far as whether people admit to it or not, well, that cuts both ways across all political stripes.

    What is in one’s self-interest does have the capacity to in fact change objectively when population density increases. That it expresses itself through political support that can also be described as altrustic is a feature, not a bug.

    #519048

    myliftkk
    Participant

    Had to laugh…

    49% of GOP voters nationally say they think that ACORN stole the election for President Obama. We found that 52% of Republicans thought that ACORN stole the 2008 election for Obama, so this is a modest decline, but perhaps smaller than might have been expected given that ACORN doesn’t exist anymore.

    [url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/04/acorn-republican-voters_n_2239298.html]http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/04/acorn-republican-voters_n_2239298.html[/url]

    #519049
    rus
    rus
    Participant

    Since we’re still talking about this:

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2012/12/04/the_no-show_problem_116328.html

    Many pundits point to high turnout by minorities and young people as the key component of Obama’s victory.

    But Sean Trende, an analyst at RealClearPolitics, points to a problem that flew under the radar: White voters did not turn out, and they did not turn out in significant numbers.

    Based on preliminary numbers, Trende estimated that, on Election Day, about 91.6 million votes were cast by whites, 16.6 million by blacks, 12.7 million by Latinos and 6.3 million by other groups (not all final counts are in yet).

    Compare this with 2008, when there were 98.6 million white voters, 16.3 million blacks, 11 million Latinos and 5.9 million from other groups.

    Assuming 7 million white votes were outstanding, he estimated that “the African-American vote only increased by about 300,000 votes, or 0.2 percent, from 2008 to 2012. The Latino vote increased by a healthier 1.7 million votes, while the ‘other’ category increased by about 470,000 votes.”

    What stands out to Trende is the decline in the number of whites for both parties.

Viewing 7 posts - 301 through 307 (of 307 total)

The forum ‘Politics’ is closed to new topics and replies.

The Columbus Coffee Festival Returns with a “Curated Take Home Box Experience”

CLICK HERE TO PLACE YOUR ORDER