Forums | MacLife

More dissection of that ABC/WaPo poll: source

What *IS* it with the South?

Obama favorability

            Fav   Unfav

All          55    37

South        27    68
Rest of USA  67    24

NE           82     7
Midwest      62    30
West         59    32

Democratic Party favorability

            Fav   Unfav

All          41    51

South        21    72
NE           62    26
Midwest      44    48
West         44    50

Republican Party favorability

            Fav   Unfav

All          21    67

South        48    37
NE            6    87
Midwest      10    78
West         12    75

Generic Congressional Ballot

            Dem   GOP

All          35    29

South        21    47
NE           51     8
Midwest      37    26
West         36    28

Last edited by bedstuy (2009-10-21 5:08 pm)

Rasmussen Obama index at -13

Obama now has a passion index of -13, with only 27% of respondents strongly approving of his performance and 40% strongly disapproving.

Yes, Rasmussen came up with new ways to measure approval after President Obama was elected.  Apparently to "differentiate" themselves from other pollsters.

Pariah wrote:

The only reason the Republicans have any power at all is because the south gets disproportionate strength in the senate.

Yeah - it's called the Great Compromise, and it is part of the Constitution of this great country.

The Great Compromise was written 1787, when the majority of the nation's population lived in rural areas. Post-Industrial Revolution, in which the nation's population migrated from rural farms to urban factories, it doesn't make much sense.

Sternum wrote:

The Great Compromise was written 1787, when the majority of the nation's population lived in rural areas. Post-Industrial Revolution, in which the nation's population migrated from rural farms to urban factories, it doesn't make much sense.

Actually, it makes more sense today than it did then. Otherwise, loosely populated states would have little power, and get railroaded by more populous states. Remember, the civil war was, indirectly, about this very issue.

Let's not dink with concepts that have worked for centuries, and are still relevant today.

sturner wrote:

And this is different from the law requiring ERs to accept all patients, even if they can't pay?

So they would be more comfortable going to an ER as an indigent person rather than declaring their indigent status and having government sponsored health care? What is the difference?

That isn't the issue I'm addressing.  I'm looking at this from the POV of thousands of homeless Americans who were were betrayed by the system.  I think a fine is problematic, and I think there are numerous problems with the idea that make this a change, but not necessarily an improvement.

user wrote:

Another point about this post: what do you think happens when you qualify for Medicare?

Participation in Medicare is compulsory, not mandatory.  There are those who choose not to use it.

I might be making underinformed evaluations, but that's because I can't be bothered to read the tome of a document that the bill is, and I'd bet that most of the people who are voting on it haven't, either.

resedit wrote:

Pariah wrote:

The only reason the Republicans have any power at all is because the south gets disproportionate strength in the senate.

Yeah - it's called the Great Compromise, and it is part of the Constitution of this great country.

More populous Southern States were allowed to count three-fifths of all non-free, non-Native American people towards population counts and allocations.

Great compromise.

I'm beginning to think that in addition to holding a constitutional convention, it may be time to consider splitting CA into smaller states. There are many conservatives here who are pissed that they get drowned out by the more liberal metro areas. I say we let them have OC south and east to the border, the central coast and maybe parts of the north.

JakeTheTall wrote:

resedit wrote:

Pariah wrote:

The only reason the Republicans have any power at all is because the south gets disproportionate strength in the senate.

Yeah - it's called the Great Compromise, and it is part of the Constitution of this great country.

More populous Southern States were allowed to count three-fifths of all non-free, non-Native American people towards population counts and allocations.

Great compromise.

Oh - I just find it hilarious that people here post political comic strips about conservatives wanting to do away with the constitution while they also complain about the constitution themselves.

resedit wrote:

JakeTheTall wrote:

resedit wrote:

Yeah - it's called the Great Compromise, and it is part of the Constitution of this great country.

More populous Southern States were allowed to count three-fifths of all non-free, non-Native American people towards population counts and allocations.

Great compromise.

Oh - I just find it hilarious that people here post political comic strips about conservatives wanting to do away with the constitution while they also complain about the constitution themselves.

I am not calling foul on the clause which causes this imbalance. I am just pointing out, for the sake of discussion, that the only reason that the right has the clout they have is due to a quirk in the constitution.
This is in regards to the right's arrogance about being the "real Americans" when in actual fact they are more like a protected class enjoying a form of affirmative action that gives them more power than they might actually deserve, considering their actual representation in the population.