Originally Posted By ecdc >>What percent believe those things, ecdc?<< Recall a few years ago in a Republican primary debate when they asked who believed in evolution? Didn't like two people raise their hand? We clearly got a glimpse into what some Republicans think about rape and women's bodies. I'll grant you, it's impossible to quantify based on those anecdotes, but that those men continued to get tens of thousands of votes tells us that they are not an aberration.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 What's more telling to me is (I'm guessing) more than the two of the then-dozen Republican candidates probably do believe in evolution. But they don't think Republican primary voters do, or they wouldn't have been afraid to raise their hands. Which tells you probably a depressingly high percentage of GOP primary voters don't.
Originally Posted By ecdc And polls back that up. That also tracks with how frequently Republican candidates or leaders refuse to rebuke insanity. Since Josh is a fan of Mitt Romney, let's use him as an example. My guess is Mitt doesn't believe anything too crazy. I suspect he's probably a social moderate, and probably does believe in evolution or some sort of combination of evolution and God's hand in things. Except...he'd never actually stand up for those beliefs like, say, Jon Huntsman. Republican candidates say crazy crap about women and rape and Mitt Romney doesn't say, "Those guys are appalling and those things are completely disgusting." Instead we get statements like "it was inartful...." Because he has to pander to Republican voters. You can't even stand up and say appalling comments about rape are...well...appalling.
Originally Posted By Goofyernmost Actually, it makes sense. Then they can lower the tax rate and be hero's and keep some of their "pork" projects and be hero's and any complaints are met with a resounding "Don't look at me, it was Obama's fault". Fortunately, the ones that this appeals to are the same ones that failed to power a Republican Landslide the last election. Personally I feel, this whole cliff thing is total hyperbole anyway. It might be better named "a slight pebble under foot". Just like Y2K, life will continue with or without it.
Originally Posted By ecdc I'd add, Jon Huntsman was the one Republican candidate who decided to go the moderate, sane route. He tweeted about believing in climate change and evolution. Jon Huntsman also has the distinction of being the only Republican candidate to never lead the pack in the polls at any time. Herman Cain? You bet. Rick Santorum? Absolutely. Michele Freaking Bachmann actually won the Iowa straw poll! But the candidate who talks like a reasonable human being never, ever had a chance in the Republican party. What does that say, Josh?
Originally Posted By TomSawyer "What percent believe those things, ecdc?" <a href="http://www.gallup.com/poll/155003/hold-creationist-view-human-origins.aspx" target="_blank">http://www.gallup.com/poll/155...ins.aspx</a> While 58% of Republicans believe that God created humans in their present form within the last 10,000 years, 39% of independents and 41% of Democrats agree.
Originally Posted By Goofyernmost >>>So independents are smarter than Democrats. Nice! <<< I like to think so! ;-)
Originally Posted By ecdc >>within the last 10,000 years<< That's the real kicker. I'm all for someone who accepts the facts of evolution but feels like God had some kind of divine hand in it. (I've decided to stop saying "believe in evolution." Believing in evolution is like "believing 2+2=4." I don't "believe in evolution," I understand the facts that make evolution a highly-likely, convincing scientific theory.) But holy crap! To have that many people believe that humans are only 10,000 years old! The first agrarian-based societies are older than that. Where did these people go to school, John the Baptist High?
Originally Posted By andyll <<Personally I feel, this whole cliff thing is total hyperbole anyway. It might be better named "a slight pebble under foot". Just like Y2K, life will continue with or without it.>> I agree. We and our economy lived just fine under Clinton's rates. As far as the automatic spending cuts... I doubt cutting 50 Billion of defense out of a 800 Billion budget will decimate our military like they claim. I'm sure there is also 50 Billion in non-defense cuts available without mass layoffs or huge cuts in services. The idea of a 100 billion spending cut (out of a 3 trillion budget) along with everyone paying 3-5% more in taxes will throw us back into recession is a joke. The yearly medicare payment fix and AMT fix does need to happening. However I would like to see everything fazed in over several years.
Originally Posted By andyll ^^ The yearly medicare payment fix and AMT fix does need to happen. ( it'd be nice if they permently fix them )
Originally Posted By mawnck >>The idea of a 100 billion spending cut (out of a 3 trillion budget) along with everyone paying 3-5% more in taxes will throw us back into recession is a joke.<< Methinks you haven't actually investigated the math very carefully. In this case, "optimist" = "uninformed".
Originally Posted By Goofyernmost Or in some cases it means...lived a long time = been there done that = if we can't make this sound terminally serious how can we justify our damn jobs. Besides we're already in a recession, how will we tell if we are in another?
Originally Posted By DyGDisney >>>2:17p <<Personally I feel, this whole cliff thing is total hyperbole anyway. It might be better named "a slight pebble under foot". Just like Y2K, life will continue with or without it.>> I agree. We and our economy lived just fine under Clinton's rates.<<< I'd like to agree and I do think the best thing for the gov't deficit would be to go "over the fiscal cliff." However, on a personal note, the increase in taxes would create quite a strain on our family; and I'm sure many families feel the same. Between the SS increase, the tax increase and the fact that unemployment ins extension has ended, I don't think the economy would take this very well.
Originally Posted By SuperDry <<< I'd like to agree and I do think the best thing for the gov't deficit would be to go "over the fiscal cliff." However, on a personal note, the increase in taxes would create quite a strain on our family; and I'm sure many families feel the same. Between the SS increase, the tax increase and the fact that unemployment ins extension has ended, I don't think the economy would take this very well. >>> In other words, the fiscal cliff would be just great, as long as it is someone else's taxes that go up and someone else's benefits that are cut.
Originally Posted By DyGDisney Yep! Well, actually, no. That's not what I said at all. I said it would be bad for my family, a lot of other families, and the economy as a whole right now; good for the federal deficit. But thanks for reading into it whatever you wanted to.
Originally Posted By DyGDisney Oh, and no one in my family is unemployed or on unemployment insurance. I was referring to those who are, and how it will affect them personally as well as the economy as a whole.
