Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com

Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com (http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/)
-   The Club House (http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/f12/)
-   -   Strange Radio Poll (http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/f12/strange-radio-poll-6573/)

Dillinger 08-26-2008 07:41 PM

Strange Radio Poll
 
So, I was driving out to one of my job site meetings today, which was way out in East Hell, so I had some time on my hands. Tuned into the local morning DJ to listen to what ridiculous knowledge he was imparting for the listening audience and found this interesting, which led me to thinking further into the question itself.

According to a recent phone poll of American Households, something like 60% of the "voting public" would consider voting for an openly gay candidate for President if they felt that person were qualified.

Something like 64% or 65% of the same folks would vote for a female candidate for President.

Now, it got interesting in that, as you moved further down the Chain of Command, Cabinet Member, Senator, House of Reps, those initial numbers increased by almost 20%.

First off - I find that extremely hard to believe. I can't see a gay man, qualified or not, who had a same sex partner ever getting elected, not under the current Electoral Congress.

But, I would imagine this is more of the Obama spin masters getting the news out for the country to think that it's okay to vote for the "race card" guy because everyone else would too, even a candidate that was "worse" by being gay... :rolleyes:

But, what got me thinking was, how many people would vote for a candidate for President if he had NO, as in ZERO, ties to religion of any type? A true, separation of Church & State character?

How many people would vote for a single man, or a single woman, to the highest elected position?

How many who said yes to that question, would say yes if their VP choice was of the opposite sex? Married or not?

It got my mind spinning and had me wondering what you folks thought about the double standard that exists in the media surrounding taking part in the election that would be landmark by electing the First "Whatever" President.

Personally - I don't expect a hell of a lot of "services" from my government. From my leader, I don't expect a hell of a lot either, but some basic needs need to covered. No point in running down a list, everyone's will be different, but I small list of criteria that you could make, even if you were a woman, or gay, or minority ( if you are an actual citizen that is ) - even if you were a combination there of.

So, could you vote for a "qualified" candidate, in your eyes, if they didn't meet the standard of being ( White, Male, married, 2.5 kids, etc. )

Discuss -

JD

bkt 08-26-2008 08:22 PM

Gender is a slight concern and would really depend on the individual. In a time of war, I'm a little wary of a woman president unless she's from the Thatcher bloodline and won't "go all wobbly" on us in a time of crisis.

Ethnic background doesn't concern me.

Personally, and I may catch flak for this, I believe the gay lifestyle is a chosen one, not a genetic one. That speaks volumes about a person, IMO. That person would almost certainly not get my vote.

As for the radio poll, where was it taken? Demographics and locale determine poll results.

supergus 08-26-2008 08:24 PM

I could and would, as long as I was convinced that he was sincere in his promises. Not every candidate is going to be perfect but my main attributes would be Pro 2A, pro smaller government, and anti coddeling of illegals. I really don't care for the most part what their sexual orientation is, what their skin color is, or what their religious leanings are. I do have one exception though, and that is I'll never vote for a Muslim. I'm sorry if anyone is offended but that is where I would draw the line. I know that not all Muslims are Islamic Fascists, but IMO it's not worth the risk to our nation.

Dillinger 08-26-2008 08:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bkt (Post 37956)
As for the radio poll, where was it taken? Demographics and locale determine poll results.

I turned it on in the middle, so of course they didn't make a point of disclosing the source or where it was taken. The radio station in question, KISW, is of a large conglomerate, so I am sure they are toeing some corporate line along the way.

I agree with Supergus that Muslim is a no vote for me as well. As I learn more about the "religion" I am truly concerned about the real belief system that isn't displayed to the media and what is really going on behind the nice pretty architecture.

I could vote for a single guy, or a single woman, if they were qualified. I could vote for a national citizen of any race as well, if they were qualified in my own eyes. I still like Colin Powell, and I know he isn't for everyone, but I respect the guy.

Along with bkt, I definitely agree they need the ability to green light an action though - I can't have a president, again *COUGH* WILLIAM EMBARASSMENT CLINTON, lacking the sand to get something done when push comes to shove.

JD

BigO01 08-26-2008 09:23 PM

Quote:

unless she's from the Thatcher bloodline and won't "go all wobbly" on us in a time of crisis.
There's a great deal to this concern .

Back in the early 90's or so a friend showed me a Business magazine article "The women were on an equality kick at the time again !!" it said there had been a study on CEO's and the nervous breakdown rate of them .

It claimed women at that time comprised about 10% of all CEO's yet accounted for something like 90% of the breakdowns .

Not someone I want with their fingernail on THE button and crying :What do I do what do I do ?" or worrying about how bloated she is this month or fat she looks or any of other problems the females have .

With most of them I can see them putting Putin on hold because Opra or some damn cooking show is on TV and they don't want to miss it with WWIII about to start !

As far as Gays go do you realy want all the female problems wrapped in a mans body ? Do you call it Mr. or MS President ? What do you call it's spouse if they're married ? The first Fag ? If you go to a big shindig at the White House and are asked to dance with the President what do you say ? Who leads ? Do you ask ? How do you keep from laughing when you're suppose to protect him when you just saw him in drag 30 minutes ago getting spanked by his whatever it's called ?

Nope not for me Thanks anyway !!

jeepcreep927 08-26-2008 09:59 PM

"As far as Gays go do you realy want all the female problems wrapped in a mans body ? Do you call it Mr. or MS President ? What do you call it's spouse if they're married ? The first Fag ? If you go to a big shindig at the White House and are asked to dance with the President what do you say ? Who leads ? Do you ask ? How do you keep from laughing when you're suppose to protect him when you just saw him in drag 30 minutes ago getting spanked by his whatever it's called ?"

That was funny...

Race doesn't mean anything to me. Gender does. After seeing Hillary crying, on national TV, after losing a primary in a single state was/ is a deal breaker for me. Not that every woman is like this, but it is a societal expectation that woman are supposed to be less "hard line" and more outwardly emotional. The natural instinct is also not the same as a male. I am talking gender hardwiring in general.

Gay? No how no way. I am sure I could be labeled as a biggot or whatever the going term is, but I was raised, as well as taught even in college as late as the early 90's, that homosexuality is a form of social deviance. There is no way a strictly homsexual animal in nature would survive more than one generation. That is absolutely irrefutable and cannot be argued. It is a choice to practice this form of perversion that has been lobbied and whined about so much society has it forced down their throats and is expected to accept it. I would move to France before I would accept a gay president.

RL357Mag 08-26-2008 11:09 PM

+1 and ditto to BKT and Jeepcreep's assessment. I would and could not vote for a gay. It goes against everything that this country was founded on - namely, religious beliefs. Gays and God do not belong in the same sentence. The "SanFran Nan's" thread of a few weeks ago cemented my belief that this is one sick segment of society! "Ethnicity" doesn't matter much to me, unless the individual is a racist, and I believe everyone is a racist to a certain extent, whether they admit it to themselves or not. Colin Powell is backing Obama - I rest my case. It will be many, many years before racism ceases to exist, if at all. A woman president, while not out of the question, is not something I would feel comfortable with just yet. Although a Condoleeza Rice type woman commands respect and admiration.

Dillinger 08-26-2008 11:47 PM

Okay - The Gay question has become more of an issue than I intended. :o

How about a Single Male or Female Candidate?

How about someone with ZERO Religious ties?

Would anyone be able to elect one of those persons, if completely qualified, to the highest seat in the land?

JD

RL357Mag 08-26-2008 11:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dillinger (Post 37991)
Okay - The Gay question has become more of an issue than I intended. :o

How about a Single Male or Female Candidate?

How about someone with ZERO Religious ties?

Would anyone be able to elect one of those persons, if completely qualified, to the highest seat in the land?

JD


Single no, atheist, no. The general population, I think, would want someone that can relate to them and their struggles. Not that we have that now anyway, but someone single cannot relate to the daily financial struggles of raising a family. Atheism is antithetic to the reason this country was formed originally. Too many referrences to God and a higher power in our Constitution. Our Constitution acknowledges and defers to the power and sovereignty of God. An atheistic President would create inroads to our Government for groups like the ACLU and other anti-religious groups.

ScottG 08-27-2008 12:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dillinger (Post 37991)
Okay - The Gay question has become more of an issue than I intended. :o

You mean it isn't "Up Your Alley?" :D

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dillinger (Post 37991)
How about a Single Male or Female Candidate?

I don't see why not as long as "The American President" doesn't spend his time skirt chasing after lib reporters.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dillinger (Post 37991)
How about someone with ZERO Religious ties?

Harder to choose. Martin Luther is supposed to have said it would be better to have an honest non religious man ruling you than a corrupt believer. I'm not sure that someone who can't see the reality of the creation and the evidence of the creator in the sustained existence of the universe can be trusted to do anything other than what he believes according to his own rules. He becomes a law unto himself as it was said. He/she would do what is good in his/her own eyes. Can't trust someone like that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dillinger (Post 37991)
Would anyone be able to elect one of those persons, if completely qualified, to the highest seat in the land?

I'm not sure, but I think all these signs are pointing to Obama..... :rolleyes:


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:34 AM.

Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.