Connect with us

Politics

Poll Shows Large Percentage of Voters Have Strong Distrust for Opposing Side, Favor State Secessions

Published

on

Voters

The Center for Politics at the University of Virginia conducted a poll finding telling results about how the American people feel in regard to policymaking. Primarily, many people want blue policies to remain in blue states and red policies to remain in red states; both of which should be separated.

“Roughly 4 in 10 (41%) of Biden and half (52%) of Trump voters at least somewhat agree that it’s time to split the country, favoring blue/red states seceding from the union.” The Center for Politics had partnered on the poll with Project Home Fire, an initiative dedicated to finding common ground in American politics.

The commonalities found in the poll are as follows:

Majorities — often large majorities — of both Biden and Trump voters express some form of distrust for voters, elected officials, and media sources they associate with the other side. A strong majority of Trump voters see no real difference between Democrats and socialists, and a majority of Biden voters at least somewhat agree that there is no real difference between Republicans and fascists.

Significant numbers of both Trump and Biden voters show a willingness to consider violating democratic tendencies and norms if needed to serve their priorities. Roughly 2 in 10 Trump and Biden voters strongly agree it would be better if a “President could take needed actions without being constrained by Congress or courts.”

Another common factor is 80% of both Trump and Biden voters view democracy as preferable to any non-democratic kind of government. “On the other hand, more than 6 in 10 Trump and Biden voters see America as less a representative democracy and more a system that is run by and rigged for the benefit of the wealthy” the poll reports.

“Overall, more than two-thirds support – and one-third strongly – emboldening and empowering strong leaders and taking the law into their own hands when it comes to dealing with people or groups they view as dangerous.” Unfortunately, that is likely to be the opposing political party.

Continue Reading
6 Comments

6 Comments

  1. R Phillips

    October 4, 2021 at 8:19 am

    Fascism was invented by an Italian Communist before world war 2

  2. DG

    October 4, 2021 at 9:23 am

    So basically both sides agree on most things. They have just allowed the government to divide them.

  3. Slideglide

    October 4, 2021 at 10:12 am

    🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸♥️♥️♥️🌎🌎🌎🍓🍓🍓🤪🤪🤪

    Most Democrat voters are uninformed on political issues and vote against Republicans, and their policies.

    Most Republican voters are aware of Democrat ideologies, and vote against their policies.

    It has come down to an aggressive Marxist Democrat Party, versus a Republican Freedom Party.

    Give me a smaller Union of Free States, and the Democrats can have their States with Central Planning nightmares.

  4. Slideglide

    October 4, 2021 at 12:08 pm

    🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸♥️♥️♥️🌎🌎🍓🍓🍓🤪🤪🤪

    The Free States of America, are seeking the promise and protection as spelled out in the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights, without a Federal authority.

  5. Joseph

    October 4, 2021 at 2:12 pm

    Unless Biden/Harris reverse course on policy, we will be in danger of another civil war. The only question is, where will the military stand.

    • Diana Wagner

      October 4, 2021 at 6:26 pm

      Once the Dem socialists succeed in weeding out Conservatives from the military, the military will then be on the side of the socialists.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Media

National Public Radio Discontinues Reading the Declaration of Inependence

Published

on

Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

A post by Todd Starnes alerts that National Public Radio (NPR) has ditched its annual ritual of reading the Declaration of Independence. NPR, derisively referred to by Starnes as “National Public Welfare Radio,” announced the cessation of reading the Declaration. Which staffers at the taxpayer-funded radio network had been reading aloud the document since 1988.

The void that would have resulted from not reading the Declaration was not unfilled. “Instead, NPR broadcast an 11-minute conversation about whether or not the Founding Fathers actually meant the words “all men are created equal.” Here’s a link if you’d like to listen to their “screed” (which also reminds us frequently that many of the Founding Fathers owned slaves).

Starnes disclosed that he owns “KWAM, the leading news talk radio station in Memphis, Tennessee. It angers me that my tax dollars are used to prop up a broadcast competitor that spits on our Founding Fathers and our Founding Documents.”

Interestingly, NPR’s newly voiced contempt and cynicism for the Declaration of Independence does not encompass refusing taxpayer-funded government support. Whether or not the Founding Fathers meant what they said and what they wrote may be grist for energetic banter on a radio program that is increasingly committed to shrill progressive virtue signaling. However, the topic of this discussion among smug well-remunerated media activists is irrelevant. The words of the Founding Fathers have been inspirational for two hundred and forty-six years and have been the moral and legal foundation used to free the slaves and develop Constitutional principles to ensure that slavery can never be implemented in this country. Slavery currently exists in several countries now, but NPR is dedicated to ignoring that scourge.

Continue Reading

Politics

‘Every Word Of This Is False’: Ted Cruz Factchecks Ilhan Omar’s Attack On Coach Kennedy Prayer Case

Published

on

Rep. Ilhan Omar

On Monday night, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) factchecked Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) after she made multiple false claims about the Supreme Court ruling in Kennedy v. Bremerton School District, in which the Court ruled 6-3 that a public high school football coach in Washington state had his First Amendment rights violated when he was punished by his school district for praying on the field after games where students could see.

As previously reported, “In 2008, high school football coach Joseph Kennedy began a tradition of praying at midfield after each game. Over time, his players and even members of the opposing team began to join him. In September 2015, a school administrator addressed the matter with Kennedy after an opposing team complained and the coach briefly stopped his prayers.”

“On October 14, 2015, Kennedy told the school district that he was planning on resuming his prayer tradition at the next game. The school district told the coach that his prayers violated the district’s policy, but Kennedy continued to pray at the next two games. The school district subsequently placed him on administrative leave, banned him from participating in the football program, and refused to renew his contract for the following season. Kennedy took the issue to federal district court, arguing that the school district had violated his First Amendment rights,” the report added.

In response to the Supreme Court ruling in favor of Kennedy, Omar tweeted, “The Supreme Court just ruled that public school teachers can pressure students to join in prayer at public school events but can also retaliate against those that don’t join in. Religious freedom is dead in America.”

“Every word of this is false,” Cruz responded.

Omar’s claim that the Supreme Court’s decision allowed to teachers to “pressure students to join prayer” is false. The Court’s ruling just protected Coach Kennedy’s religious freedom to pray publicly.

Omar was also incorrect in claiming that there would be retaliation against students who did not join Kennedy in prayer – the coach’s tradition of praying after games began with him praying alone at midfield after football games. Kennedy’s school district even noted that Kennedy had “not actively encouraged, or required, participation.”

Additionally, in contrast to Omar’s claim that “religious freedom is dead in America,” the Supreme Court ruling actually strengthened protections of religious freedom.

Writing for the majority opinion, Justice Neil Gorsuch explained, “Respect for religious expressions is indispensable to life in a free and diverse Republic—whether those expressions take place in a sanctuary or on a field, and whether they manifest through the spoken word or a bowed head.”

“Here, a government entity sought to punish an individual for engaging in a brief, quiet, personal religious observance doubly protected by the Free Exercise and Free Speech Clauses of the First Amendment,” Gorsuch added. “And the only meaningful justification the government offered for its reprisal rested on a mistaken view that it had a duty to ferret out and suppress religious observances even as it allows comparable secular speech. The Constitution neither mandates nor tolerates that kind of discrimination. Mr. Kennedy is entitled to summary judgment on his First Amendment claims.”

Continue Reading

Leo's Hot List