Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 4, 2015 18:34:58 GMT
Of course, assuming turnout patterns at future GE's will replicate last month's itself makes quite a few assumptions...... True, but its probably better than asking peoplevif they will vote. How many 18 to 25s said they would vote - how many actually did ...
|
|
carlton43
Reform Party
Posts: 50,279
Member is Online
|
Post by carlton43 on Jun 4, 2015 20:21:45 GMT
12-points difference and UKIP on 10? I don't think so.
|
|
|
Post by greenchristian on Jun 16, 2015 19:53:30 GMT
Not their regular poll, but ComRes have done a poll of practising Christians for Christian charity Tearfund, including a question on who they voted for. Excluding non-voters and won't says, it comes out as: Conservative 32% Labour 27% Liberal Democrats 18% Green 10% UKIP 9% Other 5% Which is substantially different from the national picture.
|
|
Sibboleth
Labour
'Sit on my finger, sing in my ear, O littleblood.'
Posts: 15,801
Member is Online
|
Post by Sibboleth on Jun 17, 2015 10:54:07 GMT
But which is also probably pretty dubious, as are almost all surveys of specific groups (even if maybe they can be right in general terms).
|
|
|
Post by greenchristian on Jun 18, 2015 15:15:08 GMT
But which is also probably pretty dubious, as are almost all surveys of specific groups (even if maybe they can be right in general terms). As a single poll, I wouldn't trust the specific numbers. But it certainly paints a very plausible picture.
|
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,400
|
Post by The Bishop on Jun 18, 2015 16:55:38 GMT
I am aware of the religious roots of many LibDems, but that figure for them still seems a bit high in the current political climate......
|
|
|
Post by greenchristian on Jun 18, 2015 21:33:18 GMT
I am aware of the religious roots of many LibDems, but that figure for them still seems a bit high in the current political climate...... I'd agree that it does look a little high. That Christians would be a lot more likely to vote Lib Dem than the general populace is not surprising, given that we tend to be more politically engaged, are more likely to vote in all types of elections, and are actively involved in our local communities. That's going to bias us in the direction of supporting the hard-working councillor/constituency MP that's the Lib Dems main selling point, even for those who aren't that keen on their policies. Certainly I know quite a few Christians who voted Lib Dem because they were impressed by the candidate.
|
|
|
Post by Arthur Figgis on Jun 18, 2015 21:39:33 GMT
I am aware of the religious roots of many LibDems, but that figure for them still seems a bit high in the current political climate...... I'd agree that it does look a little high. That Christians would be a lot more likely to vote Lib Dem than the general populace is not surprising, given that we tend to believe in crap with no evidence.
|
|
|
Post by greenchristian on Jun 19, 2015 15:23:44 GMT
I'd agree that it does look a little high. That Christians would be a lot more likely to vote Lib Dem than the general populace is not surprising, given that we tend to believe in crap with no evidence. I see you're taking the Richard Dawkins party line on Christianity. It'd be a shame for your argument if it turned out that Dawkins supported the Lib Dems, wouldn't it?
|
|
|
Post by Arthur Figgis on Jun 19, 2015 15:28:38 GMT
I see you're taking the Richard Dawkins party line on Christianity. It'd be a shame for your argument if it turned out that Dawkins supported the Lib Dems, wouldn't it? Not really. I think Dawkins is an idiot.
|
|
|
Post by greenchristian on Jun 19, 2015 15:32:48 GMT
I see you're taking the Richard Dawkins party line on Christianity. It'd be a shame for your argument if it turned out that Dawkins supported the Lib Dems, wouldn't it? Not really. I think Dawkins is an idiot. His repeated claims that Christians and other theists tend to believe in crap with no evidence certainly points in that direction.
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Jun 19, 2015 15:46:13 GMT
Religious people persist in believing that atheism has leaders. It doesn't. It's not a religion and 'atheists' are not a group.
|
|
|
Post by greenchristian on Jun 19, 2015 21:23:31 GMT
Religious people persist in believing that atheism has leaders. It doesn't. It's not a religion and 'atheists' are not a group. For a non-group with no leaders they're remarkably good at toeing the party line; frequently using the same weak, tired, and frequently strawman arguments against religion in general, and Christianity in particular.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 19, 2015 21:43:27 GMT
The idea that arguments against religion are weak is beyond absurd.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 20, 2015 0:10:52 GMT
Atheists in general don't have leaders or a party line, but there's certainly a personality cult around Dawkins.
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Jun 20, 2015 8:19:40 GMT
Dawkins is a remarkably poor spokesman for atheism, particularly with regard to the mismatch between the arguments against religion he advances, and the arguments he's competent to advance.
|
|
Sibboleth
Labour
'Sit on my finger, sing in my ear, O littleblood.'
Posts: 15,801
Member is Online
|
Post by Sibboleth on Jun 20, 2015 11:45:23 GMT
It's amazing how quickly discussions relating to religion on the internet always seem to end up at the same destination...
|
|
|
Post by greenchristian on Jun 20, 2015 19:12:51 GMT
The idea that arguments against religion are weak is beyond absurd. You think that all arguments against religion are strong? What a bizarre point of view.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 20, 2015 20:47:34 GMT
The idea that arguments against religion are weak is beyond absurd. You think that all arguments against religion are strong? What a bizarre point of view. There are so many strong ones that you dont tend to hear weaker ones very often.
|
|
|
Post by gwynthegriff on Jun 20, 2015 22:25:34 GMT
The idea that arguments against religion are weak is beyond absurd. You think that all arguments against religion are strong? What a bizarre point of view. I'm not sure that was what joe was saying. But I have a certain difficulty anyway with the idea of "arguments against religion". What exactly does that phrase mean?
|
|