How Adventists Plan to Vote in the 2020 United States National Election
During the last week in August we asked Spectrum and Adventist Today readers, as well as members of Adventists for Social Justice and Adventists Vote (a voter engagement campaign), to participate in a short survey about their religious and political leanings, plans for voting in the upcoming election, and positions on a number of controversial social issues. We asked questions similar to those found in most public opinion polls such as the Gallup Poll, replicating many questions from our previous surveys of Adventist Today and Spectrum readers, Adventist pastors, and Adventist collegians. A summary and analysis of these findings and other studies of Adventists — religion, politics, and social issues — from 1988 through 2016 will be published soon in Spectrum.
Interesting study … with flaws, unfortunately. The sampling strategy does not become apparent. A convenience sample from Atoday and Spectrum readers is very likely to be biased.
All the more disheartening the findings… If about one third of the intellectual elite of Adventism finds Trump to be an acceptable candidate for presidency - even an increase to the last election, European Adventists can only shake their heads in disbelief.
WOW! That’s good news. We only need to know if those votes will count after all, or will it all be taken to the Courts, and a dictatorship handed out to Trump. Will see…
I voted yesterday. I want my vote to mean something!
Have you ever seen a Presidential Candidate refuse to answer because his answer will make headlines? Biden was asked if he’d support increasing the number of justices on the Supreme Court. "‘They’ll know my opinion on court-packing when the election is over,’ ‘I don’t blame you for asking it, but you know the moment I answer that question, the headline in every one of your papers will be about that, other than - other than focusing on what’s happening now,’.
Actually, the only way it would be in headlines is if he said yes I will pack the court, if he followed normal procedures it would not be packed and not much news. In effect between Harris refusing to answer the question in the debate last night and Biden today. Yes, they intend to pack the court and rule by the court system instead of the congress. If you vote for Biden/Harris you vote for the end of America as a constitutional Republic. So those who say they will vote for Biden because he is not Trump need to seriously reconsider their thinking!
No Andreas, not here. You know that nobody here or at AToday is biased.
This is actually not that bad, considering that the rest of the world, justifiably, is actually laughing at us! And every day adds to the reasons to do so. I am so embarrassed… But, still more, I am actually fearful that this election will actually go down the tubes at the end of the day the courts will hand to Donald Trump a true dictatorship.
This case about the militia blotting against the Michigan’s Governor… well I am not concerned about what the FBI knew and did not tell Trump; I am concerned with what Trump knew and didn’t tell the FBI before…
Sadly that there are people who care so little about the constitution that packing the court is something they want is a reality. I don’t think that it is widely accepted though and there is no need to micro-manage the religions of the judges if they actually interpret the constitution (textualists) Of course if one is for packing the court they could also pack toward a particular religion or anti-religion view as well.
I do too! What was the US population when the SCOTUS was packed with 9 Justices? I don’t know, but I know that the population is today significantly larger. I support a proportional increase of Justices. What are the Republicans afraid of? Justices or Justice???
Interesting… is anybody concerned with the fact that neither Trump nor Pence answered the question about peaceful transfer of power? Just this is a clear indication that those two have a plan in mind. Any American supporting that is engaged in treason.
OK, I just found it. The year for 9 Justices was 1869. In 1870 the population was 38.5 million. Therefore, considering the population growth, we should have ca of 9 times (81) Justices today!!! And there are people yelling and screaming about 13 or 19??? I see it only as a refusal to support JUSTICE, thus supporting the perpetuation of manipulation of justice! @harrpa
Packing is a term used by those who support it and oppose it. There is nothing that means it would be more fair or balanced, it is effectively the opposite of balanced. Lots of states have not given us Presidents either, so what! The justices are supposed to be top of the heap not representative of the population as this is not a court of your peers it is a court to decide constitutional issues. If you are a professor of law and ethics I feel sorry for your students…But that is the problem of many of our schools and that is another issue.
At the end of the day, “packing the court” provides only brief satisfaction for those who would do it for ideological purposes. As soon as judges choose to retire or pass away the court once again reverts to a situation where the luck of the draw and subversive politics hold sway when it comes to who serves.
Who can deny that Mitch McConnell has engaged and is engaging in his own version of “packing the court” with his refusal to bring Garland’s nomination to the floor “because the American people have the right to choose” and his immediate commitment to bringing Judge Barrett’s nomination to the floor in the same situation?
If someone wants to complain about packing the court they have to be honest about their own complicity or opposition to that very thing in its various forms. Democrats are not completely innocent in suggesting the same tactics as McConnell has/is done/doing. Frankly I find both of them hypocritical on this.
Didn’t we know that his word is as good as Trump’s?
I hope he loses re-election. A deplorable like him (and Lindsey Graham) should not be there. Well,… unless they represent people whose character is like theirs. Yes, … maybe they will end up keeping their seats after all…
As for Mitch McConnell, the senate could have easily just turned down Garland, instead they chose not to hang that on the candidate and just did not bring it forward. I would not call that hypocritical.
All this is so silly, what would the folks who want to pack the court says if they thought that Trump was going to pack the court. Or worse yet when asked said I will give you my answer when the election is over! That is hypocrisy!