Quantcast

Comments about ‘More Republicans than Democrats value military experience in office’

Return to article »

Published: Monday, June 2 2014 12:25 p.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Understands Math
Lacey, WA

Some of these numbers are shocking: 67% of Republicans and 42% of Democrats see a candidate's atheism as a negative? Why?

Very interesting, though, to see a majority of both parties seeing "never held office" as a negative, considering that a lot of candidates try that approach as a selling point.

2 bits
Cottonwood Heights, UT

To Democrats... How is being a woman a plus? I thought sex didn't matter... and both are "EQUAL". Look up "EQUAL" in the dictionary... IF they are "equal" then how is being female a plus?

If you're consistent... and you think people shouldn't see being a man as a plus... then being a woman should also not be seen as a plus. (that's consistent).

IF Republicans expressed that being MALE was their 3rd highest criteria for office... I would expect there to be outrage (and rightfully so)... so why is the opposite bias OK?

IF both sexes are truly "equal"... then being a woman should NOT be a plus.

I applaud Republican/Republican-learners... for not letting sex be a plus OR a negative in their evaluation of candidates. That shows the really think they are "equal".

Sex doesn't matter... Being a man isn't a plus, and begin a woman is not a plus (IF we're consistent).

====

These biases are interesting.

John Charity Spring
Back Home in Davis County, UT

The irrefutable fact is that the current left-wing administration is anti-military. Indeed, the entire party is against the idea of a strong military.

This Country became the greatest in the world because it had a strong military. Freedom comes from having the strength to prevent others from taking it away.

Shame on the left-wing for its anti-millitary attitude. Giving out lollipops and balloons to our enemies will not be enough to protect us.

GZE
SALT LAKE CITY, UT

More Republicans than Democrats Value Military Experience.

And yet so few of them are willing to serve.

LDS Liberal
Farmington, UT

Speaking as both Veteran and former-Republican...

It's intersting to note that most Utahns,
in fact most Republicans have never even served in the Military...

However, this may also explain why they sheepishly vote for someone,
who would seek to send us,
or at least someone else's kid to fight and die for their stupid made-up reasons...

2 bits
Cottonwood Heights, UT

The "who values the military more" game is useless. Nobody wins. We ALL value them, just some more than others, and some in different ways than others. But nobody's AGAINST our military (I HOPE).

It's like the "Who loves our country more"... or "Who's more Patriotic"... it's all just bogus.

====

IMO it doesn't matter which sex you are, or even what sexual orientation you are. What matters is what you have DONE for your country (when you are asking to lead the country).

If you haven't even bothered to serve in the military (when our nation and our liberty are at stake)... how much dedication can you really pretend to have... for our liberty and our country?

It just seems like you are willing to talk, but not walk, when you say want to dedicate your life to our country, but refuse to sped even a second in our military.

Our military is what allows us to be... our country. Without them... we would not be a country (for long). So you can't disrespect them... and say you want to serve our country (in political office).

Wonder
Provo, UT

I'm a Democrat, I personally would count military service as a plus. I think prior military service can be helpful in knowing the limits of military action. I think one of the reasons Bush, Cheney, etc. were so eager to go to war in Iraq was because they had no (or virtually no) military experience. Although that said, John McCain with all his military experience is too eager to advocate war, in my opinion. (Yes, I am aware that Obama had no prior military experience. I said military experience is a plus, not a requirement.) As far as Dems wanting to vote for a woman, I bet that result is skewed high because they are supporters of Hillary and are eagerly anticipating her running for office.

Ultra Bob
Cottonwood Heights, UT

It is absolutely logical that more Republicans associate themselves with the military.

Military people are simply employees of the businessmen who make up the military/industrial complex. They are employees of business but their salaries and benefits are paid for by the American people in general.

All wars are fought over economic issues, either to gain or to protect an economic advantage in the commercial world. War is the ultimate competition between the competing big boys who own most of the world.

As properly indoctrinated employees of the business world, that is made up mainly by republicans, it follows that republicans would want military people to run the government.

Democrats are businessmen also but their ranks are mostly ordinary people who would love not to have wars.

Understands Math
Lacey, WA

@2 bits wrote: "To Democrats... How is being a woman a plus? I thought sex didn't matter... and both are "EQUAL". Look up "EQUAL" in the dictionary... IF they are "equal" then how is being female a plus?

If you're consistent... and you think people shouldn't see being a man as a plus... then being a woman should also not be seen as a plus. (that's consistent).

IF Republicans expressed that being MALE was their 3rd highest criteria for office... I would expect there to be outrage (and rightfully so)... so why is the opposite bias OK?"

You might find it enlightening to follow the links to find more information about this survey. Yes, Democrats would be more likely to support a candidate if she were a woman, but the same also holds true, to a lesser percentage, for political independents to a lesser degree. Additionally, according to the survey, Republicans would be less likely to support a candidate if she were a woman.

2 bits
Cottonwood Heights, UT

@Wonder,

I know it's a habit to trash Bush and Cheney. But both had military experience before we elected them President and VP.

Google "George W. Bush military service" (read wikipedia or some impartial source, not some Democrat attack source).

In November 1970, Lt. Col. Jerry B. Killian, commander of the 111th Fighter Squadron, recommended that Bush be promoted to First Lieutenant, calling him "a dynamic outstanding young officer" who stood out as "a top notch fighter interceptor pilot." He said that "Lt. Bush's skills far exceed his contemporaries," and that "he is a natural leader whom his contemporaries look to for leadership. Lt. Bush is also a good follower with outstanding disciplinary traits and an impeccable military bearing."

====

Dick Cheney had military experience. He was the Secretary of Defense from March 1989 to January 1993.

He was the Secretary of Defense during Operation Desert Storm (which may have resulted in him knowing TOO much about Saddam Hussien and what he was capable of). In 1991, he was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom for his work during Operation Desert Storm.

CHS 85
Sandy, UT

@2 bits

"Dick Cheney had military experience. He was the Secretary of Defense from March 1989 to January 1993.

He was the Secretary of Defense during Operation Desert Storm (which may have resulted in him knowing TOO much about Saddam Hussien and what he was capable of). In 1991, he was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom for his work during Operation Desert Storm."

So after his FIVE draft deferments, and then his appointment as a political appointee, you are going to say with a straight face that Dick Cheney had "military experience?"

DN Subscriber
Cottonwood Heights, UT

The canard that Republicans are unwilling to serve in the military must be refuted!

One only has to look at the facts that most military voters tend to vote Republican, and that Democrats chronically try to disenfranchise military voters for that reason.

Yeah, I'm ticked at this shameful distortion of facts, by supporters of one impeached (but not convicted) President who "loathed the military" and another who uses them as props for photo ops.

I served for over 26 years myself, so I know whereof I speak on this issue!

2 bits
Cottonwood Heights, UT

@CHS 85
Yes, I think being Secretary of Defense gives you military experience. You are working with generals and military decisions all day every day. Being a private isn't the only way to get military experience. Ask Hillary Clinton.

Ultra Bob
Cottonwood Heights, UT

2 bits.

For many of us in the first experience with government, Mom and Dad, the female part of that government was the most caring and satisfying. Not only at the beginning, but throughout most of our lives.

When we seek a government that has our own personal welfare as a concern, that early indoctrination may affect our judgment

CHS 85
Sandy, UT

@2 bits

Dick Cheney was as much a military man being Secretary of Defense as Mike Leavitt was a MD when he was the Secretary of Health and Human Services.

p.s. I never said Hillary Clinton had military experience. Nor do I necessarily think that military service is a prerequisite for being a good President. Presidents from both sides of the aisle have had military experience, while others have not. There have been really bad Presidents who were military men. Again, I don't think it is absolutely necessary for a President to have served in the military.

LDS Liberal
Farmington, UT

If it is such a high value to Republicans...

Why would they consider and even nominate:
Sarah Palin,
Donald Trump,
Herman Cain,
Michelle Bachmann,
Rick Santorum,
or
Mitt Romney?
Paul Ryan?

At least Democrats are honest,
and do not pretened to be or champion something they are not themselves.

Just a reminder folks --
A Presidential candidate Romney conplained weakness in Libya and promised a full blown invasion of Syria...

Ultra Bob
Cottonwood Heights, UT

DN Subscriber.

I served 4 years in the Navy and never owned a boat.

I worked 10 years at an Air Craft plant and never learned to fly.

I worked 30 years for a Bank and never got rich.

How does serving 26 years in the military give you the right to tell anyone the reason people serve in the military? A more important thing to us might be Why you spent 26 years in the military.

Would your statement about military voters be effected by whether or not we are at war?

Wonder
Provo, UT

2 bits, I agree with you that Cheney's Secretary of Defense experience gave him more experience with the military than a non-military person would have. I was thinking of his multiple deferments as a young person. Yes, I am aware that Bush was in the National Guard, but he was never deployed and didn't have the type of military experience I would count as a "plus." (Although to be fair, I acknowledge that neither has Obama.) To clarify my point: I disagree with the military hawks (typically Republicans) who would take us to war over every issue. It often seems like the ones leading the charge are those who got out of combat as young people, but are perfectly willing to send others to die, even when it is not clear that military action in our national interest. (e.g. Iraq, where I think our action actually decreased our national security.)

Schnee
Salt Lake City, UT

Generally, these skew towards "does this demographic tend to be more liberal/conservative on average"? You see that with evangelical Christians most notably here.

GaryO
Virginia Beach, VA

2 bits -

"To Democrats... How is being a woman a plus? "

I don't know. Maybe it's the women in the Democratic Party who would like to see a woman as President.

To me, gender is not an issue . . . Because Hillary Clinton would definitely make a better President than anyone the GOP can field.

And I don't think military experience is a big selling point either. Generally, the President won't be directly involved in planning strategy and tactics. We have plenty of qualified people in the military to do that.

But we do want someone with good sense, and that precludes most Republicans, especially for the nation's highest office.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments