Opinion Polls: Delphi's Polling Place

Hosted by Showtalk

Opinion polls on all subjects. Opinions? Heck yes, we have opinions - but we're *always* nice about it, even when ours are diametrically opposed to yours. Register your vote today!

  • 4595
    MEMBERS
  • 102104
    MESSAGES
  • 23
    POSTS TODAY

Discussions

Population change for your state? See...   The Serious You: How Current Events Affect You

Started Jan-23 by WALTER784; 292 views.
WALTER784
Staff

Poll Question From WALTER784

Jan-23

Population change for your state? See next post for details.
  • 1.01% or higher1  vote
    11%
  • 0.51% - 1.00%2  votes
    22%
  • 0.01% - 0.50%3  votes
    33%
  • -0.59% - 0.00%2  votes
    22%
  • -0.60 or lower1  vote
    11%
1.01% or higher 
0.51% - 1.00% 
0.01% - 0.50% 
-0.59% - 0.00% 
-0.60 or lower 
Showtalk
Host

From: Showtalk 

Jan-23

The red states in this map are also the most expensive,  I thought liberals wanted to Kate thing more equal,which should mean lower costs, not higher.  They refuse to allow more building so there isn’t enough housing for everyone who wants to live there.  If you ask liberals what the biggest problems are in those states, they will say not enough affordable housing or even any housing at all.  As an example, the prices in San Francisco (Pelosi’s district) are among the highest in the state. As prices rose, those who couldn’t afford it moved out to places Ike Oakland, where the poorest residents had to move somewhere else that was cheaper.  

Jeri (azpaints)

From: Jeri (azpaints) 

Jan-23

The article seems confused.  How can you have a negative population increase?

California, New York, Illinois and Hawaii, which are all deep blue states with Democratic governors, were the only states that saw a negative population increase of 0.60 percent or lower.

Jeri (azpaints)

From: Jeri (azpaints) 

Jan-23

Did his analysis consider population increases or decreases by birth and death rates?  I didn't see where he indicated what parameters were used in his analysis.

Showtalk
Host

From: Showtalk 

Jan-23

Don’t they mean population loss?  I understood what was meant.

Jeri (azpaints)

From: Jeri (azpaints) 

Jan-23

I understood the intent, just thought it was funny.

WALTER784
Staff

From: WALTER784 

Jan-23

Jeri (azpaints) said...

The article seems confused.  How can you have a negative population increase?

A negative increase is a decrease.

But for the most part of the article, it refers to population change. Only that one sentence used the term negative increase.

You can click a link at the bottom of the article to [Submit a correction] if you like.

FWIW

WALTER784
Staff

From: WALTER784 

Jan-23

Jeri (azpaints) said...

Did his analysis consider population increases or decreases by birth and death rates?  I didn't see where he indicated what parameters were used in his analysis.

You would have to ask him directly as the article doesn't mention that:

Cameron Arcand is a political commentator based in Phoenix, Arizona. His "Young Not Stupid" column launched at The Western Journal in January 2021, making Cameron one of the youngest columnists for a national news outlet in the United States. He has appeared on One America News and Fox 5 DC. Since 2019, he has been a Young America's Foundation member.
TOP