3 ms·

This poll has been shared a number of times in this thread, so I’ve seen it. I’m not sure how it holds more value than actual legislation sponsored and passed.

This poll has been shared a number of times in this thread, so I’ve seen it. I’m not sure how it holds more value than actual legislation sponsored and passed. Again, looking at individual states, there a plenty of Democratic controlled ones with significant nuclear production (Illinois, New Jersey, Connecticut). Considering how long it takes to build a nuclear plant, that means they must have supported it for pretty long. It’s ok to admit that something isn’t R or D. Republicans support oil and coal most, Dems support wind and solar most, both support nuclear. The Gallup analysis itself talks about the cost of other energy sources playing a part in the perception. As solar, natural gas and oil have become cheaper, expensive nuclear plants have become less popular. Your link about the Georgia plant says it is years behind schedule and costs have doubled, maybe Democrats see that as fiscally irresponsible and that’s why they don’t support it as much. Either way, this simple poll can’t answer those questions and actual legislation tells its own story.

Consultant32452 7y ago
You've moved the goalposts several times now. The only claim I started with is that Republicans, as a group, have supported nuclear for some time while Democrats, as a group, haven't. You then asked me to provide some evidence of specific actions Republicans took, which I provided recent example. Then you complained that some Democrats also supported the thing Republicans did. So I showed data on the general support by party. But now that's not good enough either. Also, legislation isn't the only part of the story, so are lawsuits. Do you think environmentalist groups like the Sierra club who have a history of burying efforts to build plants in lawsuits are more closely associated with Democrats or Republicans?
- gotAnyEvidence 7y ago
  You said Republicans have supported it and patiently waited for Democrats to catch up. I showed that each of your examples included a group of Democrats supporting (co-sponsoring) it. I also showed how multiple Democratic controlled states also support nuclear. A qualitative poll doesn’t disprove the quantitative evidence that Democrats have and continue to support nuclear as an energy option. There is also a vocal group of Democrats who don’t support it in any way, but that doesn’t change the votes and actions of those that do. Trying to boil everything down to a yes/no or left/right issue leads to this type of back and forth. Issues have many sides and multiple nuances, it’s ok to admit that.
  - Consultant32452 7y ago
    Sorry, but you are still taking an extremely narrow interpretation of what I wrote and then asking me to defend the thing that you made up in your mind. Finding some Democrats that support nuclear doesn't in any way invalidate what I said. Moving the discussion between layers of abstraction from generalizations to individuals and back is a disingenuous way to debate. The only thing I needed to support my position is the survey of support showing that the majority of Republicans support nuclear while the majority of Democrats don't, and that this state of affairs has held consistently over time.

Consultant32452 7y ago

You've moved the goalposts several times now. The only claim I started with is that Republicans, as a group, have supported nuclear for some time while Democrats, as a group, haven't. You then asked me to provide some evidence of specific actions Republicans took, which I provided recent example. Then you complained that some Democrats also supported the thing Republicans did. So I showed data on the general support by party. But now that's not good enough either. Also, legislation isn't the only part of the story, so are lawsuits. Do you think environmentalist groups like the Sierra club who have a history of burying efforts to build plants in lawsuits are more closely associated with Democrats or Republicans?

gotAnyEvidence 7y ago
You said Republicans have supported it and patiently waited for Democrats to catch up. I showed that each of your examples included a group of Democrats supporting (co-sponsoring) it. I also showed how multiple Democratic controlled states also support nuclear. A qualitative poll doesn’t disprove the quantitative evidence that Democrats have and continue to support nuclear as an energy option. There is also a vocal group of Democrats who don’t support it in any way, but that doesn’t change the votes and actions of those that do. Trying to boil everything down to a yes/no or left/right issue leads to this type of back and forth. Issues have many sides and multiple nuances, it’s ok to admit that.
- Consultant32452 7y ago
  Sorry, but you are still taking an extremely narrow interpretation of what I wrote and then asking me to defend the thing that you made up in your mind. Finding some Democrats that support nuclear doesn't in any way invalidate what I said. Moving the discussion between layers of abstraction from generalizations to individuals and back is a disingenuous way to debate. The only thing I needed to support my position is the survey of support showing that the majority of Republicans support nuclear while the majority of Democrats don't, and that this state of affairs has held consistently over time.