Image 01 Image 03

Poll Says Virginians Want Colleges to be Safe Spaces

Poll Says Virginians Want Colleges to be Safe Spaces

“protecting everyone on campus from discrimination”

What’s the point of going to college if you’re going to be coddled and sheltered?

The Daily Caller reports:

SHOCK POLL: Virginia Residents Want Colleges To Be SAFE SPACES Where Free Speech Is Censored

Virginia Commonwealth University’s Office of Public Policy Outreach conducted the poll in mid-July — about a month before the events in Charlottesville and at the University of Virginia. The school released the findings late last week.

“A very narrow majority” of the 806 adult Virginia residents polled said they think colleges and universities should emphasize “protecting everyone on campus from discrimination, even if it means there are negative consequences for voicing one’s opinions.”

Just 40 percent of the poll participants said colleges and universities should emphasize “allowing everyone on campus to have unlimited freedom of expression, even if it means some groups of people may face discrimination.”

Five percent of the survey respondents said they want colleges and universities to protect people from discriminatory language while somehow simultaneously allowing unlimited free speech.

Another five percent had no opinion or refused to answer the question.

About 40 percent of self-described Republicans said protecting people from hearing about discrimination is more important than free speech.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


I live in the 804, and I’m curious which “adult Virginia residents” they polled. If it was those who live in close proximity to VCU, it was all Democrats. This is obviously not a poll to be taken seriously.

    healthguyfsu in reply to phdwyphe. | September 5, 2017 at 5:41 pm

    757 here…my thoughts exactly. VCU is a liberal school among liberal schools.

    There’s no doubt in my mind that the “L. Douglas Wilder School of Government and Public Affairs” conducted this poll in an unscrupulous fashion.

    The wording of the question is loaded to suggest that 1. people can somehow be “safe” from discrimination with minimal restrictions to free speech (which they can’t) and 2. negative consequences will be applied justly and impartially to real bigots

    Their sampling also allows for a 4.2% margin of error plus two other categories (do both, which isn’t really possible) and don’t know completely absorb any differences. There is no majority, only a truly split population, and I hate to see it in my state.

    Last thing hidden in their little data set: They oversampled the elderly. You see, back when censorship was an issue in their day, it was all about the morality clauses. Limiting free speech to some of the older generations is simply less tattoos, piercings, and nudity. Clever trick…I’m sure ol’ Dougie is proud.

Apples and oranges.

“Protecting people from discrimination” has nothing at all to do with “safe spaces”.

Discrimination is “no white people on campus day”, “no coloreds” signs, maybe even parking lots without “handicapped” spaces. Nobody (except maybe an ogre living under a bridge somewhere) supports any vestige of this. It isn’t even a close call … except perhaps for the parking places.

“Safe spaces” are blatant and explicit suppression of free speech.

There is no relationship at all between these concepts.

Ergo, this is just another junk poll. It would make as much sense to ask people questions about eighteenth century Italian opera, and then announce conclusions about public attitudes to tobasco sauce as part of a balanced breakfast. It’s nonsensical, and therefore deceptive.

“Discrimination” you say?


The person who is unable to “discriminate” between iodine and cough syrup is in for a rude reality check.

The person who is unable to “discriminate” between whether or not to grab hold of the Third Rail of a subway track below the sign warning against such behavior will likely be shocked, simply shocked at the result.

Colleges/Universities USED to teach critical thinking whereby the graduate would be able to function in society and (*ahem!*) discriminate between wisdom and folly, which often means the difference between life death.

Instead they produce drones of the Hemeac mold, following by rote their Dem/Lib programming. (Re: the scifi short story and TV episode)