Split: Heavy majority of tea partiers opposes gay marriage, plurality of rest of GOP supports

Hotair ^ | 03/11/2015 | AllahPundit

[SeekAndFind]

A fine little illustration of the divide between the Republican base and many of those who purport to represent them in Washington, in the media, and in fundraising corridors. Consider this a follow-up to the two polls that Noah and I flagged for you last month, one from Marist suggesting that GOP primary voters(!) had started to warm to gay marriage and one from CNN showing overall Republican support for SSM creeping up above the 40 percent mark.

The good news for social cons in today’s WSJ/NBC poll: The Marist data on primary voters is probably wrong. Marist asked likely Republican voters whether candidates who oppose gay marriage are acceptable to them and found, surprisingly, more than 50 percent in some early primary states saying unacceptable. Since when does criticism of gay marriage count against Republicans in a primary? That seemed like a big deal. Per WSJ/NBC, though, it’s probably just an outlier:

Support for gay marriage has risen to an all-time high in the latest Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll, reinforcing it as one of the fastest-moving changes in social attitudes of this generation.

The new survey found that 59% of Americans support allowing same-sex marriage, nearly double the 30% support reported in 2004…

However, the issue still poses some risk to GOP candidates facing a spirited presidential primary. Among core Republican voters — the party’s most committed followers — opposition is far stronger, with only 29% saying they support gay marriage.

When Republican primary voters were asked in the new survey how their view of candidates would be affected by support for gay marriage, 50% said it would make them less favorable to candidates, 19% said it would make them more favorable.

Supporting SSM is still a major loser in a GOP primary, as everyone thought, which is why no one among the GOP’s eight thousand 2016 candidates is willing to go further than “I’m personally opposed but let’s let the states decide.” Like Scott Shackford says, the way Marist worded its question may have confused Republican voters who thought they were being asked whether it’d be acceptable for a candidate to support, not oppose, gay marriage. The GOP base is still very much against nontraditional marriage.

But what about the rest of the party?

Most GOP primary voters are not on board with allowing same-sex marriage, with 40 percent favoring it and 53 percent opposing it. But there’s a major difference between Republicans who identify with the Tea Party (24 percent favor/64 percent oppose) and those who don’t (49 percent favor/47 percent oppose.)

So there’s another poll, a la CNN’s last month, showing overall GOP support at 40 percent. At least two other major polls taken over the past 12 months have pegged Republican backing of SSM at similar levels, 41 percent in an NYT survey from last September and 39 percent in a Pew poll from last spring. The 40 percent threshold seems legit, which makes me wonder how much longer it’ll be before so many non-tea-party GOPers back gay marriage that the party itself is evenly divided or even slightly pro-SSM. WSJ/NBC found a huge 13-point jump in Republican support in just the last two years; what happens to the fencesitters among centrist Republicans who are mildly opposed to gay marriage right now once the Roberts Court ends up formally legalizing gay marriage this summer?

Most polls don’t drill down to how the numbers divide among tea partiers and more centrist Republicans, but after today’s finding, I bet more will. If conservatives are reliably at 20-30 percent support and the party as a whole is now reliably at 40 percent support, center-righties must already be reliably at or above the break-even point of 50 percent. As you see above, WSJ/NBC has it at 49/47 today and that’s with virtually zero current Republican officeholders willing to nudge them by going on the record in favor. (The only major exception I can think of offhand is Rob Portman.) Makes me think that rumors of Jeb Bush’s “evolution” on gay marriage could be even more significant than we think in potentially influencing the party.

If Jeb, following his “screw the right, please the center” primary strategy, makes some sort of bold move on SSM, the center-righties who are invested in his candidacy may feel obliged to follow, whether to give him cover or because they quietly support legalizing gay marriage too. That could shake loose a bunch of Republican fencesitters, tipping them into the pro-SSM camp. Early signs from Team Jeb suggest he won’t do that: Bush’s new campaign manager, who’s endorsed court challenges to legalize SSM before, conspicuously declined to join the latest amicus brief from centrist Republicans advocating for legal gay marriage. Smart play, as Jeb already has enough issues with the right that he doesn’t need to cross them on a core “values” issue too. But who knows? With overall public support now near 60 percent and likely to rise further after SCOTUS rules, maybe Jeb is more worried about Hillary using this as a wedge against him in the general than tea partiers having one extra reason to dislike a guy they already dislike. Can the party hang together with someone at the top of the ticket who opposes the base on this, though? That’s the significance of today’s numbers.

[George from New England]

It’s the RINO branch of the GOP. Sort of like the liberal branch of the formerly Catholic Church.

[George from New England]

It is so simple ... The Bible speaks ... either you believe and follow the Word of God or you don’t.

[sickoflibs]

Again, it takes way more than just saying you are against something to stop or even slow it. Many seem to think just saying "I am against something" is accomplishing something.

Progressives plan is to progress step by step if need be.
They form coherent logical sounding arguments that win over voters, I dont see that on our side.

Their argument: ‘We must marry the same sex to each other because gays can’t control their feelings’ | 3/10/2015

[Fido969]

Soft-headed nitwits wants to give out “rights and benefits” like handing out candy. They are smart enough to stop any think: “Where do these rights and benefits come from? Who pays for them?”

[angryoldfatman]

Has AllahPundit shed his RINO wonkiness yet? That was a lengthy non-informative post of his.

AllahPundit was known to be a RINO supporter during the 2008 and particularly the 2012 presidential elections. I was under the impression he just looooooooved him some Romney.

Ace from Ace of Spades HQ has started to come around since the midterms and the subsequent Boehner-McConnell disasters. I can’t be bothered to slog through all of the minutiae that AllahPundit spews to figure out any of his current positions, though.

[lexington minuteman 1775]

And God is still opposed to marriage other than one man and one woman. And he’s opposed to abortion on demand.
So when the judgment comes it won’t matter what the polling organizations say, it will be settled and lots of people are going to be left cut off from the Holy One.
Freegards
LEX

[2nd Amendment]

bingo! The only question we have left is whether we go peacefully or with opposition when the gov’t comes to put us in “reeducation camps” Like the Coptic Christians in Egypt, we will face the choice to compromise or follow God’s Word.

[Usagi_yo]

Actually, it’s the Conservative wing of the Democratic party.

[Vaduz]

RINO = DEMOCRAT

[Terry L Smith]

All this junk over 3% of the American population?????

Let them die off.

[Alas Babylon!]

The TEA Party started out as an fiscal conservative group, and TEA stood for Taxed Enough Already. Just how did it also become a social conservative movement?

Now please note, I'm not against this, but it puzzles me that it now is focused in this direction, as if the media wanted it to, and didn't want the movement to really emphasize these fiscal/government spending/taxes aspect, as they would have a much harder time defending against it.

I think it's a trap, personally.

The media likes to wrap up all our important points into a nice little homophobic, racist bow. Notice how the meme of the week's news is the Oklahoma University fraternity, rather than Hillary or Obama?

[ansel12]

More like 1 to 1.5% of the population.

[ansel12]

The tea party has always been made up (naturally) of the more religious, more conservative Americans, which also means social conservative.

[ansel12]

Who is the rino branch of the GOP?

[GeronL]

Remember that Paulbots still claim the Tea Party is a libertarian movement.

Obviously it is not.

[GeronL]

There is nothing coherent or logical from the left of course

[Amendment10]

Thank you for referencing that article SeekAndFind. Please bear in mind that the following critique is directed at the article and not at you.

I find it suspicious that conservatives seem to be depicting the legitimacy of gay marriage as merely a matter of opinion. Given that the states have never amended the Constitution to expressly protect gay marriage, please consider the following hypothetical situation.

Even if everybody in the country supported gay marriage, it remains that there are no constitutionally enumerated gay “rights” to stop the states from making laws which prohibit gay marriage, as long as such laws don’t unreasonably abridge constitutionally enumerated protections.

[GeronL]

Fiscal conservatives are usually also social conservatives, no great mystery there. The two go hand in glove.

[sarge83]

If the Republicans cave on gay marriage and go all in for it and kowtow to the gay mafia they are done in 2016. Evangelical voters will vote third party or sit out the election. Without these votes the GOP loses period, they cannot pull enough independents and democrats to make up for the evangelicals. If the GOP caves on gay marriage or abortion they are done.