Posted on 09/14/2011 10:09:27 PM PDT by Antoninus
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: September 14, 2011
Mary Beth Hutchins or Elizabeth Ray at 703-683-5004
WEPRIN VOTE FOR GAY MARRIAGE COST HIM SEAT IN CONGRESS
Washington –The National Organization for Marriage (NOM) today released a “flash” survey conducted yesterday among voters of New York’s 9th Congressional District which demonstrates that David Weprin’s support of same-sex marriage was a major factor in his loss to Republican Bob Turner.
“This survey demonstrates what many people have been saying for a long time – David Weprin’s vote in favor of same-sex marriage cost him election to the US House,” said Brian Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage. “NOM funded a major independent expenditure campaign in this race and the survey shows that marriage was a major factor in the race and cost Weprin the election.” The election of Republican Bob Turner marks the first time this district has been represented by a Republican since the early 1920s.
The survey by QEV Analytics interviewed 251 actual or highly likely voters in the NY 9th Congressional District and concluded just as the polls closed last evening. It found the following:
Fifty percent (50%) of district voters believe that marriage should only be between one man and one woman; while only 38% of voters disagree (13% didn’t express an opinion). Marriage supporters include 88% of Orthodox Jews, 53% of Catholics and 47% of other Christians. There is a high correlation between a person’s position on marriage and their vote between Turner and Weprin. Those who agree marriage should only be between a man and a woman voted for Turner 81% - 19%. Turner won Orthodox Jews 91% - 9%; Catholics by 72%-28%; Other Christians 53% - 47%. Weprin won among non-Orthodox Jews 69% - 29%; among Other/None/DK 76%-24%.
Moreover, among those who agree with the traditional definition of marriage, 44% said Weprin’s position was a factor in their vote, while 29% of those who disagree said his position was a factor. Voters told the pollster that David Weprin’s position on same-sex marriage was a specific factor in the voting decision of 72% of Orthodox Jews, 29% of Other Jews, 27% of Catholics, 33% of Other Christians, 27% of other/None/DK.
“When the New York legislature voted to redefine marriage, NOM vowed that we would hold those legislators accountable. This is what happened last night,” Brown said. “Legislators were sold a bill of goods when they were told by Andrew Cuomo, Michael Bloomberg and the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) that they could redefine marriage and suffer no political consequences. All you have to do is look at David Weprin’s shocking loss to Bob Turner to understand that voting for same-sex marriage has consequences. Weprin just lost one of the most Democratic Congressional seats in the country in large part because of his vote to redefine marriage. Cuomo, Bloomberg and the HRC couldn’t save him and neither will they be able to save other legislators when it comes time for them to face voters.”
QEV derived the survey sample from a random selection of registered voters in the district most likely to vote in a special election. They carefully monitored the age distribution of the obtained sample so that it matched the age distribution of those likely voters. They weighted the obtained results so that these precisely matched the actual vote result.
The survey sample was 13% Orthodox Jewish, 25% Other Jewish, 36% Catholic, 12% Other Christian, 14% Other Faiths + No Faith + No Response. The margin of sampling error for Orthodox Jews on the ballot question is +/- 10%, which means that actual result of the ballot question could theoretically be as close as 81% Turner/19% Weprin.
sample size too small to be significant
No, it means their constituents need more education
Yet we have folks on this board who think that we should take a pass or make a truce on social issues.
This is exibit "A" why that strategy sucks.
So a self-serving survey by the National Organization for Marriage lets Obama and Schumer off the hook. What a nice gift for the press corps.
Even worse, he tried to justify his vote in favor of gay marriage on the grounds that it was consistent with the teachings of his religion. Which is obviously nuts and infuriated his coreligionists.
Sounds like a real odd ball. Modern Orthodoxy is one of the last places you’d expect to hear something like this. (The more liberal arms of the American synagogue have already plunged themselves into this sewer.)
Or trust that they really want a truce.
They’ll take a “truce” to consolidate their gains and, when things have settled down, they’ll commence tearing apart the social fabric.
As someone here said in a prior post “ erections have consequences
Democrats take note: Support Gay Marriage and end your political career. Better have another job in your back pocket if you back these un-popular acts.
I hope those gay marriage supporting traitor RINOs in the NY senate pay very close attention. If they were hoping for democratic cover next election, they should remember, dems can’t even protect themselves. How are they going to provide cover for you backstabbers?
Hopefully November 2012 will get rid of democrats and any reach across the aisle RINOs up for re-election. Maybe the RINOs, elites, beltway boys will take notice and quit trying to push their favorite RINO’s on us.
Truth. To be a social liberal is to be a fiscal liberal in the long run. After all, the taxpayers end up being the ones forced to pay for the consequences and results of social liberalism in society.
It is an opportunity. White Southerners didn’t become Republican overnight.
I’m happy to know that more NYers have better morals than I originally thought.
Assuming that they did their best to maintain randomness of the sample, IMO, n= 250 should be fine. The number of people voted on Tuesday was about 60,000. So, a bit below 0.5%. Most sample size for presidential poll usually are much lower than that (in terms of percentage).
No, it means they don’t want homosexual marriage. The term “education” used in this instance is a euphemism for the ongoing effort by some to exert social pressure and force society into submission on this.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.