Likely voters oppose marriage initiative

San Francisco Chronicle ^ | 7/18/8

[SmithL]

Fifty-one percent of likely voters in the state oppose Proposition 8 on the November ballot, a constitutional amendment that bans same-sex marriage by defining marriage as only between a man and woman, according to a Field Poll released today. The poll shows voters are divided by where they live, their age, gender and political party.

For Prop. 8:

"I see nothing wrong with gay marriage. It's only controversial to narrow-minded people. ... I think the opposition (to same-sex marriage) has to do with being close-minded about homosexuality. Or maybe people are afraid of it."

[xzins]

Let’s hope you’re right.

[isrul]

We descended a long way in 8 years. The degenerates control to media and define the argument.

[SoldierDad]

Why don’t we go back to focusing on lower taxes, cutting spenidng, and shirnking government, and forget about this crap.

Yes indeed. It's more important to "cherry pick" our values than to hold firm in the face of opposition. Typical of libertarians to want to cut-and-run when things get tough.

[B Knotts]

LOL...Field Poll.

You always have to shift at least 10% in the conservative direction to correct their polls.

[Enterprise]

"Likely voters oppose marriage initiative"

BS

[jimmyray]

All Field polls are phony.

50% of statistics are made up 92% of the time, and I have the poll to prove it!

[SatinDoll]

This kind of proposal brings out people who, even if they are usually quite liberal, just can’t accept the idea of homosexuals marrying. They won’t say it publicly - but they talk about it around the kitchen table with family and friends, and object to the idea vehemently.

I expect that new constitutional amendment to pass with percentage to spare.

[Antoninus]

Wishful thinking poll. Wait until the vote is actually taken....

[isrul]

Why should at least 5000 years of every civilization's wisdom be allowed to be scrapped by people who are sexually confused? Why should aberration be accommodated by any society? Especially one that produces so much death?

[SoldierDad]

Cali has created the world they deserve . . .

It's not real californians who have created this "world", but transplants from other parts of the country and from abroad. In 2000 CA voters voted by a margin of 61%+ in favor of defining a marriage as between one man and one woman. In the intervening years we've had an influx of out-of-staters from other liberal areas of the country, and that is affecting our state's politics.

[gunnedah]

That crowd out there wants to name a filtering plant after Bush. The whole ocean could not filter California enough to clean it up.

[ConservativeMajority]

If 2004 is any indication, gay marriage gets out the vote!

[B Knotts]

By comparison, here is a part of the Field Poll from August, 1982:

       PCT     N  VALUE  LABEL
      60.9   523      1  BRADLEY
      37.6   323      2  DUKMEJIN
       1.5    13      3  OTHER
             148      8  UDECIDED

[Antoninus]

The one-trick pony of gay marraige fear isn’t going to work anymore.

Tell you what? Don't waste your breath trying to impose your immorality upon me and my country, ok?

If the voters of CA accept butt-sex fake marriage, that's their issue. If they try to impose it upon me and my locality via the "full faith and credit" clause, we'll take it to a Constitutional Amendment.

In my opinion, I think butt-sex marriage is going down in CA thanks to the will of the voters.

[Right Cal Gal]

All you have to do is see the breakdown in polling regions and understand “S.F. Comical-speak”.

“Los Angeles County” - Westwood, Beverly Hills and Hollywood. No Blacks or Hispanic areas polled.
“Other Southern California” - Santa Barabara - not Orange County or San Diego County
“Bay Area” - San Francisco/Berkeley.
“Central Valley” - polled five people at gas stations off I-99. When most voted “yes,” they stopped polling.

[j_tull]

everybody asked was probably gay.

The lack of spread in the age breakdown leads me to believe you are probably right. The 50/50 split in the >65 category leaves considerable doubt, to my mind, about sampling validity

[puroresu]

Here’s a classic example of the type of “limited government” you can expect in a “gay tolerant” area:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/07/16/MNH311PMRE.DTL

[Boagenes]

Trust me, the majority is going to vote in support of the amendment. This is just the MSM trying to stage things. They’re full of crap. This measure will pass by 55% or more.

[MinnesotaLibertarian]

There's no logical reason why the two should be related at all. Most of the cities that have big gay populations were liberal beforehand; many gays are liberals, but not all, and not all live in cities. Also, look at a city like San Diego, that is both gay-friendly and relatively conservative.

There have been politicians who have run as being “progressive” on gay issues while being solid economic conservatives, sometimes even moreso than their social conservative counterparts. For examples, see former Gov. Bill Weld (R-MA), former Sen. Alan Simpson (R-WY), and former Rep. Jim Kolbe (R-AZ).

A campaign against big government would flop in both the Twin Cities and socially conservative rural areas. Most rural areas of Minnesota vote DFL - look at our Congressional representation and our state legislature. Conservative strength in Minnesota is all in the suburbs, which includes both socially conservative suburbs and not-so-socially conservative suburbs, such as my hometown of Edina.

[MinnesotaLibertarian]

I don’t things are tough. I think this is not really a relevant issue for government and a waste of time.