Skip to comments.Polls on gay marriage not yet reflected in votes [Liberal Media Whining]
Posted on 05/28/2012 2:23:49 AM PDT by SoFloFreeper
Poll after poll shows public support for same-sex marriage steadily increasing, to the point where it's now a majority viewpoint. Yet in all 32 states where gay marriage has been on the ballot, voters have rejected it.
It's possible the streak could end in November, when Maine, Maryland, Minnesota and Washington state are likely to have closely contested gay marriage measures on their ballots.
(Excerpt) Read more at 2.wjbf.com ...
Also from the article:
California...voters, by a 52-48 margin, approved a ban on same-sex marriage in the state constitution. A statewide Field Poll that September indicated Proposition 8 would lose decisively; an updated poll a week before the vote still showed it trailing by 5 percentage points.
California is an unusual case. It’s one of a few reliably Democratic states that have had a statewide vote rebuffing same-sex marriage. The vast majority of the referendums have been in more conservative states, which have a greater predilection for using ballot measures to set social policy. The 32 states that have rejected gay marriage at the polls make up just over 60 percent of the U.S. population.
California is kind of a special case. Time after time, ballot initiatives have been overturned in the courts, because “the people” are not a reliable barometer of judgment in these delicate matters.
Above all, the sensibilities of the perverted must be protected and preserved. Haven’t they suffered enough?
Affirmative action for the sexually disoriented.
Is it possible that people tell pollsters what the pollsters want to hear and give their true opinion only when in the privacy of the voting booth?
Probably. Probably something like this:
Pollster: “Do you support gay marriage, or are you a bigot?”
Polled: “Well, gee, I guess I support it.” And then they vote their true conviction.
“Polls on gay marriage not yet reflected in votes”
Couldn’t be due to the polls being faked/skewed/and or manipulated could it?
Noooo.. they wouldn’t do that!
Same sex marriage was proposed for Maryland last year and it was stopped by black preachers in PG county.
This year Mike Miller voted against same sex marriage because he likes to get that black vote , but the rest of our Democrat Homo lovers voted it in.
Then it went to referendum.
We have a growing Republican party in Md. and a lot of Black Democrats who don’t want Homo marriage. I think we will beat it. O’Mally isn’t so popular right now.
Maine already voted against gay marriage once. How many times do they have to do it?
But when a socially and economically conservative candidate is on the ballot against a "gay" marriage supporter who also promises more government cheese......that's a different story entirely, especially amongst the gimmee geezers.
They also represent 6 shy of the supermajority the Constitution requires to ratify an amendment. If that many states have enacted Definition of Marriage laws, I have to believe they would support a Constitutional amendment codifying the same thing. Why not introduce such an amendment and lay this abomination to rest once and for all?
This is a particularly crude example because in the United States we have a particularly crude propaganda organism and just enough free speech left to combat it, at least for now. The dismay with which a contrary vote is met - and voting on the matter has, in a large majority of contests, been contrary - is not simply another cynical effort to sway, I think, but a genuine conviction that the truth has been dictated by what were once called the nomenklatura in the Soviet Union and that the people are simply too stupid to understand it.
The upshot to all this is that if the propaganda organism fails, the state of which its participants feel they are the proper guide will resort to force in the form of legislative diktat that circumvents the usual checks and balances of representative government. The canceling of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" is a perfect example.
Because the power of propaganda, while nowhere near the overwhelming force its proponents appear to assume, still can be persuasive enough to bring into office people whose intention is to dictate, to rule. This it has done in the case of the 0bama administration in 2008, an election that was a textbook case of monolithic propaganda, and that has resulted in a weird class of progressive gnomes whose intent is not to represent, but to rule, who are going to lead the country their direction whether it wants to follow or not and curse it roundly if it is in any way refractory. That, in children, is termed a tantrum. We'd better get used to it.
"It's equality in marriage."
"Oh, well, I guess so." (wife punches arm, look of "whaddaya mean 'guess so'.")
Yeah, that’s the real tricksy (a little Gollum lingo) way they structure their questions to get the desired result.
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.