February 2019

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28    

« Aargh | Main | Hagan OMSFW »

Feb 09, 2012

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Stephen

I received a call from PPP last night asking me if I supported this or not.

Joe Killian

I've gotten robo-calls on the issue, but not an actual pollster as yet.

Roch101

PPP's polls are robo-calls.

Thanks for doing this, Ed. Any response yet?

Lenny

Greetings Ed,

Thanks for contacting us! I wanted to share with you those numbers she mentioned from the Civitas Jan 2012 poll. Support for the Constitutional Amendment to protect the definition of marriage:

Total Support: 62%
Charlotte Media Market: 74%
Greensboro MM: 61%
Piedmont Triad: 66%
Men: 64%
Women: 61%
Piedmont Triad: 66%

There is also a majority support among Men (64%), Women (61%), registered Republicans (75%), Democrats (58%), Independents (52%), all categories of likely voters (62%-78%), African Americans (66%), and whites (62%). You'll find the Civitas Jan 2012 poll posted on their website soon.

Have a great day!

Ron

Its a surprise to see the Charlotte area higher in percentage. I always thought Greensboro was more socially conservative.

Ed Cone

See update to post.

Ron, your surprise surprises me -- GSO is generally/historically one of the more progressive places in NC.

Roch101

"Lenny," thank you for commenting. I see that you are with Vote for Marriage NC. In light of this week's events, you will understand if we simply do not accept as credible another undocumented assertion from your Political Action Committee.

Since the poll you cite is not listed among the poll results on the Civitas website, please provide a link to these poll results or email them to me: sysop@wirecom.com

designation

A lying bigot paid to be a lying bigot.

Will wonders never cease?!

Prell_Shampoo_Fan

The Vote for Marriage NC house party sounds like a crazy time. Is it kosher to serve booze at such functions?

Lex

Translation: We now have at least two V4MNC reps who clearly are able and willing to lie publicly. Good to know.

Ishmael

It is a means to an end. Lying to get there doesn't matter to them.
Think about this the next time your "freedoms" are threatened. There are groups out there who are being carried by the Libertarian messenger who can't wait until they can climb down off the back and put a lock down on anything that doesn't meet their narrow definition of morality.
I wish Canada was warmer.

Ed Cone

There is some chance these folks just made glaring mistakes in a crucial televised presentation.

What we know for certain is that the group has shown real problems providing reliable data, and that its spokesperson will not answer a direct question about the impact of this proposed amendment on civil unions in North Carolina.

Matt Comer

Ed... you said: "There is some chance these folks just made glaring mistakes in a crucial televised presentation. What we know for certain is that the group has shown real problems providing reliable data..."

This anti-gay campaigns -- in every state in this country -- have relied on misinformation, lies, deception and spin. "Reliable data" is anathema to them; you can't create scary ads and motivate people to vote with the truth.

Jeremy Hooper is a great blogger who's been keeping up with anti-gay spin and lies for years: http://www.goodasyou.org/.

sean coon

i'm about to do something i never thought i would -- agree with the evil dr. guarino. to paraphrase: "moral relativists are bringing down our nation."

i concur. negative poll numbers about civil rights issues mean nothing. equal protection and equal rights are not popularity contests. these are self-evident truths, not relative to the prejudicial whims of certain religions or hate mongers.

that's the footing we should be digging into.

Matt Comer

The unfortunate problem, Sean, is that anti-gay religious zealots and people like Guarino do not believe LGBT people are even deserving of civil or human rights to begin with. Indeed, they believe that LGBT people either don't exist in reality at all or that we shouldn't exist.

sean coon

oh, i understand the reality, matt. it's both sad and pathetic.

bubba

We can always count on the Cone Peanut Gallery Echo Chamber to spin a truth that doesn't fit the agenda, can't we?

Prell_Shampoo_Fan

Folks, let's not be too hard on Rachel. She's a graduate of Liberty University - that bastion of right-wing Christian fundamental fascism to our north. Four years of social and intellectual devolution take a severe toll on one's tolerance for minorities deemed to be invaluable. I've never read The Bible as I've heard it's like the Ishtar of books, but I heard somewhere that Jesus once asked a mean old codger, "Why don't you love all people?" Let us pray for Rachel and Vinny, or whatever that guy's name was.

Roch101

You have a funny definition of truth, Bob.

That admonition against bearing false witness must be a Commandment of convenience, eh Bob?

SAL LEONE

Hi
I am all for rights of the people. The whole voting thing is the wrong way to solve this issue. The issue is not a state issue but a federal issue. We have states in the union that allow marriage and states that do not. The US Congress has to address this issue once and for all. The issue will come to a head in the courts soon anyway because of the full faith and credit clause and the defense of marriage act. These laws work against eachother. We have a mess on our hands and this goes beyound this state.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defense_of_Marriage_Act
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Full_Faith_and_Credit_Clause

Sue

Hubby, not an online person, has said for years that the government needs to get out of the marriage business. I'm starting to agree. Get a license, get married. Nothing else matters. If you prefer a religious service, then you're at the mercy or blessing of your religion. But government? Two people, one marriage (sigh, at a time). Get the piece of paper and get on with it. Civil unions are stupid; marriage isn't something that needs governmental defining. Get the license; you're married. Dayenu! (Enough!)

Andrew Brod

That would be enough for me.

Prell_Shampoo_Fan

From Guarino: "BTW, some of us happen to view allowing civil unions as quite comparable to allowing gay marriage. It is merely a convenient category created to make it appear that you are not allowing gay marriage."

lol. He has kids. Two boys. They must be the most fucked up kids who ever lived. Actually, there's a good chance one or both of them may be gay.

sean coon

what a prick. "some of us" shouldn't be driving the conversation and defining law.

Ishmael

This issue may be beyond our control anyway. Fewer young people want to get married or are delaying it well into their 30's. Control is the issue here, not marriage per se.
Why don't we get this right: love should trump hate.

sean coon

it already does, ishmael, but love doesn't allow a partner into a hospital room, or provide financial benefits, or validate modern societal acceptance. unfortunately.

Ishmael

Sean - your comment is spot on, and I take the opposite view of getting government out of the marriage business.
The way I see it, government very much needs to be in the marriage business because this is the only way partners have the protection of the law. They need the law to protect them from being abandoned with debts or the care of a child, they need the law to obtain health coverage under a partner's plan, and they also need the law to help them sort out the dissolution of the union in a fair way. This is not a perfect solution because people are not perfect.
The basis for our government is the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. These documents were written to protect ALL citizens of the US, not just those who meet the criteria of certain religions or religious texts. When we allow ourselves to be bullied by these pseudo-Puritans, our own Constitutional protections are in peril in the long run.
I have nothing against various religions or their adherants - the majority are just trying to live their lives in a decent and good way.
But these groups are not representative of the vast majority of religious followers. They SAY they are because if this is repeated enough...well, you get the message.

Sue

@Ishmael What I said was the government should get out of the marriage business, that is, they should stop defining who can get married. Marriage is a legal status and comes with benefits for each spouse (and together). The government doesn't need to write specious law to define marriage. Two people, one license = marriage. Comes with all the perks (and tribulations) of marriage.

Civil rights aren't a popularity contest.

Ishmael

Sue,
Sorry for taking what you said the wrong way. I do think it is ironic that some factions believe that Government is unnecessary until it can be used to tinker with other's personal business (or their civil rights as you so aptly put it).

Local Reader

Hi Ed. Thanks for pursuing this story. A friend of mine is subscribed to Vote for Marriage's e-mail list. In a 1/27 announcement e-mail, they said "According to a poll released earlier this month by Public Policy Polling, support for the Marriage Protection Amendment has declined with 56 percent of voters surveyed in January supporting the amendment to preserve traditional marriage by protecting it in our state constitution. In October, support for the amendment stood at 61 percent, according to the same poll. This is a 5 percent drop in support in just two short months."

See the full text of the e-mail below.


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Tami Fitzgerald, Chairwoman
Date: Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 12:46 PM
Subject: We Need Your Help
To: ******************


Dear Marriage Supporter,

As you are aware, North Carolina’s drive to preserve marriage as God designed it – the union of one man and one woman – has officially launched and now we need your help! Election Day is only three short months away and we need to raise funds quickly to be able to preserve traditional marriage in our state.

According to a poll released earlier this month by Public Policy Polling, support for the Marriage Protection Amendment has declined with 56 percent of voters surveyed in January supporting the amendment to preserve traditional marriage by protecting it in our state constitution. In October, support for the amendment stood at 61 percent, according to the same poll. This is a 5 percent drop in support in just two short months.

Even more alarming, according to financial statements filed with the State Board of Elections today, our opponents have already raised over $260,000 to engage in an aggressive campaign to defeat the Marriage Protection Amendment. They have also received several thousands of dollars from out of state special interest groups including $50,000 in donations from the Washington-based Human Rights Campaign.

And yesterday, Governor Bev Perdue announced that she will not run for re-election, almost insuring a Democrat primary. While marriage between one man and one woman is supported by a majority of both Democrats and Republicans in our state and we welcome the opportunity for more people to vote on protecting marriage, this latest turn of events will complicate our job in reaching voters of both parties.

Now is the time for us to come together for this most important cause. We cannot assume that this amendment will automatically be approved by voters in May. We must raise the funds necessary to educate and spread the word about the critical need for this amendment and the serious negative consequences that will result if it fails.

As a marriage supporter, we ask for you to please take a moment to go to our website www.VoteFORMarriageNC.com and make a donation, or click the donation button below and make a contribution today. We also encourage you to ask your family, friends, neighbors and church members to do the same. Any donation amount helps by putting us one step closer to ensuring our state’s current definition of marriage – the union of one man and one woman – is protected against being redefined by liberal state judges or a future legislature. Time is of essence and we need your help today!

You can also help spread the word by liking us on Facebook, following us on Twitter, YouTube and Flickr.

Vote FOR Marriage NC is comprised of a multitude of policy organizations, denominations, and civic groups. Its Executive Committee consists of the Christian Action League, NC Values Coalition, a coalition of African American pastors, NC Baptists, and the National Organization for Marriage (NOM).

Stay tuned for more updates about the campaign to protect marriage in North Carolina and thank you for your support!

Sincerely,

Tami Fitzgerald
Chairwoman

Paid for by Vote FOR Marriage NC.
Contributions or gifts to Vote FOR Marriage NC are not deductible as charitable contributions. Financial information about Vote for Marriage NC and a copy of its license are available from the North Carolina State Solicitation Licensing Branch at 919.807.2214. The license is not an endorsement by the State.

bubba

"That admonition against bearing false witness must be a Commandment of convenience, eh Bob?"

You are assuming you and your fellow prevaricators are holding that always elusive "progressive" moral high ground on this issue.

Here's a clue.......that particular moral high ground has never existed, despite all the attempts to invent such. And obviously, you feel the need to resort to some kind of statement like the one you made above when you viewpoint cannot be validated by facts or logic.

In other words, it's business as usual for you.

The comments to this entry are closed.