Pollsters consistently understate public support for banning gay marriage. But a new study suggests that it is not because voters are hesitant to tell a pollster that they oppose gay marriage.
Read the full article here. Discuss below.
|
Posted on June 15, 2010
|
|
connect with blueoregon
Our Featured Action
To Republicans in Congress and in state capitals across the country: It's time to refuse the NRA's support and their money. And donations received in the past should be donated to organizations supporting the survivors of gun violence.
This petition sponsored by BlueOregon Action. (You may always unsubscribe, of course.) Learn more.
| Most Recent Posts | |
Albert Kaufman |
|
Guest Column |
|
Kari Chisholm |
|
Kari Chisholm |
Final pre-census estimate: Oregon's getting a sixth congressional seat |
Albert Kaufman |
Polluted by Money - How corporate cash corrupted one of the greenest states in America |
Guest Column |
|
Albert Kaufman |
Our Democrat Representatives in Action - What's on your wish list? |
Kari Chisholm |
|
Guest Column |
|
Kari Chisholm |
|
Guest Columns
Got something to say? We want a diversity of voices 'round the water cooler. Submit your guest column here.
8:18 a.m.
Jun 16, '10
The only consistency in comparing GLBT ballot measures for 92,94, 2000, and 2004 is that the winning side came out above the higher demarcation point in the margin of error. So whether the GLBT community was victorious (92, 94, 2000), or the Anti-GLBT crowd was (2004), the winners did better than they thought they would.
So what does this tell us for the future? Not much. Campaigns may handicap according the consistency of the historical polling skew, which essentially means that both sides will look to higher bars in terms of quantifiable campaign goals.
Not this year, but very soon, it will be time to challenge the constitutionality of banning marriage equality. Regardless of pre-election surveys, polls, and punditry, Oregonians will have an opportunity to dump the bigotry of 2004.