The San Francisco Bay Area was in favor of gay marriages by a 2:1 margin
Posted on 07/18/2008 3:46:14 PM PDT by Zakeet
Californians are likely to support same-sex marriage in the coming November election, suggests to an opinion poll released Friday.
According to the Field Poll, 51% of California voters surveyed said they would oppose Proposition 8, a ballot measure that would amend the state constitution to define marriage as between a man and a woman, thus banning same-sex marriage. Forty-one percent of voters surveyed said they would vote "yes" on the measure, according to the statewide survey that was completed this week.
Those results are nearly identical to findings of a Field Poll in May that found 51% of Californian voters surveyed approved of allowing gay couples to marry, while 42% disapproved.
In May, California's Supreme Court struck down a ban on same-sex marriage as unconstitutional, allowing gay marriages to become legal starting June 17. Opposition groups put an initiative banning same-sex marriage on the November ballot. The measure would need a simple majority to become law.
The issue has deeply divided the state. The Field Poll found wide differences in voting preferences by region. Fifty-six percent of voters surveyed living in California's coastal counties, which represent about two-thirds of all likely voters, said they oppose the gay-marriage ban, compared with 37% who said they support the ban. Sentiment was reversed in the state's inland counties where 54% of voters surveyed said they support Prop. 8 and 40% said they oppose it.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
The San Francisco Bay Area was in favor of gay marriages by a 2:1 margin
Polls show a lot of things, most aren’t so
The Field Poll is notorious for leftist slant to its polls.
Based on past election results, I thought for sure this thing would pass without a problem?
Smells like bull. Polls also said Obama would clean-up in New Hampshire on January 8th. I doubt California’s population has changed so much from 2002 or whenever was they voted no for homosexual marriage before four tyrants on the state supreme court said otherwise.
Yea, poll had to have been taken in the Sthan FranSthisco area only.
Look at the clothing. A female still wants to be female
and a male still wants to be a male.
I remember taking a class at a California Junior College. Something called "Polls can say anything you want them to."
They can make polls that show anything. It was suppose to be a close vote the last time around. Of course making it a Constitutional Amendment may scare a few voters away, I suppose.
This would explain why the court refused to throw our Prop 8 as a revision to the State Constitution instead of just and amendment. If the voter don’t support Prop 8 the State Supreme Court Justices can pretend they were right in their decision redefining marriage, and if the voters pass Prop 8 the Justices can toss it and impose their vision of what the law should be.
Exactly, the Field poll always favors the libs. It’s bogus. I want to see other polls. This thing is going to pass.
Just one of the reasons we left that God forsaken place...
The only poll that counts is the one on election day.
It’s kindof sad to see the WSJ buy into this tripe.
Usually it’s Pravda on the Pacific trying swing public opinion.
Well, we’ll just see if the “in your face” politics of hate the straights works as well as these folks think it will
My guess is that homosexual marriage get’s stood up at the alter.
Then why try to stop it in court?
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
In this case, it’s not the exit polls I’d worry about, it’s the entrance polls .... yow!
Bullshit!
can’t say this photo is a real recruiting plus... ugly and slimey....
I hear that this poll was taken during gay pride day in downtown San Fransiko
It is hard to find a Field poll that is accurate. Just another left wing California based poll founded by Mervin Field. So many Field polls have been highly inaccurate.
It does not matter what the kooks in San Fran think. The rest of us normal folks will be voting in favor. The bishop of our diocese already has written an article on marriage in the July issue of the diocesan newspaper. He wrote that more articles are to come in the next few months. I suspect all of the bishops in CA will be publishing articles on marriage being between a man and a woman.
Aside from the editorial page, the WSJ is mostly liberal writers. Go figure how that happened. I was a subscriber for 45 years, but no longer. What used to be factual stories have turned into junior versions of NY Times articles. Some of the stories on particular companies are so full of negative nonsense that it makes me wonder if the writers are in the employ of Short Sellers.
Close I-80 at the Donner! Shut down I-40 at Needles. Seal the border now, before it’s too late...
That’s too bad. I hadn’t realized it had slipped so much.
If Ca. votes down Prop 8 then a suggestion for Californians get extra fire and earthquake insurance. I’m not kidding....
If a majority of California voters thinks it’s OK, they should be forced to stay in the Golden State. I don’t want anybody who votes this way escaping into the civilized parts of the country.
Expecially considering the referendum Californians passed a few years ago prohibiting "same sex marriage" got over 60%.
Agreed!
Doesn’t matter even if this passes AGAIN, as some liberal judge will be right there to “invalidate” it against the wishes of the public.
The WSJ has strict separation between "church and state". The editorial writers and editors don't get to see the news pages before they are published, and neither do the news writers and editors get to see the editorial pages before they are published. The news writers are just as left wing as any news staff in the US. The news coverage in the WSJ has gotten to be just as biased as the NYT, LAT, ChT, or WP, although the writing is better done than in any other paper in the US.
I don’t believe this poll at all.
I never read the opinion, but a comment on it said that the refernedum violated California civil rights law. My question is so what? I thought the initiative and referendum process was set up specifically to allow the voters of the state to override the laws passed by the legislature. If referenda could never repeal laws passed by the legislature, what's the point of having them in the first place?
If it violated “fill-in-the-blank” laws, how could said language ever been approved for the ballot ? This is all nothing but nonsense. The notion that we have to be clarifying that marriage is between a man and a woman in a referendum in the first place is ludicrous. If the gay folks want to include themselves, it is they, not us, that should be seeking a referendum to change established law. These judges that subvert established law are an abomination.
All that matters is the black robed tyranny. We can vote as they tell us to, or they overturn it.
Note, the Field poll crap is a SF Chronicle financed push poll but the WSJ IGNORED the LAT poll done at the same time that showed a large majority opposed Gay marriage. WSJ is becoming more and more left wing since Murdoch’s Obama loving son has been running it!
The Fieild Poll only polls liberals!
I know what you are saying and whole heartedly agree!
We’re still suffering through the effects of that last decision!
then why do the FDRQ keep trying to keep it from being voted on???
Another election by polls.
The losers never stop, do they.
Me? I'll wait for the election, thankyouverymuch.
Hmmphh!!! THIS California voter does NOT support same-sex marriage.
And as I have said, this isn’t about these people’s “right” to a legal partnership, is is about the rights of everyone else.
It is a case of taking away rights from anyone who disagrees with the morality of homosexuality. Don’t believe me, check this out:
http://resolvedpastor.blogspot.com/2008/07/few-thoughts-on-recent-newspaper.html
Did you notice what it says on the sign?
IMMIGRATION RIGHTS for gay partners. Now we can get double the amount of immigrants. They don’t actually have to be gay to come into the country....and wait until polygamy is also legalised! No need for a “guest worker” program. They will be coming in legally for marriage.
Muslims are polygamists.
Thanks for the clarification. I used to think the articles were fairly decent in the WSJ. Evidently things have gotten a lot worse.
In CA, this is not an issue to hang your hat upon.
Unbiased reporting - from your daily liberal rag. /s
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.