Frank Schubert, president of Schubert Flint Public Affairs and campaign manager for ProtectMarriage.com - Yes on 8, has announced a new study which finds support for the protection of marriage has been underestimated in polling in almost every instance.
Said Schubert
"For example, the Field Poll showed that support for Proposition 22 in 2000 was at 53% right before the election, yet over 61% of voters supported the proposition."
According to a press release from the ProtectMarriage.com
The study looked at the same-sex marriage issue in 26 states where it has appeared on the ballot, going back to the first such campaign in Hawaii in 1998. Surveys published by news media outlets before an election under-estimated support for traditional marriage by an average of seven points. In only two states (Texas and South Carolina) did pre-election surveys accurately measure voter support for traditional marriage, and in both of those states support stood at 76%. Support for traditional marriage was under-estimated in 23 of the 26 states studied, ranging from a low of three points in Kentucky and Oregon, to as high as 21 points in North Dakota. Support for traditional marriage in California was under-estimated by eight points in 2000. In only one case, Arizona, did support for traditional marriage drop (by three points).
Schubert said, "I can't say for sure why polls almost always understate support for traditional marriage, but I believe it is because the media portrays same-sex marriage as being politically correct. Supporters of traditional marriage don't want pollsters to consider them intolerant, so they mask their true feelings on the issue. The result is that support for traditional marriage rises considerably when voters cast their ballots in the privacy of the voter booth. It is my opinion that the same thing will happen in California when voters cast ballots on Proposition 8."
This is very similar to what I have said about this and many other issues--and conservative candidates--for some time.
Polls can often give distorted results, either by negligence on the part of the pollsters, or by design. The wording of questions can have a lot to do with the average response, and when the survey is conducted by phone or in person, the tone and inflection of the pollster asking the question can also have an effect.
While many people can be relied on to give their opinion regardless of what they perceive is the "right answer," many average people are aware of political correctness and what the elite believe is the "proper" opinion. So when pollsters ask questions, many respondents want to "give the right answer" or seem "informed" or want to look "smart" in the eyes of the pollster.
Yet when they enter the privacy and anonymity of the voting booth, they often go with their real opinion.
We have seen this effect played out numerous times as conservative initiatives are portrayed as "doomed" in the media and their polls, yet pass handily on election day. Conservative candidates also often generate "surprise" wins that go against liberal "wisdom." Remember how surprised the "mainstream" media was when George W. Bush pulled out a win in 2004?
The "mainstream" media counts on that herd instinct to kick in, so they release biased and slanted poll results so that voters will understand which direction the herd is going...and hopefully join the herd there. But it doesn't always work.
Let's hope that is the case in California in November. With the efforts of the pro-homosexual liberal establishment in California to stack the deck against the marriage protection amendment, marriage supporters are swimming upstream.
0 comments:
Post a Comment