What Mike, Julaine, and the Polls Have to Say

This morning on WPR's Joy Cardin show, Mike Tate and Julaine Appling went head to head in a discussion about the ban and about a recent poll conducted by St. Norberts College in DePere.

Those conducting the poll split the two sentences of the ban into two different polling questions. Results showed that a majority of people support civil unions, but do not support marriage equality. Again, this is why it's so important that we keep talking to people about exactly what the ban says.

Here are the major findings:
  • 61% favor an amendment to the Wisconsin State Constitution defining marriage as between one man and one woman (support dropped from 66.7% in 2004)
  • 59% favor civil unions generally
Xoff has a great post about the accuracy of polls, about this poll specifically, and about a UW Milwaukee poll that found only 53% of people support the ban. His bottom line? "Don't believe anything you hear, and only half of what you see."

Mike and Julaine didn't focus much energy on the poll results, but there was a lot of back and forth about that far-reaching second sentence.

If you missed the show, you can listen to it online.


The UW-La Crosse political science department also conducted a poll. This one showed that in La Crosse County, a whopping 18.4% are undecided on the issue. Only 45% said they supported the ban, while 36% would vote against it.

Tags: , , ,


At 6:19 PM, Blogger Rebecca said...

hey all -

i haven't listened to the entire hour of discussion this morning but sounded, from what i heard, like some good callers with good points - always good to hear folks on our side. and the other poll results in this blog post are good to see, too.

i particularly liked the caller who backed Julaine into a corner and made her admit they wouldn't support ANY legislation giving us ANY rights.

she's got many things she likes to use repeatedly and one of them is this: that we can go to a lawyer and get the things we need "just like any other single person". besides the insult that that is (since we are not single), this is a HUGE lie coming from their side.

it didn't sound like mike responded to that argument at the time she brought it up - maybe he did later and i didn't hear it, but I'd really encourage everyone to address this ANY time this is brought up.

we need to debunk it. it is such a misleading argument and one that makes people feel comfortable voting for the amendment - if they think we can take care of those things with legal documents, they are less apt to see the injustice here.

my apologies if it was addressed later and i didn't catch it - in which case, thank you. if not, and in the future, we all need to counter this argument. (the beginnings of my points counter to are at www.itsonlycivil.org/notsoequalbenefits.htm


At 5:17 AM, Anonymous Keith said...

I wasn't able to listen to the broadcast since I'm overseas at the moment, and my PC manager doesn't support audio streaming. Is there a transcript of the hour available?

At 5:20 AM, Anonymous Keith said...

I agree with Rebecca about Julaine's convincing (albeit wrong) argument about getting a lawyer. The response that I usually give is, "Yes, I call it the GAY TAX. Gay folks have the freedom to spend thousands of dollars on attorneys and accountants, while strait folks can buy a marriage license for fifty bucks." I thought that conservatives were about reducing taxation?

At 5:44 AM, Anonymous Keith said...

The Xoff comments about meaningful polls are right-on. I'm a statistician by trade, so I know of what he speaks.

What kind of polling is Fair Wisconsin doing, Mike? I realise that you cannot share results on the blogsite, since they are surely strategic. But it would be good for your donor base to know what sort of polling we are doing.

My suggestion? Poll to understand voters' level of understanding, type of understanding, and opinion about the amendment. Our key (once we start with the media buys) has got to be to inform, since as even the St Norbert "Gay Marriage" polling agrees with our suspicion that voters are FOR banning marriage, but AGAINST banning unions.

At 6:51 AM, Anonymous Keith said...

Yes, another post from me. But your post, Ingrid, is filled with good stuff, even if I cannot see make Julaine and Mike talked about!

I was just reading the UWM poll results. I find it fascinating, and indicative of our challenge, that the news release noted that "Wisconsinites are against gay marriage." They noted so, because the poll favors the amendment.
YES: 53%
NO: 37%

A better sound bite would have been that "Wisconsinites who favor legal recognition for same-sex families are confused." The poll clearly shows it.
YES to ban all recognition: 39%
NO to ban civil unions: 27%
NO to ban marriage: 22%

So... 39% of the survey respondents are honestly in favor of the amendment as written, since they want to ban all legal regognitions of gay families.

But that leaves the 14% (i.e. 53%-39%) of the respondents who want civil unions but are still voting YES on the amendment. These are the 14% whom I would love to see Mike recruit for a focus group. They are our key to sinning in November.

At 6:52 AM, Anonymous Keith said...

Oops... key to our WINNING, not key to our SINNING. Freudian slip? I hope not!

At 8:23 PM, Blogger Rebecca said...

:) I like the "gay tax" response - that's how i respond about the domestic partner benefits being required to be unequal by the irs.

but many, many of these protections are simply not attainable in any form whatsoever - there are simply no legal documents to provide FMLA rights, COBRA insurance (on dp benefits), bereavement leave, adoption rights, immigration, etc. etc.

and several other things are not assured no matter how much you spend - even powers of attorney for health care are state documents which aren't 100% even in one's own state, much less if you're out of state...


Post a Comment

<< Home

A Fair Wisconsin Votes No
Add this banner to your website