by a 51% to 42% Margin Voters Appear Ready to Vote No on Proposition...

The issue of same-sex marriage, which has long been in the forefront of social and political discussions in California, has become very salient this year.

[gemelk]

Jay wrote:

Every poll so far that predicted a win for the fraud of homosexual "marriage" has proven to be false.
No significant percent of homosexuals has "married" in ANY country that permits the oxymoron.
Homosexuals are NOT the same as other people. They seldom form longterm exclusive relationships, often completely obsess on perversion, and have much elevated rates of many diseases and social ills. THIS is the reality.
No homosexual "marriage" is recognized by the US Government. We have a democratically established national definition of marriage as solely between one man and one woman.
No law could ever make even one homosexual relationship into a real marriage. It is of course ludicrous to claim that "equal rights" are involved in trying to disenfranchise others on the legal definition of marriage.
Homosexual "marriage" is a complete FRAUD.
Two unequals will NEVER be equal.
No homosexual relationship shares the reasons for government involvement in real marriage, and the two are VERY different.
No homosexual relationships is the "equal" of a real marriage.
Marriage is indeed very different from any homosexual relationship:
Here are some MAJOR differences between real marriage and any sort of homosexual relationship, especially regarding any governmental involvement:
Like it or not, marriage and family are the basic building block of American Society.
No significant percent of homosexuals has "married" in ANY country that allows the contrived oxymoron and only about 1.6% of the US population claims to be GLBT anyway, so homosexual "marriage" fails on this one!
Children are the usual and natural result of real marriage. No child will EVER be born as a direct result of a homosexual relationship, so homomarriage fails on this one, too!
Having both a mother and father in the home is one of the best statistical predictors of a child's future success in life. No homosexual relationship can provide this.
Marriage is recognized as moral and necessary by nearly all Americans. Americans overwhelmingly reject homosexual "marriage" and most find homosexual acts to be immoral and damaging.

Same old tired 'cut and paste' lies.

YOU'RE LOSING THE BATTLE AND THE WAR!!

Todays polling on Prop 8

51% against
42 for

We're winning at present and WE MUST GET OUT AND VOTE !!!

Eric

[WoodieSD]

Jay,

You just covered a wide range of topics. Maybe you should reference some studies to back up your statements. Otherwise your comments mostly seem to be opinions ... and we all know what they say about opinions.

[cross99]

Jay wrote:

Every poll so far that predicted a win for the fraud of homosexual "marriage" has proven to be false.
No significant percent of homosexuals has "married" in ANY country that permits the oxymoron.
Homosexuals are NOT the same as other people. They seldom form longterm exclusive relationships, often completely obsess on perversion, and have much elevated rates of many diseases and social ills. THIS is the reality.
No homosexual "marriage" is recognized by the US Government. We have a democratically established national definition of marriage as solely between one man and one woman.
No law could ever make even one homosexual relationship into a real marriage. It is of course ludicrous to claim that "equal rights" are involved in trying to disenfranchise others on the legal definition of marriage.
Homosexual "marriage" is a complete FRAUD.
Two unequals will NEVER be equal.
No homosexual relationship shares the reasons for government involvement in real marriage, and the two are VERY different.
No homosexual relationships is the "equal" of a real marriage.
Marriage is indeed very different from any homosexual relationship:
Here are some MAJOR differences between real marriage and any sort of homosexual relationship, especially regarding any governmental involvement:
Like it or not, marriage and family are the basic building block of American Society.
No significant percent of homosexuals has "married" in ANY country that allows the contrived oxymoron and only about 1.6% of the US population claims to be GLBT anyway, so homosexual "marriage" fails on this one!
Children are the usual and natural result of real marriage. No child will EVER be born as a direct result of a homosexual relationship, so homomarriage fails on this one, too!
Having both a mother and father in the home is one of the best statistical predictors of a child's future success in life. No homosexual relationship can provide this.
Marriage is recognized as moral and necessary by nearly all Americans. Americans overwhelmingly reject homosexual "marriage" and most find homosexual acts to be immoral and damaging.

Can you PLEASE stop with the same old crap. It is really getting old and nobody is listening to you anyway. Just because you change your name with EVERY ONE of your posts, doesn't mean we don't know who you are. You are definitely a closet case is there ever was one. Why do you care so much about taking away the rights of people who actually mean you no harm? Makes one wonder!!

[Maria]

Jay wrote:

No homosexual "marriage" is recognized by the US Government. We have a democratically established national definition of marriage as solely between one man and one woman.

The DOMA was passed by a vote of senators and congressman, not by a referendum of the American people, which the conservative right claims is the only way that marriage equality should be legalized. It is quite convenient to hold such a double standard.

As for the rest of the crap you said, I suggest you get your head out of your ass and look around you... modern society is not as homophobic and close-minded as you apparently are. And for the record, I know many same-sex couples whose relationships have lasted longer than legal, opposite-sex marriages. When your people can prove 100% success and longevity on your part, then maybe we can talk about why you should have exclusive access to the rights and responsibilities provided by the institution of marriage.

Until then, shut up.

[Live-n-Let-Live]

Everyone should just ignore this guy since he's "wack" with all his multiple names/fake locations.

The REAL news is once Californians vote down Prop 8 (ban on same sex marriage) and Massachusetts offers same sex marriages to non-residents, both coasts will open doors (or should I say "closets") across the U.S.

Since New York will recognize these licenses, it will probably be the next state, thereafter will come those states that do not have bans within their state constitutions.

And the REAL reason why more states will start offering same sex marriages? Its "MONEY" which is why Massachusetts is changing their residency laws as they were losing out on financial gains to California which had no residency restrictions.

Even Hawaii, which was the first state to start the issue of same sex marriages has been recently talking about reviewing their ban as they are hoping to reap financial rewards by having same sex couples marry and honeymoon in the "Aloha" state.

As is the case here in the U.S., in the end Capitalism will win out over religious objections.

Give it about 5 years and there will be a lot more states offering same sex marriages.

[Will]

LOL. Great...another BOGUS Field Poll.

In the May 28,2008 Field Poll "completed May 17-26 among a random sample of 1,052 registered voters the idea of allowing gay and lesbian couples to marry is now approved by a 51% to 42% margin statewide."

This latest Field Poll of July 18, 2008 "completed this week among 672 likely voters,...finds that if the election were being held now, more voters say they would vote No (51%) on Prop. 8 than would vote Yes (42%)".

One has to assume that the METHODOGY for the 2 polls was exactly the same -- EXCEPT that this time slightly more than A THIRD FEWER "likely voters" were polled.

Fewer people polled this go round most likely results in the MARGIN OF ERROR (m.o.e.) being even HIGHER than the 5% m.o.e. from the poll in May.

Given that the claimed results in BOTH polls is exactly the same (51% to 42%) but the m.o.e. may be even greater than before, I am indeed underwhelmed.

[mrSteven]

This is great news!! Field poll is very reliable

[Umninimuzi]

The one good thing about 'Jay' is that the more he talks, the more people turn away in disgust from his hypocritical Christian Taleban. Keep jabbering away 'Jay', you're actually promoting our cause!! I wonder how your Lord feels about that?!

[Will]

A 5% (or greater) margin of error means that the poll results could JUST AS LIKELY be 46% against and 47% for Prop8.

[eric]

Will wrote:

LOL. Great...another BOGUS Field Poll.
In the May 28,2008 Field Poll "completed May 17-26 among a random sample of 1,052 registered voters the idea of allowing gay and lesbian couples to marry is now approved by a 51% to 42% margin statewide."
This latest Field Poll of July 18, 2008 "completed this week among 672 likely voters,...finds that if the election were being held now, more voters say they would vote No (51%) on Prop. 8 than would vote Yes (42%)".
One has to assume that the METHODOGY for the 2 polls was exactly the same -- EXCEPT that this time slightly more than A THIRD FEWER "likely voters" were polled.
Fewer people polled this go round most likely results in the MARGIN OF ERROR (m.o.e.) being even HIGHER than the 5% m.o.e. from the poll in May.
Given that the claimed results in BOTH polls is exactly the same (51% to 42%) but the m.o.e. may be even greater than before, I am indeed underwhelmed.

Poor LOL-Will.
What will you do when SSM is in all 50 states?

[mrSteven]

Will wrote:

LOL. Great...another BOGUS Field Poll.
In the May 28,2008 Field Poll "completed May 17-26 among a random sample of 1,052 registered voters the idea of allowing gay and lesbian couples to marry is now approved by a 51% to 42% margin statewide."
This latest Field Poll of July 18, 2008 "completed this week among 672 likely voters,...finds that if the election were being held now, more voters say they would vote No (51%) on Prop. 8 than would vote Yes (42%)".
One has to assume that the METHODOGY for the 2 polls was exactly the same -- EXCEPT that this time slightly more than A THIRD FEWER "likely voters" were polled.
Fewer people polled this go round most likely results in the MARGIN OF ERROR (m.o.e.) being even HIGHER than the 5% m.o.e. from the poll in May.
Given that the claimed results in BOTH polls is exactly the same (51% to 42%) but the m.o.e. may be even greater than before, I am indeed underwhelmed.

GET LOST for a change!!!

It seems like u can't handle the truth!!!

[Will]

eric wrote:

<quoted text>
Poor LOL-Will.
What will you do when SSM is in all 50 states?

LOL...I'll be too busy dodging the flying pigs to be able to do much of anything else!

[Will]

mrSteven wrote:

<quoted text>
GET LOST for a change!!!
It seems like u can't handle the truth!!!

LOL.

Jack Nicholson just called for you -- he wants his line back.

[gemelk]

Will wrote:

LOL. Great...another BOGUS Field Poll.
In the May 28,2008 Field Poll "completed May 17-26 among a random sample of 1,052 registered voters the idea of allowing gay and lesbian couples to marry is now approved by a 51% to 42% margin statewide."
This latest Field Poll of July 18, 2008 "completed this week among 672 likely voters,...finds that if the election were being held now, more voters say they would vote No (51%) on Prop. 8 than would vote Yes (42%)".
One has to assume that the METHODOGY for the 2 polls was exactly the same -- EXCEPT that this time slightly more than A THIRD FEWER "likely voters" were polled.
Fewer people polled this go round most likely results in the MARGIN OF ERROR (m.o.e.) being even HIGHER than the 5% m.o.e. from the poll in May.
Given that the claimed results in BOTH polls is exactly the same (51% to 42%) but the m.o.e. may be even greater than before, I am indeed underwhelmed.

Whatever, you posted the truth, that on 2 occasions, the same results were produced.

Eric

[gemelk]

Will wrote:

A 5%(or greater) margin of error means that the poll results could JUST AS LIKELY be 46% against and 47% for Prop8.

Where did you come up with that 5%("or greater") number for margin of error? Typically polls have 3-4% margin of error!

I'm thinking Will, you made it up just to make yourself look good. I could be wrong but I think you're lying.

Eric

[gemelk]

http://field.com/fieldpollonline/subscribers/...

Quoting from the actual Field Poll report.

"The maximum sampling error for results based on the overall sample of 672 likely voters is +/- 3.9 percentage points at that 95% confidence level."

It's not 5% as Will reported.

Eric

[Will]

gemelk wrote:

<quoted text>
Where did you come up with that 5%("or greater") number for margin of error? Typically polls have 3-4% margin of error!
I'm thinking Will, you made it up just to make yourself look good. I could be wrong but I think you're lying.
Eric

Not only "could" you be wrong, you ARE wrong.
----------
"The Field Poll #2268
Wednesday, May 28, 2008 Page 8

Information About The Survey

Sample Details

The findings in this report are based on a random sample survey of 1,052 registered voters in California.
.....

Sampling error estimates applicable to any probability-based survey depend on sample size.

The maximum sampling error for results based on the overall sample of 1,052 registered voters is +/- 3.2 percentage points at the 95% confidence level.

The maximum sampling error for results from the survey’s final question (Version A) is +/-4.0 percentage points, while the maximum sampling error for Version B is +/- 5.0 percentage points.

The maximum sampling error is based on percentages in the middle of the sampling distribution (percentages around 50%).

Percentages at either end of the distribution
(percentages around 10% or around 90%) have a smaller margin of error.

The maximum sampling error will be larger for analyses based on subgroups of the overall sample.

While there are other potential sources of error in surveys besides sampling error, the overall design and execution of the survey minimized the potential for these other sources of error."

..........

[Live-n-Let-Live]

Instead of arguing with this Jay/Will character, especially about stupid percentages, let's wait and see.

If it loses in November, it will be the start of a chain-reaction in the U.S. If it wins, there will be more legal battles to come.

But based upon conversations with my family/friends both in southern and northern California, I think the polls are correct that it is going to be rejected.

People are less concerned about social issues than more worried about economic issues here. So if gay marriages bring more out-of-state money into California, they are saying, let them come and get married in California... we can use the money!!!

[Patrick in Texas]

Will wrote:

LOL. Great...another BOGUS Field Poll.
In the May 28,2008 Field Poll "completed May 17-26 among a random sample of 1,052 registered voters the idea of allowing gay and lesbian couples to marry is now approved by a 51% to 42% margin statewide."
This latest Field Poll of July 18, 2008 "completed this week among 672 likely voters,...finds that if the election were being held now, more voters say they would vote No (51%) on Prop. 8 than would vote Yes (42%)".
One has to assume that the METHODOGY for the 2 polls was exactly the same -- EXCEPT that this time slightly more than A THIRD FEWER "likely voters" were polled.
Fewer people polled this go round most likely results in the MARGIN OF ERROR (m.o.e.) being even HIGHER than the 5% m.o.e. from the poll in May.
Given that the claimed results in BOTH polls is exactly the same (51% to 42%) but the m.o.e. may be even greater than before, I am indeed underwhelmed.

Poor Will has nothing better to do than spend his days on the gay and lesbian forums. These polls sure are great news. As goes California, so goes the nation.

[Will]

gemelk wrote:

http://field.com/fieldpollonli ne/subscribers/Rls2278.pdf
Quoting from the actual Field Poll report.
"The maximum sampling error for results based on the overall sample of 672 likely voters is +/- 3.9 percentage points at that 95% confidence level."
It's not 5% as Will reported.
Eric

This just makes my point of how BOGUS the Field Polls are -- because they DON'T USE THE SAME METHODOLOGY from poll to poll.

In both the May poll and this July poll, the "Sample Details" section states the same thing: "Sampling error estimates applicable to any probability-based survey depend on sample size."

However, the July sample size is MORE THAN A THIRD LESS than the May sample size, which should increase sampling error estimates from the July poll over the May poll -- instead, the July poll claims a SMALLER maximum error margin than the May poll.

In addition, the July poll asks FEWER questions, that were DIFFERENTLY WORDED and DIFFERENTLY SEQUENCED compared to the May poll.

If anything, the May poll was more accurate and more reliable than this July poll due to the May poll's more rigorous methodogy. Both polls appear to be biased against registered voters with unlisted phone numbers and both are "weighted" using unknown and likely subjective weighting criteria.

Neither poll is very impressive to me.