Good News for Candidates Who Support Civil Unions

[HFishbine]

Lot's of debate lately about whether a candidate supporting gay uninions would suffer at the polls. Maybe not.

A new poll finds that a majority (55%) say that they would either be more likely to vote for a candidate who supports civil unions or that it wouldn't make a difference.

-----------

"If a presidential candidate favored allowing gays and lesbians to form a civil union that would give them the same rights and benefits as a married couple, would that make you more likely to support that candidate, less likely, or wouldn't it make any difference?""

More Likely: 12%
No Difference: 43%
Less Likely: 44%
Don't Know: 1%

http://www.pollingreport.com/civil.htm

[ConservativeDemocrat]

1. Not good news...

Only by counting the "no difference" as something that is good can you construe this as good news.

The more realistic way to put this is that for every three people more likely to vote for a candidate who supports civil unions there are eleven people less likely to vote for them - a significant loss.

Furthermore, the 44% number is obviously too big to merely come from the 25% GOP partisans who wouldn't be voting for a Democratic candidate anyway. It reaches into a significant swathe of independent voters.

Of course the really important question is left unanswered: the intensity of the feeling. A better poll would have been:

1] Make me vote for the candidate regardless of any other consideration.
2] Be a significant positive factor in my decision.
3] Might tip the balance towards the candidate, all other things being equal.
4] No difference.
5] Might tip the balance against the candidtate, all other things being equal.
6] Be a significant negative factor in my decision.
7] Make me vote against the candidtate regardless of any other consideration.

- C.D.