Tweet
This is not a good sign for Proposition 19. The California initiative to legalize and tax marijuana has lost a small amount of support in the latest SurveyUSA poll. For the first time in their polling, the “lean no” side outnumbers the “lean yes” side by two points.
SurveyUSA (10/21-25)
California voters may also vote on several propositions. On Proposition 19, which would change California law to legalize marijuana and allow it to be regulated and taxed, are you…
Lean Toward Yes 44
Lean Toward No 46
Not Certain 10
The best “Yes” numbers from SurveyUSA were in July, when Prop 19 was up, yes 50 – no 40. Since then, the trend has been slowly moving in the directin of the opposition. The previous SurveyUSA poll from two weeks ago had it yes 48 – n0 44.
The decrease in support over the course of the campaign has been fairly minor but critical. With the measure polling so close, even a small decrease in support could be the difference between a close win and a close lose.
Turnout is going to be critical. According to the poll, the measure is losing among those who have already voted, but doing much better among those who haven’t voted but are likely to. Without heavy young voter turnout on election day, it is hard to picture how Prop 19 would succeed.
This poll contains more evidence that there might be a heavy “reverse Bradley effect,” in which voters appear to be lying to live interviewers about their support for marijuana legalization. This SurveyUSA poll was done mostly with automated interviews, as was the PPP poll out yesterday that had Prop 19 trailing, 45 to 48. Both recent automated polls show the measure to be very close. Two recent live interview polls, however, have it losing by large margins. A Los Angeles Times poll found Prop 19 losing, 39 percent to 51 percent, and a Suffolk poll had it losing, 40 to 55. This huge divergence appears to be the result using the two different polling methods.
49 Comments
Prop 19 is constitutional and it should pass. I think there will be a reverse Bradley effect.
This poll concerns me, Jon. What GOTV stuff does JustSayNow have going on? Where can we help?
Hope 19 passes, but I still strongly recommend that 19 supporters *publicly* refute the outrageous opposition claims that it would allow legally stoned drivers and stoned workers. Supporters have largely tiptoed around those opposition claims as if they weren’t sure they were false (read the proposition – they are false!), or maybe they think they’re too absurd to answer (they aren’t). Undecided voters are picking these vibes up, and are worried, unnecessarily …
You know I’m behind proposition 19 even though I don’t live in California. I’ve given money to this proposition 19 effort, despite the fact that I’m unemployed. I just don’t believe it stands much of a chance. Not after proposition H8.
Like there aren’t stoned drivers now. That’s the silliest argument I’ve ever heard. A person who breaks the law to get stoned isn’t going to refrain from driving just because getting stoned is illegal. The type of person who will drive impaired doesn’t care enough about the rest of society to fret about getting a ticket for DUI.
Californians learned a lot from Prop 8. Look at the overwhelming support for the court challenge, the huge demonstrations, etc. More than half the state is on board now.
Whether those lessons will be applied to Prop 19 is a different story. I think they will though. I think Californians are a little brigther than they were 4 years ago. They’re also a lot more pissed off with the established government.
I hope you’re right but I’m sure you can understand why my faith in California voters has been shaken.
I would like to point out that this fits into the same set of talking points as most other MSM prognostications on the coming election. The whole “likely voter” scam is nothing more (IMHO) than an attempt to make the poll reflect the prejudices of the pollster(s)/talking heads.
Let them give out the numbers without the filter of “likely voter” and then lets see where things stand. This will tell us whether GOTV efforts are worthwhile or not.
You said it all, Jon – “turn out will be critical”. That’s the ONLY reason this is even up for a vote, to entice Democrats to come to the Polls. Without it, I’m sure the Dem. Party feared DISASTER for CA. Democrats looking to add her/his name to the payoff list.
I strongly urge ALL supporters of 19 to do everything possible to pass 19, AND at the same time do everything possible to defeat EVERY Democratic Incumbent at every level, Federal & State. What better message could we send to Obama & team then a huge Dem. turnout, a win on 19 AND devastating losses for ALL Democratic Incumbents?
Yea, I know too many Dems are too “tribal” & just can’t get there from here, but it REALLY is the ONLY message to send to effect real change in the Democratic Party!
Maybe you could write a post why this year is the PERFECT time to send the much needed message? My take is, Obamais not capable of leaning further to the right, so we’ve nothing to fear from whacko Republicans.
I agree. I’ve been calling it “The NARRATIVE” for months now. The thing is that for profit news, soon becomes for profit narrative. They have a dog in this fight.
It wasn’t the Democratic Party that got this on the ballot.
Stoned drivers now aren’t driving with the protection of the law. They won’t be under 19 if it passes either, but the claim that they would be is having a negative effect. I realize that blood tests show metabolites for weeks in the blood, but it’s my understanding (see NORML’s web site) that current blood tests are still good enough to pick out the driver or worker who is truly stoned, as opposed to having been stoned many hours earlier. Voters need reassurance on this point, preferably from someone in law enforcement in an ad.
Indeed they do have a dog in the fight. Their profits are very much at stake in the period leading up to the election (the closer the race, the more people watch) and also in the post-election (they believe that Prop 19/Dem control of the government threatens their ability to control everything).
I like that “The NARRATIVE” you use. May I borrow it?
Never should have went with the pot leaf. Made the whole thing look juvenile. Or worse, like that crazy old guy at the party in the tie-dye screaming about the fact that he’s smoked for 50 years and it never did anything to him.
revenue lost on needless incarceration and the creation of all kinds of jobs- retail, agricultural, consulting etc etc. that’s how you sell prop 19. forget the attack ads. if a voter is so uninformed that they would respond emotionally to such garbarge you’re not going to be able to sway them by refuting nonsense.
It’s a toss up but my guess is the decisions regarding the use of the Soros money will be the difference. and what the hell took you so long George?
Reassurance wouldn’t be relevant in most cases. This is an excuse, a rationalization for people who’ve already made up their minds but don’t have any real reason upon which to base their opposition. That’s it.
I fear you have SERIOUSLY underestimated the R’s if you think they can’t be even further to the right than Obama.
Maybe you really ought to listen to what some of them are saying and think about where along the spectrum it REALLY lies. Obama is quite moderate when compared to many of those running this year (not that he’s moderate by any other measure, but that’s beside my point). I’d rather have Dems in control with the possibility of forcing them to the ACTUAL left than any of the R’s currently on any ballot I’ve seen (and I even include those “moderate” R’s like Marco “false colors” Rubio in FL, and Carly “I outsourced HP” Fiorina in CA).
“… forget the attack ads. if a voter is so uninformed that they would respond emotionally to such garbarge you’re not going to be able to sway them by refuting nonsense.”
It’s foolish to throw away the votes of poorly informed voters simply by refusing to answer the attacks. A refutation could make the difference with enough of them to sway the election. That’s part of a responsible democratic process, answering attacks when the attacks are having an effect, and can be answered.
I agree with you but the only reason the ‘baggers exist is because Obama is trying to out Republican the Republicans.
“Reassurance wouldn’t be relevant in most cases.”
It only has to be relevant to enough voters to tip the election back to Yes. I agree some can’t be reached, but arguing some aren’t genuinely on the borderline is being arrogant. You’re saying your position is so strong that uninformed voters only deserve contempt. That’s a good way to lose an election …
Well nuts. This was the one bright spot on this electorial horizon.
It should be legalized, as all drugs should be. Keeping them illegal just enriches the cartels and the lawyers etc. It’s not a moral issue no matter what the right says. If it loses it’s because the left isn’t coming out because of Obama’s endless betrayals have had their effect.
Alas, this is Soooo California. Early on voters show strong support in favor of reversing our fetid 3 Strikes Law, permitting gay marriage and all sorts of other Progressive-y things. But when push comes to shove our right wing conservative streak wins the day. SOmetimes it’s big money pulling the strings, other times it’s religion – but in the end, we teeter back to the 19th century.
Let’s hope this spell breaks this time.
David Dayen has a fresh cross-post available: Foreclosure Fraud Investigations Determined by Outcome of Attorneys General Campaigns
The No on 19 spokesperson complained in the SF Chronicle the other day that they have been outspent by Yes on 19.
But throughout California below the radar in smaller cities, getting headlines in local papers and air time on local TV, has been a steady drumbeat of law enforcement press conferences, statements, and declarations, with no rational content, just the message that pot is a four-letter word spelled FEAR.
And who pays for the salaries of all those D.A.s, police chiefs, SWAT commanders, and similar Praetorians who are blathering? We the taxpayers! And best of all, the No-on-19ers don’t have to report it as a campaign expenditure.
Same goes for a certain California U.S. Senator. She never asked us what we thought about 19, just decided to co-chair the No on 19 campaign! And she’s supposed to represent all the citizens of California?
I can’t help but wonder how this would be doing if a proposal to ban alcohol were adjacent to Prop 19 on the ballot?
http://www.alternet.org/drugs/148628/could_legalizing_marijuana_in_california_help_cure_breast_cancer/
Just say now should be hitting this hard
When I sent her an email telling her I was a girl scout leader and had a solution for war in Iraq, the answer was a machine gun toting black helicopter and a psych opps program to convince my husband that I was insane.
I think all the politicians who are against Prop 19 are drug war corrupt and if pot legalization doesn’t pass this time, next time it will.
There’s a new tv ad starting tomorrow that should be excellent. I know that one of the people featured is former San Jose Chief of Police Joseph McNamara. He was and is one of the most respected law enforcement officers in the country. He has always been in favor of legalization.
We’ve gotta get on the phones!
Maybe it would help to point out that legitimate business interests are already getting ready for regulation.
Medical Marijuana Inc Prepares for Legalization in California
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/medical-marijuana-inc-prepares-for-legalization-in-california-2010-10-27?reflink=MW_news_stmp
It doesn’t matter whether or not Proposition 19 passes, because legalization is inevitable. As the reefer-madness crowd like Feinstein and Boxer die off, younger Americans will push this through at some point.
Message to Democrats: Pretty soon, the lesser-of-two-evils is going to be some idiot Republican who understands the age we live in. If you don’t GET IT, then GET OUT OF THE WAY.
I’m insulted by the slimy drug-war hubris of Feinstein and Boxer and EVERY other Democrat who doesn’t understand what democracy and representative governance is.
I’m still surprised that both Boxer and Brown opposed this. They don’t really oppose it and this is a very poor reading of the political drift.
We HOPE they don’t really oppose it.
Is Marijuana Addictive? It Depends How You Define Addiction
http://healthland.time.com/2010/10/19/is-marijuana-addictive-it-depends-how-you-define-addiction/
I’d like to point out that as a medical marijuana patient, I find the medical problems I am using it for are EXACTLY the same as my “addiction symptoms.” Huh, who would have imagined that from a useful medicine? I guess we could say aspirin is addictive too – when you have a bad headache.
I find the whole ‘addiction’ argument offensive. Yeah, my religion offends people, so they arbitrarily get to define it as an ‘addiction’ and if I refuse to quit, they all claim the right to brutally rape me.
Sister Lauren
THC Ministry
Latino Police Officers’ Group Backs California Marijuana Legalization Effort
http://blogs.laweekly.com/informer/2010/10/latino_police_marijuana_legal.php
The fascist US Chamber of Commerce is running a scare campaign against Proposition 19. The Chamber is probably taking campaign cash from Mexican drug lords.
Why do you assume they don’t really oppose it? I hate to burst your bubble, but politicians are scum–Democrats included.
You guys just don’t understand. Law enforcement and the prison industrial complex has a lot of money tied up in throwing people involved with marijuana in jail. They aren’t willing to give up the billions of dollars they make annually in the prosecution of the drug war.
It is going to be a shame if this sort of thing loses 51% – 49%. I really hate how such immoral decisions come down to a handful of people who believe “the lie” and can’t understand how or why their government and its representatives would dare sell out the people.
The response to that is making marijuana illegal does not prevent its use.
Here is how HuffPost covered it,
Prop 19 Opponents Veer Off Into Paranoia
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/10/27/prop-19-pot-marijuana-vote_n_774775.html
They have the ad there at the end if you want to hear how scary it is.
I really resent it because not only do I know it is basically an unconstitutional religious prejudice, but I also have been very badly harmed due to it, and I feel like I will get no justice. It is really discouraging, so I hope at least prop 19 passes. I’d like to see the improvements in our economy. I’m sick of going downhill.
In his younger days I’ll bet Brown smoked plenty of pot. And Boxer may not be the progressive we would like her to be but she is definitely not a conservative.
Medical Marijuana Raises Tough Questions for Nursing Homes
http://newoldage.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/10/27/medical-marijuana-raises-tough-questions-in-nursing-homes/
I’m going to vote yes on 19 next week. I’m also a recovering addict/alcohlic, with 9+ years clean and sober.
I believe marijuana is addictive, but not chemically as defined by the medical field. It does fit the definition of addiciton within programs like NA and AA. My brother is a marijuana addict. It’s a mental and emotional dependancy. In spite of this, marijuana use is SAFE. That’s the key here. No one has ever overdosed on marijuana or had marijuana poisoning. It’s a much safer, healthier alternative to alcohol. This is what Yes on 19 supporters need to be preaching to everyone who will listen.
I’ve learned over the years to seperate my personal feelings about drugs/alcohol from the reality of the situation. Just because it’s not right for me doesn’t mean it’s wrong for everyone.
I admire what you’re doing with your Ministry :)
What a farking waste of time: all this pre-election hand-wringing: oh dear, the sky is falling…
Why not just shut up and wait until the actual poll (the secret ballot election on Nov. 2) is completed.
I have no faith in pre-election polls: most of them are conducted by Republican-controlled corporations, who typically have an axe to grind…
I think too many people are afraid to say what they really think in the current atmosphere of overt voter harrassment, caging, etc. versus what they actually do on the ballot. But, today I did see a person with a huge “Yes on Measure 74″ sign standing on a major thoroughfare. Even this morning’s waitress knew about Measure 74 and had already voted “yes” on the mail-in ballot. Many folks who registered by website in Oregon did not receive their ballots (should have been received by mail within 3 days of the website registration) so you must go to your county office NOW and get it. A neighbor said that they only heard about this malfunction on local television last night.
California’s Prop 19: the end of the war on marijuana?
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/kalw/detail?entry_id=75640
Thanks.
Hello? The simple point is, Obama has veto power!!!!!!!!!!!
Cannabis should never have been made illegal to begin with. It has been used as a medicinal plant and as a recreational substance since time immemorial. Cannabis is not physically addictive, as its use does not lead to the development of a physical withdrawal syndrome. The so-called “gateway drug” theory has been completely discredited as invalid, and declared “half-baked” by a recent large study. At the same time it is an accepted scientific fact that Cannabis use suppresses violent behavior, which I believe is very important from the public safety point of view. It is also being proven that Cannabis may serve as an “exit” substance for recovering alcoholics/hard drug/prescription drug abusers, which has a potential of alleviating the Nation’s drug and alcohol problem. In addition to being very useful in treating many conditions, Cannabis may even have a preventative value for such devastating illnesses as cancer and Alzheimer’s disease. YES to Prop. 19!