The NRA is more important to voters than Oprah

[DrDavidM]

This is nice to hear. Apparently the NRA endorsement of a presidential candidate is more important to voters than any other endorsement. Even more than Oprah. :D.

http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/s...e,244388.shtml

Voters More Likely to Value Endorsement of the NRA, former President Bill Clinton, and President George W. Bush; Oprah Winfrey and Barbra Streisand Endorsements of Limited Value

Posted : Tue, 18 Dec 2007 16:08:22 GMT Author : Associated Television News Category : PressRelease News Alerts by Email click here ) PressRelease News | Create your own RSS | Home


LOS ANGELES, Dec. 18 /PRNewswire/ -- A recent poll conducted by Zogby International for Associated Television News shows that voters value the endorsements of the National Rifle Association, by former President Clinton and President George W. Bush over influential organizations like the AFL-CIO and the National Council of LaRaza or celebrities Oprah Winfrey and Barbra Streisand.

(Logo: http://www.newscom.com/cgi-bin/prnh/20030425/ATNLOGO)

The interactive poll, conducted December 13-17, 2007, surveyed 6,072 likely voters nationwide and has a margin of error of +/- 1.3 percentage points. The poll asked the following question of voters:

Q. Considering the presidential election and messages that may be sent to
you from the following people or groups, how important are those
messages to you when considering for whom to vote -- more likely to
support, less likely to support, or no effect?

Bill Clinton
George W. Bush
National Council of LaRaza
AFL-CIO
National Rifle Association
The National Right-to-Life
Oprah Winfrey
Barbra Streisand




Twenty-seven percent of all likely voters said they would be more likely to support a candidate who was endorsed by the National Rifle Association. The NRA topped other prominent political figures, organizations and celebrities, including Oprah Winfrey who recently gave her backing to Barack Obama. In fact, voters were three times more likely to support a candidate backed by the NRA than Ms. Winfrey.

In terms of potential voters, an NRA endorsement could translate into 56 million eligible voters or 40 million potential voters vs. 19 million eligible and 13 million registered voters for Ms. Winfrey.

Endorsement Potential in Terms of Voters

Organization/ More Likely In Terms of Registered
Individual To Support Eligible Voters Voters*
Nat'l Rifle Assoc. 27 % 56 million 40 million
Bill Clinton 25 % 52 million 37 million
George W. Bush 23 % 48 million 34 million
AFL-CIO 16 % 33 million 24 million
Oprah Winfrey 9 % 19 million 13 million
Nat'l Council of LaRaza 5 % 10 million 7 million
Barbra Streisand 4 % 8 million 6 million



*Projection based on calculation of the average voter registration percentage rate of the past three election cycles and a total voter eligible population in 2006 of 207.3 million voters.


http://www.newscom.com/cgi-bin/prnh/20030425/ATNLOGO" mime-type="application/octet-stream"/>
Photo: http://www.newscom.com/cgi-bin/prnh/20030425/ATNLOGO
AP Archive: http://photoarchive.ap.org/
PRN Photo Desk, photodesk@prnewswire.com

Associated Television News

[jtnick]

Well i don't think the NRA is on top of the list for some now, including me for supporting
this last bill.

[Puppy]

Originally Posted by jtnick

Well i don't think the NRA is on top of the list for some now, including me for supporting
this last bill.

So you are throwing out the baby with the bathwater!

[kwo51]

No I will keep the bath water. I will support JPF with my money and juat pay dues to nra.They are sleeping with the eneny.

[Ektarr]

For what it's worth, I am a Zogby Poll respondent. Have been for years. While their polls may leave something to be desired in their questioning techniques and the variety of options they offer as responses (almost never get a "None of the above" option, for example), they do carry some weight and - apparently - people pay attention to them. I have seen the results of surveys I participated in posted here and there, and in the news.

Also, for whatever it's worth, every poll they send me they ask if I know anyone who'd be interested in being a Zogby participant. I could post the link here the next time I get one if you like...then you could have your influence, too. Let me know.

[toreskha]

Originally Posted by Ektarr

For what it's worth, I am a Zogby Poll respondent. Have been for years. While their polls may leave something to be desired in their questioning techniques and the variety of options they offer as responses (almost never get a "None of the above" option, for example), they do carry some weight and - apparently - people pay attention to them. I have seen the results of surveys I participated in posted here and there, and in the news.

Also, for whatever it's worth, every poll they send me they ask if I know anyone who'd be interested in being a Zogby participant. I could post the link here the next time I get one if you like...then you could have your influence, too. Let me know.

I just signed up...there's a link on their website. I didn't realize until now that it was something you could opt into. :)

[sailor]

My check to the NRA-ILA is in the envelope and will be mailed tomorrow, for my 2008 sustaining membership. I can't complain if things go wrong, if I don't at least support those that are trying to keep our rights for us. Not perfect, but they have a lot louder voice than I do, or so the Zogby poll seems to suggest.:)
sailor

[toreskha]

Originally Posted by jtnick

Well i don't think the NRA is on top of the list for some now, including me for supporting
this last bill.

Which bill?

[jtnick]

HR 2640, NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007. This legislation has the effect of denying by statute the unalienable 2nd Amendment rights of all citizens, with the main target of the law being combat veterans, the very people who fought/fight to defend and uphold said unalienable rights. This legislative assault on our revered Constitution has passed both the House and Senate, and the sad thing is the NRA supported it!

[toreskha]

Originally Posted by jtnick

HR 2640, NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007. This legislation has the effect of denying by statute the unalienable 2nd Amendment rights of all citizens, with the main target of the law being combat veterans, the very people who fought/fight to defend and uphold said unalienable rights. This legislative assault on our revered Constitution has passed both the House and Senate, and the sad thing is the NRA supported it!

My understanding is that it's a little more complex than that - it really doesn't affect many more people than are already prohibited from owning a firearm because of mental health problems, but does provide an avenue for relief for those who have been incorrectly tagged to be able to clear themselves from the list of prohibited people.

Although I obviously support the right of all competent people to own guns, people who really do have problems should be looked at more carefully. I personally witnessed a neighbor who was a Vietnam vet go nuts with a .308 and a .22...he was hunkered down in his house and firing rounds like it was the war. I also had an economics professor who shot the ceiling and windows of his house up because he had totally lost it. His kids and wife were home and it could have been a lot worse. And then there's Cho, of course, who legally bought his weapon and got around NICS.

Screening out people like that makes it a lot less likely that I'm going to have to draw on some lunatic who has gone off his meds and is shooting up the local Simon property.