O'Reilly claimed poll shows most Americans "won't vote" for candidate endorsed by "a gay rights group"
During the August 13 edition of Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor, discussing the recent Democratic presidential candidates' appearance on the gay and lesbian-oriented cable channel Logo, host Bill O'Reilly claimed that "a new poll" -- which he said was issued by "Pew Research or something like that" -- "says that most Americans won't vote for you if you get an endorsement by a gay rights group." In response, Fox News correspondent Kirsten Powers asserted, "I have to say I find that very difficult to believe. Maybe if they're asked that question in a poll, but most Americans don't have any idea who's endorsing candidates." O'Reilly responded: "OK, but say a gay -- the question posed, 'If a gay rights organization endorses you, would that make you more or less likely to vote?' [sic] And most Americans said less likely."
A Media Matters for America search turned up no Pew Research Center poll on the topic nor any poll asking a nationwide sample whether respondents would be more or less likely to vote for a candidate endorsed by a gay rights organization. However, as the News Hounds blog noted in response to O'Reilly's claim, an August 6-8 Quinnipiac Poll of voters in Florida, Ohio, and Pennsylvania found that a majority of voters in each state responded that support for a presidential candidate by "gay rights groups" "doesn't ... make a difference" in their level of support for the candidate.
From the Quinnipiac Poll:
| FL | OH | PA | |
| More likely | 10% | 10% | 11% |
| Less likely | 28 | 34 | 28 |
| Doesn't make a diff | 60 | 54 | 59 |
| DK/NA | 2 | 2 | 2 |
As Media Matters for America has documented, O'Reilly has on numerous occasions misrepresented the results of polls, often either to cast the results more negatively for Democrats or progressives or more positively for Republicans. For instance, during the July 12, 2004, edition of his radio show, O'Reilly cited a poll and said that the majority of Americans oppose gay marriage and that "Far Left" senators are thwarting the will of the people by not passing a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage. In fact, numerous polls at the time showed that the public largely opposed the Federal Marriage Amendment.
From the August 13 edition of Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor:
O'REILLY: Now, a new poll says that most Americans won't vote for you if you get an endorsement by a gay rights group. Did you know that?
POWERS: No, I didn't --
O'REILLY: Ah! What is that poll? Pew Research or something like that. But anyway --
POWERS: I find that -- I have to say I find that very difficult to believe. Maybe if they're asked that question in a poll, but most Americans don't have any idea who's endorsing candidates. They are not paying attention to that.
O'REILLY: OK, but say a gay -- the question posed, "If a gay rights --
POWERS: Yes.
O'REILLY: -- organization endorses you, would that make you more or less likely to vote?
POWERS: Right.
O'REILLY: And most Americans said less likely.
POWERS: Yeah.
O'REILLY: Was that a smart move for --
POWERS: Well, I think that -- yeah.
O'REILLY: -- the Logo channel?
POWERS: The -- within the Democratic Party, this is a very important constituency. And they're certainly constituents -- they give a lot of money. They're very influential.
Gotta love those Bill-Facts, they come right out of thin air. Has he always been this bad about Gays or is this getting worse?
This is why I find O'Reilly such a hypocrite on this issue regarding gays. He is just a homophobic as Michael Savage is, yet he always cloaks it in some backhanded insulting way so as to insulate himself from such an accusation - a real phony.
At least Savage says it outright, he doesn't like gays and that's that, or something like that. And he has that right. O'Reilly would get more respect from me if he would just admit his loathing of gays and be done with it.
Savage has made it very clear he does not hate homosexuals. He has a hate for the radical gays.
I have heard him, and he rarely, if ever, differentiates between the two.
In any event, Savage is not really the topic here. We have different opinions on him, fine.
My assertions regarding O'Reilly stand.
I agree with your assessment of both guys.
check out some of the Savage archives. I believe Michael Savage once said homosexuals have a death culture. The man hates Gay people almost as much as he hates Muslims.
You are merely an apologist for bad right wing behavior. Smarten up!
Define "radical gay" please. I suspect it'll be something like "a homosexual who wants the rights promised him or her in the Constitution of the United States."
Anyone know who the Log Cabin Republicans endorsed the last bunch of Presidential elections?
In 2004, the LCR chose not to endorse a candidate. The group, remaining Republicans, would not endorse a Democrat, but felt that they could not, in good conscience, endorse Dubya over his stance on same-sex marriage.
If memory serves, the group *did* endorse Bush in 2000 due to his seemingly benign attitude towards gay issues. In 1996, the group sent a donation to the Dole campaign which returned it after some Religious Right leaders found out about the donation and criticized the Dole campaign. The LCR still gave its endorsement to Dole, dismissing the returned donation as inconsequential.
Marv, I'm sure you're not expecting any sort of reality-based definition from the weiner-fan, but I'm guessing that the "radical" gays are the ones who don't marry somebody of the opposite sex,have children and go toa decent church.
You know, the ones that do all of that "gay" stuff instead.
The Weinerdog is insane. What he says on Tuesday has very little to do with what he thinks or says on Thursday
Tommy. Thanks for an honest and concise post. Condemn the transparent hypocrisy and move on. More of this please.
"O'Reilly would get more respect from me if he would just admit his loathing of gays and be done with it."
Really? I thought that this was the one issue where we were on the same page, but you seem to be condemning O'Reilly for what you label his "hypocrisy," instead of condemning him for his homophobia. I know you don't agree with his message, but to say that you'd have more respect for him if he were more overt in his hatred echoes statements that you've made about your respect for Savage's transparent and unapologetic prejudices. Neither of them deserve any respect at all for their bigotry, whether it's overt or not. The fact that Savage is more shameless in his hatred doesn't make him any better than a weasel like O'Reilly. The intent behind the message is still the same. I just think that concern over which of them is more "honest" about their bigotry is a very strange point to focus on.
People have all sorts of reasons why they dislike gay people, some of them religious or cultural. They are under no obligation to "like" or even "accept" it, and they have that right. I don't agree with them, and I find their homophobism sad and ignorant.
However, if they act on it by infringing on anyone else's rights, that is an entirely different matter.
So Savage is hysterical in his hatred and he is wrong, in my opinion, however, O'Reilly tries to hide his hatred of gays and that is even more sinister.
Bill O'Reilly claimed that "a new poll" -- which he said was issued by "Pew Research or something like that" -- "says that most Americans won't vote for you if you get an endorsement by a gay rights group."
O'Reilly never said it was the Quinnipiac Poll. He was talking about the Paris Business Review Poll that completely supports his point in every possible way. If you don't believe me, just google for the link. I am sure anyone can find it.
; )
That would be this one, yes?
http://www.parisbusinessreview.com/
Oui, Voila! Merci beaucoup.
"...they give a lot of money. They're very influential"
--ex-representative and now convicted criminal republican randall "duke" cunningham, on why he took bribes from defense contractors
Didn't the log cabin republicans endorse Bush in 2000?
So if the American Homosexual Ruling Council gets on TV and says "We're officially endorsing Mitt Romney for President because he's SOOO DREEEEAMY!", would everybody vote for Hillary?
I'd give alot to hear that on one of those sooo adoring pundit's show PBG.
Good to see you again SI-W. That looks like something from The Onion on your link.
I was so tired of wasting my time being heartfelt concerned for our Sons and Daughters being sacrificed in Iraq.
The life and death of the defenders of our National Security: what a silly thing for Americans to think about.
GAYNESS
GAY
That's what it's all about!
The next president of the United States stands poised to inherit Iraq and the DOD and the U.S. Army and the Justice Department... and the responsibilities of Defense and National Security... and the responsibilities of the lives of U.S. Troops world-wide... and JUSTICE from a department with that name, but which presently works just the opposite...
SCREW THAT!
It's all about being GAY, and ACTING UP!
That's the issue... let bill o'reilly dictate our political discourse.
GAYNESS, and GAY, and ACTING UP, that's what's important right now...
That's what'll elect the next president of the United States!
I know this, because I've seen it happen a million times before!
GAY STUFF HAS ALWAYS WON THE PRESIDENCY...
IT HAS ALWAYS BEEN OUR TOP PRIORITY!
Perhaps Billo was refering to one of the polls on onenewsnow (part of the AFA I think)
they polled their heavily anti gay readers and came to some expected results.
http://www.onenewsnow.com/2007/08/poll_voters_take_on_candidates.php
http://www.onenewsnow.com/2007/08/poll_do_campaign_contributions.php
I have to say their polls are usually worded to achieve the desired results.
Well now that this story has been completely debunked I suppose we could see a retraction.....NOT! Anyone who watched O' Reilly the past nights knows he is no homophobe. In fact he called for all of this nonsense to stop and the gay issue be left alone. Again this is the Olbermann approach to lying.......lying by omission of information or facts.
Sure he's not. Of course, he doesn't want kids around gay people at the ballpark. The man, by his own words, is a classic definition of a homophobe, as I'm sure you are as well (I don't know for sure, I'm just going out on a limb here).
What I'd really like to see is for gay marriage to become legal so that O'Reilly and Savage could run off to the chapel and get hitched.
Of course it hasnt been debunked O'falafel was flat out wrong. He LIED. YOU are taking the tweaker approach to reality you know what you WISH were true so you just claim it IS true.
That's funny... the same Quinnipiac poll was used by Concerned Women for America right after the Logo debate...http://www.cwfa.org/articles/13669/CFI/family/index.htm "A new study has determined that backing the homosexual lobby is more likely to hurt, rather than help, a presidential candidate's chances of calling 1600 Pennsylvania home in 2008.
Quinnipiac University recently conducted a poll of likely voters in the "big three" presidential swing states: Ohio, Pennsylvania and Florida. That poll yielded some fascinating results.
The survey determined that voters were less likely to vote for a candidate who supports the homosexual agenda than one opposes it by a nearly three-to-one margin. And by an average of 53-to-33 percent, voters agreed that "homosexual acts between two individuals are immoral," as candidly observed earlier this year by General Peter Pace, outgoing Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff."
Sounds like they weren't exactly being truthful with the poll information, huh?
I listened to the initial show where he brought out this stat... it was a broad discussion of how endorsements affect (or don't affect) political candidates. The gay endorsement was just one, in fact Bill cited the NRA endorsement as the most damaging endorsement a candidate could receive according to the poll. The reason the gay one came up again was because the democrats recently held the first ever gay-sponsored debate. Bill doesn't hate gays.
Mag, the Factor you are referring to was not about kids around gays it was kids around "cavorting flamers" in public and the confusion it may cause kids to undergo......it was a baseball game for crymanie sakes not a "gay pride parade".
"cavorting flamers" Wow, not a homophobic bone in the old trollsters body huh? You guys are really something else.
Didn't BillO run a completely false story about lesbian gangs with pink guns without later correcting his false information? Didn't he state that if you legalize gay marrige you'll have to then legalize people wedding goats?
It sure sounds like he's afraid of gay people.
Did BillO run a bit about lesbian gangs with pink guns? I story that turned out to be completely fabricated with some phony "expert"? With no correction of the story later.
Did BillO say that if you legalize gay marriage you'll then have to legalize people wedding a goat?
Sounds like a homophobe to me or maybe he just knows his demographics.
As pathetic as it is, and as totally unfounded tho it might be, O'Reilly's latest attack on gays, the suggestion it's political poison to get endorsements by a gay rights group could, in fact, be an ugly truth. With hard work by a group of journalist with some integrity, I, for one, would actually like to know the answer to that question froma scientifically balanced sampling.
We LBGT members are Americans, we pay taxes, and yes, we have died in many.many wars throughout history. We have done this all for an opportunity to be a part of a culture that despises us. As we round the turn into '08, it is more important than most straight people can possibly imagine to finally get a candidate who would openly endorse who and what we are and fight for us in DC and the work place. Neither can you possibly imagine how hard and bitter the words fall upon us when we hear these same people speak of "family values." As for O'Reilly, were I to take power, I'd have this jerk deported.
OReilly is a racist hypocrite and anti-gay moron. Yes, Bill, gays do exist and are all around you. We even vote for presidents!