CNN poll: 69% support letting gays serve openly in military — including 62% of Republicans

posted at 9:37 pm on February 22, 2010 by Allahpundit

There’s been a majority in favor of it since 1998 but the split at the time was 52/39. Now it’s 69/27, with Republicans and indies both above 60 percent. A fitting exclamation point to a week that saw conservatives hold the gay-friendliest CPAC evah.

Support for allowing gays in the military is much higher among Democrats than Republicans, but the policy wins support from a majority of Republicans as well. More than eight in ten Democrats say that gays should be allowed to serve; 62 of Republicans and 63 percent of Independents agree with that view.

The poll’s release follows Sen. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut announcement Monday that he would be a sponsor of legislation next week to repeal the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy, which has been in place since 1993…

In 1994, a majority of Americans thought homosexual relationships were morally wrong; only 41 percent believed that homosexuality was not a moral issue. Now, for the first time since polls began asking this question in the 1970s, half the public thinks that homosexuality is not a moral issue.

The split on that last point is 48/50 between is/isn’t, but that trend will likely skew towards the latter over the next few years too. (Interesting footnote: In 1998, it was 48/45, so the “is” faction is holding steady thus far.) For all the blather about liberal realignment after The One was elected, I think gay issues is one area where it might actually happen — ironically because Obama’s economic agenda is so alarming to conservatives that it’s forced them to reprioritize fiscal responsibility as their organizing principle. Abortion will remain a fault line eternally because it’s a matter of life and death, but the libertarian impulse inside the GOP will continue to make inroads vis-a-vis gays. There’s nothing like aggressive statism to concentrate the mind on what’s most important.

Here’s Petraeus on Meet the Press this Sunday playing coy about his own opinion of “don’t ask, don’t tell.” He does say he supports the moves taken by Gates and Mullen but seems to want to go slow and let the Pentagon carry out a full review. (See this NYT story for a counterargument.) Given the numbers in CNN’s poll, I’m not sure how politically viable the review will be if it concludes we should stick with the policy.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 4 5 6

I don’t want to serve with openly gay people.

Signed,
A guy living in a room with three other dudes in Afghanistan.

spec_ops_mateo on February 24, 2010 at 10:36 AM

Spec Mateo – some people don’t wish to serve with black people – or Jews or Hispanics. Should we bar those people from serving also, because some don’t want to be with them?

Have conditions of conduct for behavior and ability. If you can meet them and adhere to them; great. If not – you’re out.

Your sexual orientation should be as irrelevant as your race or religion.

pbundy on February 24, 2010 at 12:12 PM

During my enlisted service, homosexuals seemed to be a clumsy
lot. They had a tendency to repeatedly fall headfirst down an engineroom
ladder. Some were even known to trip on deck and “fall” overboard.

In retrospect, I now realize that of all the officers I served with on active duty, Naval Academy graduates were the most tolerant of homosexuals. It may only be coincidence, but was there something in the curriculum that created such tolerance? I am aware that there have been numerous scandals regarding drug use, academic cheating, and heterosexual misconduct, but had never before given much thought to their acceptance of homosexual behavior, despite my awareness that there was a tendency toward an anal fixation.

These two portions of your painfully dense letter make you a jackass. As a second generation USN officer and USNA grad, I’m embarrassed that you served in the same Navy as my father and me.

dakine on February 24, 2010 at 12:24 PM

It may only be coincidence, but was there something in the curriculum that created such tolerance?

Could it be… “education?”

entropent on February 24, 2010 at 12:30 PM

A. “I am a retired Navy Captain. I enlisted in the Navy in 1948,and served as a Yeoman, Personnelman, Journalist, and CommunicationsTechnician, and, as a Petty Officer First Class, received a commission in1955 through the Integration Program. In my more than 31 years of active duty, I commanded two ships, served as Executive Officer on two ships,commanded Coastal Squadron ONE (Swift Boats) in Vietnam, and was Chief Staff Officer on an Amphibious Squadron. I developed the first Human Affairs Council in a Pacific Fleet ship in 1972, and supervised human affairs activities on seven PHIBRON ships. I am a graduate of the School of Naval Justice, the Management Course at the Navy Postgraduate School, and the Senior Officer course at the Naval War College. After retirement I received a Juris Doctorate from the Hastings College of Law.”

B. “a second generation USN officer and USNA grad”

hmmm….who to trust

Chris_Balsz on February 24, 2010 at 2:11 PM

hmmm….who to trust

Chris_Balsz on February 24, 2010 at 2:11 PM

Not entirely sure what you’re getting at Chris, but it’s not really about who to “trust”. I highlighted two statements made by this guy which are unbecoming an officer in my opinion. He took a gratuitous shot at the USNA and its graduates, and he made a nasty and vitriolic reference to how he and his fellow shipmates used to assault gay sailors back in the day. He’s a jackass.

dakine on February 24, 2010 at 2:18 PM

I don’t know the intracies of your code, since I never served (having sought counseling for depression, I am one of those unfit Americans he was talking about). I thought his letter raised serious questions of administration, based on his career experience. If you’re just complaining about his snark then you’re right, you’re as much as officer as he is and I’m not.

Chris_Balsz on February 24, 2010 at 2:55 PM

Chris_Balsz on February 24, 2010 at 2:55 PM

It’s way more than “snark” Chris. According to his own words, he participated in the assault (or worse) of gay sailors, and he impugned the character of USNA graduates. His words are unbecoming of an officer, and he is without honor. Any substance in his letter is irrelevant because he destroyed all his credibility with the two excerpts I highlighted.

dakine on February 24, 2010 at 3:08 PM

During my enlisted service, homosexuals seemed to be a clumsy lot. They had a tendency to repeatedly fall headfirst down an engineroom ladder. Some were even known to trip on deck and “fall” overboard. The crew had a way of policing themselves to eliminate homosexual advances.

First, he didn’t say he took part. Second, if it happened during his enlisted service, it happened in the 1950s, and from what I hear from family, 1950s America believed a good fistfight solved problems. Third, he said it was response to homosexual advances.

His words are unbecoming of an officer, and he is without honor. Any substance in his letter is irrelevant because he destroyed all his credibility with the two excerpts I highlighted.

I’m not a brother officer. Are you supposed to be deprecating his character to me?

Chris_Balsz on February 24, 2010 at 3:33 PM

You’re being obtuse Chris.

dakine on February 24, 2010 at 3:38 PM

I don’t think so. I’ve had family and friends who served. If you’re going to look down on 1950s enlisted men who “assaulted” each other then you’re going to be upset quite a lot.

Chris_Balsz on February 24, 2010 at 4:02 PM

Although even by those barracks rules, by suggesting the Admiral is a queer from Annapolis, the Captain needs “straightening out”.

Chris_Balsz on February 24, 2010 at 4:05 PM

I suggest that those without military experience butt out of this conversation for a while and let those who have actually served comment, pro or con.

Mason on February 24, 2010 at 10:04 PM

Mason on February 24, 2010 at 10:04 PM

I suggest you remember the 1st amendment and ignore comments that you don’t feel are relevant. You want to dictate who gets to speak, get your own site.

austinnelly on February 25, 2010 at 11:54 AM

pbundy on February 24, 2010 at 12:12 PM

It should be irrelevant, but the whole point of this seems to be making it relevant and making acceptance of it a requirement. Openly declaring your sexual preferences can be construed as an advance by some and you’re already creating discomfort; you can’t change your ethnicity but you can keep your lifestyle and preferences to yourself. Lifestyle shouldn’t be punished but neither should it be advertised and rubbed in peoples faces.
My own sexual history would make some people blanch but I don’t worry about acceptance because I don’t wear it on my sleeve. Comparing this to race is apples and oranges.

austinnelly on February 25, 2010 at 12:23 PM

austinnelly on February 25, 2010 at 12:23 PM

That.

SG1_Conservative on February 25, 2010 at 7:11 PM

Comparing this to race is apples and oranges.

austinnelly on February 25, 2010 at 12:23 PM

More like apples and walnuts.

An individual has no control over their race, and one’s sexual preferences can’t be determined simply be looking at your physical features.

Dark-Star on February 25, 2010 at 10:12 PM

These two portions of your painfully dense letter make you a jackass. As a second generation USN officer and USNA grad, I’m embarrassed that you served in the same Navy as my father and me.

dakine on February 24, 2010 at 12:24 PM

Anyone ever visiting old threads needs to know, this was a lie by a gay advocate. He would say anything to further the cause. Liar.

hawkdriver on March 10, 2014 at 3:27 AM

Comment pages: 1 4 5 6