Poll Results: Presidential Race, Open Primaries, Funeral Protests

Results of the Taxpayer Association Straw Poll
Over 1,248 people responded!
— Over 50 comments

1) If the Presidential election were held today which candidate would you vote for?

Paul, Ron 530 (43.4%)
Santorum,
Rick 274 (22.4%)
Romney,
Mitt 182 (14.9%)
Gingrich
, Newt 120 (9.8%)
Obama, Barack 77 (6.3%)
Other 39 (3.2%)
[Sarah Palin & Chris Christie led write-ins in Other category]

.

.

2) Should statewide Democrat & Republican primaries be open to non-affiliated voters?

SUPPORT Open Primaries 609 (50.2%)
OPPOSE Open Primaries 421 (34.7%)
Undecided 155 (12.8%)

 

Comments
-I believe if people look more into principles, rather than the party; we’d be more fiscally moral.
-Should Rotarians say who should head the Kiwanas?
-Primaries should be banned. A big taxpayer expense.
-Only the Caucus system benefits the political landscape.
-should be the state party’s choice, and should be voted on within the party.
– I think we should consider the Washington State style because it would allow us to have a general election with the top two candidates and get third partys out of the way
-Horrible Idea
-It should be allowed if a party agrees to it. Political parties should remain private institutions that can make the choice.
-Can you trust the other party to tell you whats best for your party?
-if both are open to others-Cross-over voters will sway elections
-I am registered as republican but vote across party lines.
-It’s a Republican thing/dumicratic thing
-open prims would help opposing sides torpedo a particular candidate
-Really don’t see this as a burning issue
-If someone really wants to vote in a primary, they should know before the election, and can register with that party. They can always change back.
-Keep Closed Primary System
-If top 2 go on to general election, third parties will be dead in 5 years.
-best hope of Republican party to run winners
-why should a non affiliate be able to choose MY parties nominie? You want to have a say. register with a party
-Should be up to each party and for which offices. This is current law.
-Open allows our complete freedom of voting.
-Voter Fraud by Mail already creates false outcomes. We don’t need democrats and union minions messing up the Republican Primary too.
-Open primaries bring in Independents
-Only way to save the GOP
3) Should there be a ban against protesting near a funeral? Free speech rights vs. right to privacy.

COMMENTS

-We can pay our respects, but express with dignity

-No but communities can work something out locally and prevent such protests by other means.

-Yes and no

-One would hope that good sense and decency would prevail in these circumstances. However no one has a right to privacy out in public, not even at a funeral.

-Limit the distance

-Out of respect, not because the government says so.

-That is what Freedom is… even if we don’t agree with it.

-It is disrespectful, but protected by the First Amendment

-don’t think it’s right, though

-If you let the funeral goers have the freedom to do want about the protesters you wouldn’t need to pass any law.

-In service to our Country these insensative people show no respect for Human life

-It’s private property, but there’s no need for a specific law.

-Roads/sidewalks should be privatized so that the owners of the property can decide if protesting can take place on there.

-As long as they don’t violate someone else’s private property rights

-However distasteful I have to say a loud and resounding NO

-If it’s on private property, yes.

-Yes, allow the family to greive at graveside

-Case for permit requirements…

-If the funeral is on private property it is a matter of property rights and should be enforced as such. If it is on public property free speech privales.

-Federal ban? No.

-The owners of the cemetery should be able to have them removed from their property, by force if necessary.

-Protests should be allowed outside a specified perimeter that does not interfere with the funeral and mourners

-no, but don’t be surprised if somebody shows that they don’t like it….

-Free speech is for all citizens, no banning is wrong for that is telling people what they can do and can’t do and that is wrong. Remember the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, thanks.

-but common sense and respect for others is needed

-Not to end free speech rights, but to give a certain amount of space out of respect for the family.

-Yes, kind of like a disturbing the peace law or drunk and disorderly. Shouldn’t be a free speech limiter

-free speech, yes, hate speech, no

-‘Near’ is a relative term. How about 200 ft from funeral participants.

-Let common sense and decorum prevail.

-Too many laws already, including laws which cover this. Enforce the laws we have.

-If you ban free speech for others, you will lose it to. Come up with free speech ways to over come the effects of protests. I saw a Youtube even where a motorcycle club surrounded a funeral playing patriotic music loud enough to overcome protesters. DON’T restrict free speech. Use your brain and be smarter than resorting to force (which in turn can be used to shut you up so tight you’d regret you ever shut others up). Remember what the constitution and bill of rights are for when it comes to free speech: you don’t need a law to restrict speech everyone like. Therefore the laws are there for things we find offensive. If not there for that, then it is there for nothing. So, it’s there for funeral protests, or nothing at all.

-and be put in jail

-There is no Constitutional right to “Privacy.” The Constitutional right to free speech, however in poor taste, trumps.

-No ban, but reasonable noise restrictions

-I do not believe there is a right to privacy law. But I think you should be able to have the protesters stand far enough back to voice their ideas but not close enough to matter.

-It infringes upon privacy during a time of sorrow.

-Funerals are private, not public matters

-Which one was planned first?

-NO, as long as the funeral is not disrupted. You’ve a right to protest, I don’t have a right to feel good. (I also support groups like PGR who keep the protesters from disrupting the funeral.)

-with an exception for public figures like politicians

-You can’t protest within so many feet of a federal building so why not so many feet in front of a funeral?

-There are laws preventing harassment. that should be enough

-/They are infringing upon others right to peaceful assembly

-What those people do is NOT free speech.

-enforce current public nuisance laws.

-I would hope that idiots like this would not be out protesting and making a mockery of some brave soul’s last rites but free speech is also an issue here that needs to be recognized.

-This is not free speech, it is harrassment in the worst possible way.

-Yes. Funerals are for the bereaved to honor their deceased loved one.

-Those mourning have the right to do so in privacy

Post to Twitter Post to Facebook Post to LinkedIn Post to Reddit

Posted by at 09:00 | Posted in Uncategorized | 5 Comments |Email This Post Email This Post |Print This Post Print This Post
  • valley person

    Ron Paul by a landslide. The oldest white guy with the most retro ideas, 19th century vintage, for our government and economy. The guy who, in a digital age, thinks we ought to be paying for goods and services with gold and silver coins.

    I guess this straw poll shows how in step with the times the Oregon Taxpayer Association is.   Bring out the fife and drums.

    • NotAFanOfPolitics

      The accuracy of the poll is in question if it shows Ron Paul that far ahead of the field. 

    • JoelinPDX

      Talk about blaming the messenger. Yeah right, VP, the poll results show the OTA to be out of step.

      What this poll shows is that the Paulistas got the phone tree fired up and told his 11 percent to get on OC and vote for the geezer…nothing more. 

      But liberals would prefer to believe it has something to do with the group that ran an entirely unscientific poll. And you wonder why the voters are going to turn Democraps out of office (including your Lord Obozo) on November 6th. It is because of your kind of stupidity…not ignorance, stupidity.

  • JoelinPDX

    Well, this was clearly a futile exercise…Ron Paul wins with 43 percent…open primaries are supported by half the respondents.

    When the votes are counted in May, Paul will have gathered his standard ten or 11 per cent of loons who shouldn’t even be voting in the Republican primary in the first place. Paul is not a Republican, especially when you consider his beliefs that the US is responsible for 9/11 and that Iran should have the bomb.

    As for open primaries, we see what happens in state’s like Michigan where Snatorum begged for non-Republicans to vote for him in the GOP primary. If you want to vote as a Republican, registering as a Republican (or as a Democrat) is as simple as filling out a card. It takes about 30 seconds but that’s better than voting on a whim to nominate a candidate who is un-electable in the general election.

  • Rupert in Springfield

    Ron Paul at the head of the pack? Seems a little odd that a guy with a track record for nutty ideas could be leading a presidential poll.

    Then again, we elected a guy with a long track record of nutty ideas and even nuttier pals about three years ago.

    Anything can happen I guess.

Stay Tuned...

Stay up to date with the latest political news and commentary from Oregon Catalyst through daily email updates:

Prefer another subscription option? Subscribe to our RSS Feed, become a fan on Facebook, or follow us on Twitter.

Twitter Facebook

No Thanks (close this box)