Skip to main content

Prop 19 Down in LA Times Poll

Submitted by Phillip Smith on
Drug War Issues
Politics & Advocacy

Two California polls last week showed Proposition 19 trailing as election day draws near. A Los Angeles Times/USC poll released Friday also had the marijuana legalization initiative trailing by 39% to 51%, with 10% undecided.

Last Wednesday, a Public Policy Institute of California poll had the measure losing 49% to 44%. But that same day, a SurveyUSA poll had it winning 48% to 44%.

Prop 19 had led in most polls taken this year and maintained a 1.2% lead in the Talking Points Memo Polltracker, which has not yet included the LA Time/USC poll. Looking at just the polls conducted in October and including the polls mentioned in this article, Prop 19 trailed by an average of 47.5% to 46.3%. At press time that had shifted to 49.6% to 43.7%.

The conventional wisdom is that in initiative elections, the burden of persuading voters is on the initiative. The electorate must be convinced to move from the status quo. But despite a late infusion of cash this month, the Prop 19 campaign does not have the funds to try to sway voters through TV ad campaigns in this state with some of the most expensive media markets in the country. Yes on 19 and allied organizations are engaged in a substantial get out the vote campaign, though.

The LA Times/USC poll found the measure supported by Democrats and independents, but opposed by Republicans. Men were split on the issue, with women leaning against it. Both sides in the campaign have considered mothers to be a key demographic.

Prop 19 continues to have support among likely voters under 40, winning by 48% to 37%. Among voters over 65, only 28% support it, with 59% opposed. The LA Times/USC poll showed Latinos swinging against Prop 19 by a two-to-one margin -- a finding at odds with most other polls. It also showed white voters opposing the measure. In most other polls, white voters favored it by a small margin.

The LA Times/USC poll surveyed 441 likely voters by telephone, including both cell phones and land lines, between October 13 and 20. The margin of error for the sample is +/- 4.6%.

Permission to Reprint: This content is licensed under a modified Creative Commons Attribution license. Content of a purely educational nature in Drug War Chronicle appear courtesy of DRCNet Foundation, unless otherwise noted.


The LA Times has been been lying to us every step of the way on this issue.

What motivation could they have now since this may get voters out to vote who otherwise would stay home thinking Prop 19 was a done deal.

Maybe the vote tally is going to be altered and these phony poll numbers are setting the expectation that the proposition will lose.

The only way to settle this will be with a landslide vote where even with some fraud, this will pass overwhelmingly.

Fri, 10/22/2010 - 5:54pm Permalink
Loopholes (not verified)


If you think the voters were ripped off by Prop 215 because of loopholes, you will be more ripped off by Prop 19 with even more loopholes.
Remember Prop 215?
"The people of the State of California hereby find and declare that the purposes of the Compassionate Use Act of 1996 are as follows: To ensure that seriously ill Californians have the right to obtain and use marijuana for medical purposes where that medical use is deemed appropriate and has been recommended by a physician who has determined that the persons health would benefit from the use of marijuana ."
SERIOUSLY ILL medical marijuana patients? Really.
Then the LOOPHOLE.
"Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no physician in this state shall be punished, or denied any right or privilege, for having recommended marijuana to a patient for medical purposes."
In other words, the PHYSICIAN is ALWAYS RIGHT when this doctor recommends marijuana to anybody like healthy 18-19 year old teens.
With Prop 19, the pot users get first class treatment. The loopholes are :
"No person shall be punished, fined, discriminated against, or be denied any right or privilege for lawfully engaging in any conduct permitted by this act or authorized pursuant to Section 11301. Provided, however, that the existing right of an employer to address consumption that actually impairs job performance by an employee shall not be affected."
"Notwithstanding Sections 11470 and 11479 of this code or any other provision of law, no state or local law enforcement agency or official shall attempt to, threaten to, or in fact seize or destroy any cannabis plant, cannabis seeds, or cannabis that is lawfully cultivated, processed, transported, possessed, possessed for sale, sold, or used in compliance with this act or any local government ordinance, law, or regulation adopted pursuant to this act."
Workers have the right to go to work with bloodshot eyes and stoned. You cannot address the pot consumption unless that ACTUALLY impairs job performance which means the accident has to happen first in most instances. The worker even has to right to possess his bongs, less than an ounce of pot and lighter at work without consuming the pot.  The worker has the right to consume pot in any non-public place whether there is a no smoking sign or not. So if you invite your boss to your house, he can smoke pot without asking you because that is his right according to the law. If your neighbors cultivate their 25 sq ft 8-feet tall pot in the front yards, roof or anywhere in the private residence, officials can't destroy or remove those plants even if they are a blight to the community. You cannot complain of smoke nuisance to authorities if your neighbors are smoking 24/7 in their patios because you will be denying pot smokers of their rights to smoke in a non-public place. Disneyland can't kick a person out if that adult guest possesses bongs, less than an ounce of pot inside the park, and a lighter. Remember the two big loopholes of Prop 19. As long as the pot user is following the Prop 19 law to the tee, you cannot deny them of any right or privilege for lawfully engaging in ANY conduct permitted by this act. Or you will be sued and they will get more money from you because you will lose the lawsuit.
Fri, 10/22/2010 - 6:04pm Permalink
Anon (not verified)

In reply to by Loopholes (not verified)

Any critical mind reading "Loopholes" post will notice that the author is heavily biased against marijuana and bongs.  Both of these articles in themselves are less of a threat than a nail file, a pair of scissors, or even a can of vegetables.  The author assumes, against today's science, that marijuana is some terrible menace that can't be controlled.  The fact is, most citizens will treat marijuana just like alcohol and not abuse it.

Just like today's drinkers, most responsible employees don't show up drunk.  Neither will marijuana consumers be any different.  This author would have you believe that marijuana is somehow different and people will disproportionately break the law and abuse their legal marijuana privileges.  Probably, since most smokers had to be careful in the past with their pot use, these same people will be just a cautious as they were when marijuana was illegal.  The marijuana consumer may prove to be far more lawful than alcohol consumers.

This author's entire argument is based solely on nothing more than hate.  This person has probably seen the evidence for legalization, but ignores it because he would prefer to hate another human group rather than be reasonable.  Marijuana prohibition has to end so that the hate can end and people who consume marijuana are treated NO DIFFERENT than any other US citizen.  But somehow I don't think the author of "Loopholes" thinks that marijuana smokers should be treated fairly.  I would bet this author has a fetish to lock up all pot smokers everywhere.

Vote for reason.  Vote for sanity.  Vote for fairness.  And vote to end this drug war against marijuana consumers.  Vote yes on Prop 19 and change the world for the better.  The pot smokers are already on your highways and businesses, and no one even knows it today.  When it is legal people will not only have freed a group of people from oppression, but created a safer world.  Now that is change we can believe in. 

Fri, 10/22/2010 - 8:33pm Permalink
joeschmeaux (not verified)

In reply to by Loopholes (not verified)

loopholes, your arguments are riddled with falsehoods (and OBNOXIOUS CAPITALS!). 

Frankly, I don't see what the problem is. People who follow the law shouldn't be subject to penalties. If you don't like the law, change it. That's what we did in 1996 and that's what we intend to do again in November. The louder you whine, the more resolved I am to vote yes on 19.

As for loopholes, I'm concerned with tax loopholes which allow big multi billion dollar corporations get away with paying little to nothing in taxes. The loopholes you describe are actually intended parts of the law which voters passed in a secret ballot vote. So WHINE ALL YOU WANT, but please do it with civility.

See you at the polls, but not at the after party, jerk.


Brown/Boxer/No on 23/Yes on 19! ?

Fri, 10/22/2010 - 9:43pm Permalink
gmk (not verified)

So, they would have us believe that in one week or so, we lost over 10%?   I just don't see too many people without an opinion on this subject, and for most, that opinion was formed LONG ago.   I think this is simply a tactic from the opposition. 

When DON'T we have an "October surprise"?  It happens every election!

Fri, 10/22/2010 - 6:42pm Permalink
joeschmeaux (not verified)

Bless Richard Lee's heart and all his vital organs for getting prop 19 on the ballot, but it was short sighted of him not to bankroll some TV ads for the final weeks as well. Biased media outlets with little journalistic integrity, like the LA times, have the machinery in place to conduct polls of small fields of voters and manipulate their outcomes with leading questions.

So the LA times polled 441 people out of 36 million in California, then published a story with the headline, "Prop 19 trailing badly, poll shows." Of course they didn't publish the poll questions along with the results. One can reasonably assume that since their poll is so out of line with other polls, that the questions were formulated to assure a proportionally higher ratio of anti-19 voters. This is free advertising (and dishonest reporting) that money can't buy.

That's difficult to compete with if you have no advertising budget, as advertising in media outlets will all but assure you of coverage. We are all tired of evil meg, yet she has bombarded us with ads, and the media has bombarded us with stories about her. She gets much more coverage than Jerry Brown because she buys much more advertising than he does.

When the LA times publishes a sham poll, too many people buy into it without questioning it. Many sheeple think that LA times has journalistic integrity -- after all it isn't fox, right? But just like fox, the LA times has its own conservative agenda, and no scruples about publishing it as news. Unfortunately, many people don't perceive that, and allow the poll to make them reassess their own positions, as they wouldn't want to vote for an unpopular position.

For the first time since it made the ballot, I am apprehensive that prop 19 may not pass. Somehow, the pro-prop 19 forces must reach people via the media before election day, or prop 19 stands a significant chance of failure. The pro-19 camp keeps coming out with new endorsements, but so far hasn't released the killer endorsement, which will push 19 over the top. If such an endorsement exists, now would be a good time to publicize it.

Brown/Boxer/No on 23/Yes on 19!

Sat, 10/23/2010 - 4:12am Permalink
John Roman (not verified)

In reply to by joeschmeaux (not verified)

Journalistic Integrity?

I remember that the Chandler Newspaper, back in 1972 endorsed Richard Nixon for re-election. I didn't have to hear the tapes to know Tricky Dick was no good. A lot of the population wished the famous Watergate tapes not to be subpeonaed

d. Regardless of later LA Times editorials said, I believe that deep down, the staff was so pro Nixon it would have preferred not having to face the truth. So if the Times seems a little slanted against the legalization of pleasure, don't be surprised. I find the Times to be about as 'fair and balanced' as Fox News. 

Sat, 10/23/2010 - 5:37pm Permalink
CouchLock (not verified)

If anyone reading this would wiki prop 19 on the list of those whom oppose prop 19 is none other than the editorial board for the LA Times. Case Closed. Their trying to spin the election with fake polls. Shame on them. Yes for prop 19!

Sat, 10/23/2010 - 4:28am Permalink

While  Prop 19 not passing  would be a bitter pill for millions nationwide, it would be wrong to call it a failure.

What has happened and is happening in California is an historic event in the marijuana wars. When you have the country so divided on such a high consequence issue, there is no victory for the prohibitionists.

This has been driven by the status quo being unsatisfactory. If Prop 19 goes down, the status quo will still be unsatisfactory. The unrest and resistance will continue. It just means that we have to wait for more Republicans to die of old age. The generational shift is 3% per year. Legalization is inevitable.

Sat, 10/23/2010 - 11:49am Permalink
Anonymous66 (not verified)

O well I already sent my Yes on Prop 19 vote in via mail about a week ago. The prohibitionists believe the younger folks will be buzzing instead of voting on Nov 2.....NOT!!!

Sat, 10/23/2010 - 1:40pm Permalink
YES ON PROP 19 (not verified)

Latest in house Poll shows Prop 19 winning 56% YES to 41% NO----Don't let these Paid off News papers trick you into thinking otherwise. Their whole final hope is that they can get voters to give up on PROP 19 and not go to the POLLS!!!   GO VOTE and take a friend with you!!!  PROP will win if we get our voters to the POLLS!!! 

Wed, 10/27/2010 - 6:47am Permalink

Add new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.