I give a lot of grief to our online poll, a mechanism that is about as scientific as seeking medical advice from a medieval barber and going home with a bucketful of leeches.
Actually, it’s usually not that reliable.
But I have to hand it to the audience poll conducted twice a week at www.thetimesnews.com, it called the outcome of the Alamance County vote on Amendment One.
Online content editor Joe Jurney posted the poll a week or so before the election. Users can vote once — in theory anyway. After several days of voting the outcome came out to 316 for the amendment and 193 against. That’s 61 percent in the “for” column.
When Alamance County election results were tallied on May 8, 29,424 people in the county cast ballots with 18,844 voting for and 10,580 going against. That’s 64 percent in the “for” column.
Much more accurate than the Elon University poll on the subject, which in all fairness didn’t phrase the question in strictly for or against terms.
Sometimes it’s best to simply ask a straight question.
Standing alone
Speaking of the Amendment One vote, it lost in just one Alamance County precinct. North Burlington voted against it 297-260.
In most of the rest of the county it passed with ease. Patterson (803-197), Coble (907-258), Morton (1,048-230), and Faucette (647-172) gave it the highest amount of support.
Looking statewide, the amendment lost in only seven counties: Orange 79 percent, Durham 70 percent, Wake 57 percent, Chatham 54 percent, Mecklenburg 54 percent, Buncombe 51 percent and Watauga 51 percent all voted against it. The split was almost 50-50 in Guilford County.
The numbers indicate a definite split in the state’s metropolitan and rural areas that is worth paying attention to during the fall general election. There is a similar dynamic between the rest of the state and large universities. Voting in Orange and Chatham counties are indicative of the strength of UNC’s presence in those areas. Appalachian State is certainly a major influence in Watauga County.
Random observation
Speaking of the Elon poll, it found that only 11 percent of those it spoke to received election information via newspapers. TV topped the list at 42 percent. The internet checked in at 24 percent. I have no reason at all to doubt this poll’s numbers. It seemed that voters overall were very poorly informed this year when compared to previous elections.
How do I know? A lot of people simply asked me how they should vote in races for county commissioners, governor, lieutenant governor and all the council of state races. They didn’t know who the candidates were and didn’t seem all that interested in finding out.
As I’ve said before, I’m not comfortable telling others how to vote.
We previewed the races for county commissioners, register of deeds and state House before the early voting period. Later we decided to provide more information about the races for governor and Congress simply because our wire services were not doing so. Cuts in the media world are certainly having a serious impact. We’ll only see more of this as time marches on.
In the fall, we’ll try to do a better job of previewing all the races we can for readers in print and online who may be interested.
But I fear that local election coverage may be a lost art. It won’t be for lack of effort on our end, though.
Random observation part 2
Speaking of lagging interest, only two people showed up on Election Night to watch results at the county courthouse — and one was our reporter Chris Lavender.
That’s a shame.
One by one our communal gathering points are going away as people remain transfixed by their mobile phones or laptop computers. Nothing more sad than watching a family of four watching four different TV programs at four different computer stations.
The courthouse deal is very similar. It was once a collection spot for people around the community — Republicans and Democrats — to watch the results in real time and actually speak to each other.
We lose some of our humanity every day, it seems.
Last Amendment One observations
Probably the one message voters didn’t get about the recently approved Amendment One concerning marriage in North Carolina was this one: The amendment itself is inherently un-American, according to guidelines laid down by the founders of our nation in the Declaration of Independence.
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” is how the document reads.
Note that at no point does it say “unless the Bible says otherwise.” The writers also fail to reveal an identity for “Creator.”
It speaks volumes to what the people who made the arduous journey to this country felt most important — that the right of an individual is paramount and that neither people nor governments are beholden to one particular religious belief.
Still, I believe North Carolina voters in the main were predisposed to vote for the same-sex marriage amendment on biblical grounds. That’s very much their right and I respect it if I don’t agree with it. Just understand that it’s counter to the idea our nation was founded upon.
A couple of people who regularly contact me made this point rather clearly. One is Warren Pegram, a tea party conservative who regularly writes to the Times-News. Mr. Pegram didn’t wish to vote on the amendment at all. He felt people were misinformed about it and confused. Like me, he thought the state legislature was completely wrong for putting it before voters to begin with. It is merely the government’s role to license marriages for purposes of determining property ownership once a union dissolves. It’s up to individual churches to sanction what they believe to be right and proper — or not. Government interference in either case is equally wrong. It is not the function of government to deny rights to one segment of society while others have those same rights.
What the church wants to do is another matter.
Here’s what Mr. Pegram wrote before the vote.
“For the few of us who believe that any law regarding who gets married is a church function, not the state, is invalid under the US Constitution, you could let them know how to avoid voting on Amendment One in May. You can choose the church of your choice to match your belief.”
And I got this message from Chuck Mann of Greensboro who writes every so often. Because he lives out of our area his letters don’t make print.
“As a supporter of equal rights I voted against Amendment 1. Constitutions should only be amended to give people more rights, not to deny some rights to some people. If we allow the government to deny some groups equal rights today, then that makes it easier for the government to deny rights to other groups in the future. I wonder which group will be next?”
How others see us
This editorial cartoon is a glimpse into how North Carolina is being viewed by others outside the state. It’s not particularly flattering and not completely accurate. On the plus side, I doubt many on the “for” side care very much.
But that’s how it’s going to be for awhile I suspect.
I took a quick glance. It looked like my old newspaper, the Jacksonville Daily News — only not really. A couple of years ago the Daily News moved from a broadsheet to tabloid format. This was a broadsheet.
All the credit for this series goes to first and foremost Don Bolden, our editor emeritus and a noted historian of the county’s events. Managing editor Jay Ashley is harnessing the great volume of text and photos Don is generating and graphics editor Linda Bowden is designing the package so it looks cool each day. Hope everyone say Monday’s edition, which featured one of the largest fires in county history. Amazing visual display by Linda. Actually, here it is.
It’s called the American Community Survey, a folksy rather harmless — even friendly-sounding title — probably thought up during a series of 10 dozen meetings over a two-year period at a cost of roughly $2.5 million. I say probably because this is only a wild guess on my part. But I do base this hunch on one singular factor. The American Community Survey was cooked up by an agency overseen by the federal government.
