Denver Issues Voter Opinion Survey (Of The Circus)
Asks likely Denver voters a wide range of questions relating to the circus in general, as well as Ringling Bros specifically and support or opposition to state officials who support a ban on exotic animal displays. Also tests a wide range of positioning statements that seek to discredit the circus.
Initiative 100 (exotic animal display ban): 48% ‘for’ (30% ‘strongly’), 42% ‘against’ (21% ‘strongly’) ‘Effect of knowing that proposal would prevent most circuses like the Ringling Brothers-Barnum & Bailey Circus from coming to Denver would have on vote for proposal’ 29% ’cause to vote for’ (20% ‘strongly’), 60% ’cause to vote against’ (32% ‘strongly’) Arguments followed by percentages of respondents that found it very convincing (for initiative 100) vs. not very convincing:
- ‘Wild animals in circuses are often subjected to cruel training methods such as chaining, burning of paws, & beating with sharp bull hooks’ (39% vs. 34%)
- ‘While elephants in the wild walk more than 10 miles a day, circus elephants are trucked to 100 cities a year & spend most of their time on rail cars & in chains for 22 hours a day so they cannot even take a full stride’ (36% vs. 34%)
- ‘Circus tigers & lions are constantly kept in cages (34% vs. 39%)
- ‘Wild & exotic animals should be left in their natural habitats’ (33% vs. 35%)
- ‘Caged circus animals are often physically & mentally stressed by long travel & a lack of exercise, which can cause them to act unpredictably & attack, main, or injure circus spectators or employees’ (33% vs. 42%),
- ‘U.S. Department of Agriculture has documented & cited Ringling Brothers for numerous cases of injury & abuse to circus animals’ (31% vs. 34%)
- ‘Circus elephant breeding programs do nothing for conservation because baby elephants are still removed from their mothers as a young are & forced to perform’ (29% vs. 40%)
- ‘There are plenty of non-animal circuses that are fun & successful alternatives, such as the Cirque de Soleil’ (24% vs. 42%)
- ‘Some exotic animals carry diseases, including tuberculosis, which can be transmitted to humans’ (23% vs. 50%)
Arguments followed by percentages of respondents that found it very convincing (against initiative 100) vs. not very convincing:
- ‘Banning the circus in Denver alone wouldn’t do anything to stop abuse of animals because circuses would just go to some other nearby city instead’ (44% vs. 28%)
- ‘Circus animals receive better care than some children do in this country, so activists need to focus on some more worthy issue, like child abuse’ (39% vs. 34%)
- ‘Circuses are one of the few remaining types of wholesome family fun & entertainment, so it would be a pity to ban them from Denver’ (38% vs. 29%)
- ‘Mainline circuses like Ringling Brothers-Barnum & Bailey treat their animals humanely because it’s just good business to keep their animals performing well’ (36% vs. 24%)
- ‘Proposed ordinance is hypocritical because it picks on circuses but then leaves exceptions for the Denver Zoo & Stock Show which also keep animals in unnatural habitats’ (35% vs. 32%)
- ‘Ringling Brothers Circus pumps $8M into Denver’s economy each year, money we need in this down economy’ (30% vs. 31%)
- ‘People behind the effort to ban circuses are animal rights extremists who want to stop you from eating meat’ (25% vs. 57%)
- ‘Denver TV legend Blinky the Clown has been around the circus in Denver for decades & he says he’s never seen any abuse of animals’ (25% vs. 42%)
- ‘There is no solid proof that circuses abuse their animals; it’s all hearsay based on a few minor or exaggerated problems’ (24% vs. 34%)
‘Effect of knowing that Ringling Brothers-Barnum & Bailey Circus is part of a billion dollar corporation’: 13% more likely to support initiative, 20% less likely to.