mixed-mode probability
Rasmussen Reports
Rasmussen Reports national survey, June 2017 · Jun 26–27, 2017 · US national
Methodology
- Pollster
- Rasmussen Reports commercial
- Sponsor
- Rasmussen Reports
- Fielded
- Jun 26–27, 2017
- Population
- likely voters
- Sample size
- 1,000
- Sample frame
- mixed-mode probability
- Mode
- national telephone and online survey; field work by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC
- Margin of error
- +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence
- Geography
- US national
Sources
Verification note. Wording read verbatim from Rasmussen's questions page; percentages from the public release. This is the reading taken one month before the July 26, 2017 ban announcement, and is the baseline against which the post-announcement wave should be read. No party splits were published outside the Platinum crosstabs.
Figures below are transcribed from these documents. Where they disagree with the source, the source governs.
Questions asked (2)
whether open transgender service is good or bad for the military
The U.S. Department of Defense now allows transgender people, those who identify with and want to live as the opposite sex, to serve openly in the military.
The U.S. Department of Defense now allows transgender people, those who identify with and want to live as the opposite sex, to serve openly in the military. Is this decision good for the military, bad for the military or does it have no impact?
No impact
38%
Bad for the military
31%
Good for the military
23%
Wording notes: repeats Rasmussen's 'want to live as the opposite sex' definition | asks about institutional effect rather than about rights
loaded_terms — good/bad/no impact is a balanced trichotomy, but the standing definitional clause carries the same problem as in the 2015 wave
Military servicefavor/oppose
delaying transgender enlistments
The heads of the Army, Air Force and Marines want to delay enlistments by transgender people to study the matter further.
The heads of the Army, Air Force and Marines want to delay enlistments by transgender people to study the matter further. Do you favor or oppose a delay in allowing openly transgender people to enlist in the military?
Wording notes: cites the service chiefs as the source of the proposal, an authority cue | 'to study the matter further' presents the delay as procedural caution rather than as a policy reversal
tilts_restrictive — both the endorsement by service chiefs and the reassuring purpose clause push toward favoring the delay; a version stating only the delay itself would very likely score lower