Putting Prop 8 up for repeal in 2010 is a disaster waiting to happen

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/results/polls/#CAI01p1

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14308564/ns/politics-2006_election_results/

One of, if not the biggest factor in predicting what one's vote on Prop 8 would be is age. The younger a person was on election day, the more likely he or she would vote no on 8.

People between 18 and 29 are the only group we carried (61 no to 39 yes). On the flip side we lost those over 65 by the exact same margin (39 no to 61 yes). So the last thing we need is to have an election in which the electorate is older. That is exactly what the electorate of 2010 will likely be.

In 2006, the last off year national election the electorate voted in the following percentages:

18-29 14%, 30-44 22%, 45-64 45%, 65 and over 19%

In 2008, the electorate of prop 8 voted in the following percentages:

18-29 20%, 30-44 28%, 45-64 36%, 65 and over 15%.

Had the electorate in 2006 voted on prop 8 and those in their age cohorts voted the same way the 2008 ones did we would have lost 53.5 to 46.5 or about 166% of the margin in 2008. I see no reason whatsoever to think the electorate in 2010 wouldn't be more like the one in 2006 as opposed to the one in 2008. Young people are notorious for being fickle about voting while the old vote with regularity. Yes, things might well be trending our way in the long term, but I don't see us even doing as well in 2010 as we did in 2008 given the different electorate.

We have momentum. besides if we lose , we do it again, and again. I want it in my lifetime. The time is now! Keep the wound festering.

Maine will have a referendum this year as will Washington state. Both are winnable if we don't get burried by the other side financially. At some point we will exhaust our resources and start losing winnable fights due to not having money. A California race costs huge money.

I intend to keep fighting let them pay, let the state pay to keep running elections too. I pay my taxes to be second class? let them pay

it is our side. I don't see us being able to repeatedly raise money for ads every two years. If I thought there were a shot of prop 8 going down in 2010 I would be strongly in favor but I just don't see it.

When we sent yesterday's message asking you to raise $41,967 in less than 60 hours -- to help finance the research necessary to place a marriage equality initiative on the 2010 ballot -- we did not know if our community would make the Courage Campaign's $100,000 goal by August 13.

I am shocked and amazed to tell you that Courage Campaign members raised $77,905 yesterday, beating our deadline by two days. You read that right -- $77,905 in just 24 hours, for a grand total of $135,998 that we will immediately invest in research, polling and focus groups to repeal Prop 8.

Of course, we can't do this alone. That's why we also challenged our friends in the marriage equality movement to raise an additional $100,000 to place the most effective initiative possible on the 2010 ballot. With confidence that the shared costs of this research will be paid for, we are pushing ahead to file a ballot measure.

Now it's time to keep this marriage equality momentum going -- and to support our friends fighting the same battle for marriage rights across the country. That's why we are sharing this special message for you from Steve Hildebrand, former deputy campaign manager for Barack Obama's presidential campaign

I live in Virginia (the state with the nastiest anti-gay constitutional amendment) and donated to Courage Campaign. California's fight for equality has become the national face of this struggle. The community needs a big win, and the only way to win is to stay in the game.

Who are these queer folk that think we should wait? Just last week, Cleve Jones' detractors tried to put the kibosh on a national march on Washington. Opponents characterized the rally as a "pain in the tuchus" and "self-indulgent". Excuse me? Come again? It looks to me like the only members of the gay community that want to wait are establishment gays that have thrown the entire community over in exchange for high tea with Obama and a gift bag with presidential seal coasters.



I also donated to the "No on 1" campaign in Maine. This is on the ballot in November so please donate today.
http://www.actblue.com/page/courageformaine

but I hope you guys are able to keep fighting. It's wonderful that you were able to raise this much money. We should NEVER back down in the face of bigotry. If possible it needs to be kept in the public limelight--otherwise outta sight, outta mind. It is just so horrible that bigots are allowed to vote on the civil rights of a portion of society who are law-abiding, tax-paying citizens. It makes me wonder where this country is going. I wish I had some money to send you but I am pretty much tapped out at the moment. It's not much but all my prayers and good wishes are with everyone in CA. When I have some money I will be very happy to donate.

I went to Canada a couple of years ago and got married, but I want to see EVERY LGBT couple in this country who wants it to be able to have the happiness of being legally married. I went to Canada because legal marriage is available--even for non-Canadians--and because being in my 50s, I don't know how long I will be around and didn't want to wait until this entire country FINALLY has marriage equality. I was very impressed at the way we were treated at the license bureau in Windsor, Ontario. We showed our birth certificates and state IDs and in about 20 minutes, the clerk had sworn us and we had our license. No being treated like freaks, or something out of the ordinary. Just a quick, easy, application and within 20 minutes, we had the go-ahead to be legally married--followed the next day by a beautiful riverside wedding with all the people we love the most there to share our happiness. We are still together two years later, very happy and deeply in love. I thank the gods every day for the Canadians having done the right thing. Sorry to ramble on here, but I am so thankful that the Canadians were there for us.

I am sure there are Canadians who don't like same-sex marriage, but they have more or less accepted it as a fait accompli and are going on with their lives. There was some agitation to take it off the books, but so far it looks as if marriage equality is here to stay, at least in Canada.

It really bugs me when straights tell us to wait. How would they like it if they couldn't marry the person they love? It is easy to say "wait" when the power and privilege are on their side. LGBT people do not have the luxury of sitting around and waiting until society finally gives us the right to marry--nor should we have to wait. Marriage is a civil right--as in "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."

Please keep working on this--2010 or 2012 (though of course I would prefer the former), keep this out there and in people's minds. No one except us (and our straight allies) will gain our full civil rights.

And I'm unemployed just now. Why? because prop 8 Pissed Me Off. I assume others have reacted as I have. I also assume that an extra two years will just give people a chance to get pissed off about other things, too.

I see the wisdom of your statistics all too well. But will the Pissed Off come out in greater numbers than they might for just any congressional election? I think they might. I think waiting until 2012 when there is also liable to be a great turnout to vote out the "socialist" Obama... might be even more of a mistake.

Also, in California... there are a fair number of old folks who aren't all that homophobic... might not be as bad as generic statistics might otherwise indicate.

And, just in case... I'll make a point of forcing my son to register to vote... and vote on this one... and see if he can't drag some of his newly vote-able friends to vote.

and worry about ME and WA? no way is that gonna happen. let the mormons cough up the money for another Calif campaign and all the bad press too

the ballot then. So I say put it on the ballot in 2010 and then work to let younger voters know what is at stake. I'm still hoping that another organization will decide to try to put on the 2010 ballot. And if we lose, then we go to 2012.

and we have got to have it come up in a year where President Obama is not on the ballot. The hallelulia chorus from the still-homophobic black church is not going to do us any favors in 2012, they might just sit out the 2010 election.

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/04/will-iowans-uphold-gay-marriage.html

Below are the dates when the model predicts that each of the 50 states would vote against a marriage ban. Asterisks indicate states which had previously passed amendments to ban gay marriage.

2009 (now)
Vermont
New Hampshire
Massachusetts
Maine
Rhode Island
Connecticut
Nevada*
Washington
Alaska*
New York
Oregon*

2010
California*
Hawaii
Montana*
New Jersey
Colorado*

2011
Wyoming
Delaware
Idaho*
Arizona*

2012
Wisconsin*
Pennsylvania
Maryland
Illinois

2013
Michigan*
Minnesota
Iowa
Ohio*
Utah*
Florida*

2014
New Mexico
North Dakota*
Nebraska*
South Dakota*

2015
Indiana
Virginia*
West Virginia
Kansas*

2016
Missouri*

2018
Texas*

2019
North Carolina
Louisiana*
Georgia*

2020
Kentucky*

2021
South Carolina*
Oklahoma*

2022
Tennessee*
Arkansas*

2023
Alabama*

2024
Mississippi*

And this is supposed to be one of the "progressive" states.

So the young group will grow more supportive (in accordance with the trend), and so will the older groups.

The real problem is that it's just too soon.

which changes the electorate substantially. That would overcome just about any change that would have happened in attitude in the last two years or for that matter 6 years.

That's a good point. But I think the educated vote disproportionately highly in off-year elections, and that's a demographic that trends toward us... I'm not sure how the numbers compare here though.

Certainly off-year versus presidential election is a mixed bag. In any case, waiting another three years seems wiser to me for other reasons too; we'll probably be able to win by then simply because of long-term trends toward acceptance.

But of course I don't like the idea of going to the ballot at all. Our rights are not something that should be put to "the will of the people", particularly in a state like California where anything and everything can be put on the ballot every two years. If we lose in 2010 do we go at it again in 2012? Conversely if we win in 2012 it will be of little value because the bigots will have our rights on the chopping block once again in 2012. Round and round it will go ad nauseum. Do we want to bleed our wallets and our souls dry like that?

If we are to win it is through the courts, since (thanks to Ahnold) the legislative route didn't work.

The courts made same sex marriage legal... and prop 8 actually changed the State Constitution so that the Supreme Court's decision would no longer be valid (as it was based upon... the Constitution).

Hence, the courts are not a solution here in Cali. The Constitution needs to be changed back... then the Court decision will be valid again...

;)

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Now that's some hardball politics...

"That is exactly what the electorate of 2010 will likely be"?

I'm not a statistician, but I can pretty comfortably say that, yes, the electorate of 2010 will be older than the electorate of 2008. By two years. You can drop the "likely".

Of all the lame excuses I've heard for waiting to get equality, this one is truly the lamest.

The momentum is now, the time is now. All that is needed is competent leadership.

Thanks , I'm not waiting

Yes, the individuals who are still alive and still in California will be two years older than they were before, but that doesn't necessarily increase the median age of the electorate. The median age of the 2008 electorate was almost certainly younger by a few years than the median age of the 2006 electorate. The simple fact is that young people, the ones who disproportionately support our rights are the least likely to vote in off year elections. While the elderly and the near elderly are the most likely to vote in those same elections. I think that 2012 would be a reasonable shot at winning though it would be a tough fight. I don't see any way that we could win in 2010 unless the electorate is vastly different than what it would most likely be.

On edit: if you look at the percents in each category the 2008 electorate was split almost 50/50 between those in the first two categories (18-29 and 30-44) and those in the second two categories (45-64 and over 65) making the median age likely very slightly above 44. Conversely the 2006 electorate was closer to a 33/66 split with only 36% of voters in the 18-44 category and 64% of the voters 45 and older. It is quite likely the median was in the low 50's in that electorate. That is a substantial shift against us that will likely swamp any change in attitude that occured between 2008 and 2010. We won only one category of voters, those 18-29. We statistically tied in the 30-44 category. Narrowly lost the 45-64 category and got burried in the over 65. But when you break the categories down further, the news is even worse. Without exception we did worse the older the voter got. We did better among 18-24 than among 25-29. We did better among 30-34 than among 35-39 etc. So a shift from median age 44 to median age 50 makes an even bigger difference than what I posted in my OP would suggest.

Leaving it off the ballot is exactly the kind of piss poor leadership that allowed Prop 8 to pass in the first place. NOT blaming the victim, but let's learn our fucking lesson from past mistakes and work NOW to repeal this while momentum is on our side.

and it hasn't worked. Maybe this issue would get young voters fired up when they haven't been before, though I admit I have my doubts. Turnout will likely be driven by the governor's race out there and I don't see Newsome or Brown driving the young voters to the polls. I do see Obama's reelection campaign getting young voters to the polls. The fact is we are likely to win the 30-44 category in either 2010 or 2012 but will likely lose both the 45-64 and over 65 categories in either year. The goal becomes then to have more voters between 18 and 44 than 45 or over. We are more likely to have that happen in 2012 than in 2010.

It wouldn't be too hard to do a "rock the vote" for equality in CA. I realize this is anecdotal, but I teach high school in California and it is very rare to find a student who is anti gay marriage. Orgs just need to get in touch with first time voters and remind them to vote for equality. They might think the "grown ups" have it all covered and not realize that they matter and need to vote too.

Somebody stayed home:

On November 4, 2008, Chambliss received 49.8% of the vote, while Democratic challenger Jim Martin received 46.8% and Libertarian Allen Buckley received 3.4% of the vote.<14>
Since no candidate exceeded 50% of the vote, a runoff election between Chambliss and Martin was held on December 2, 2008.
Chambliss defeated Martin 57.5% to 42.5% in the runoff election

This is California... might just as likely have a rather inverted relationship of turnout. In Georgia, the "liberals" failed to show up for the run off election. I would guess that they don't have a whole lot riding in Georgia elections... and I would suggest that, especially at the State level, here in California it is the Conservatives, in many areas anyway, who are likewise more likely to feel like there's no real incentive to show up if there's no Obama to vote against.

I might be wrong.. but I'm chipping in cash to cover costs of seeing whether or not the "right" is able to keep up the fight... It seems to me the only real question is will people be willing to part with cash again in 2012 if 2010 fails (in terms of whether or not to try in 2010). The Courage Campaign email that mitchtv has posted, in my opinion, answers the question. 2010, and do it again in 2012 if necessary. Apparently I'm not the only one willing to pony up on that supposition.

I believe that voting on this is really undignified and it's really crap to have to go hat in hand to bigots to ask for human rights. On the other hand, I hate to see any loss of momentum. I wish the system here in CA wasn't so fucked.

just because people get older doesn't mean they will suddenly start supporting Prop 8!

This is much more of a generational thing. The older generations, which tend to die off as time passes by, tend not to understand gay marriage and view it as a threat to society. Younger generations, who have grown up exposed to more positive gay role models in the media, tend to understand the civil rights issues better. Even if they become more conservative as they grow older, it doesn't mean that their opinion of gay people will change.

I'm afraid the OP doesn't make much sense to me.

so it isn't just population change that changes electorates from one election to the next. In 2006 fewer people voted than voted in 2008 because significant percentages of the electorate didn't show up. The people who didn't show up were overwhelmingly young making the remaining electorate older. Think of it like polling. If you poll only those over 65 on Prop 8 we lose big. An off year election has an effect of over polling 65 and older and under polling 30 and younger.

the people who were young in 2006 are 4 years older in 2010 and will become more likely to vote as they get older. The people who were over 65 in 2006 are becoming less and less relevent demographically.

--is the fact that social change just happens too fast. In general, we will become more liberal on issues that were controversial to us while we were young but still generally fall short with the next generation's issues.

ballot with their initiatives and we won't be able to effectively raise the funds to fight for it.

The truth with California is that there constitution is just to easy to amend. Now THAT needs to be revised.

the Courage Campaign had no problem raising funds in just a couple of days to do the work necessary to put this on the ballot in 2010, and their supporters overwhelmingly want it put on the ballot in 2010. I will stick with supporting the Courage Campaign.

groups that gave a lot of money to Prop 8 are now facing financial problems. By 2012 they may have time to regroup.

That is the best thing thst could happen.

this will bring out the young and liberal voters like nothing else.

http://www.ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/California_activists_gear_up_for_marijuana_initiative

:smoke:

Mitch you're a genius.

I should think with everything going on in Cali the turnout would be pretty good. I completely agree with you that waiting is NOT a good idea.

to the "you'd best wait" crowd to pile on.

You're framing the entire issue in the reality that existed BEFORE Prop 8 passed. You don't think that some people who were complacent before are now energized and ready to fight? You don't think that some people who were confused about the issue and really should have voted NO on 8 instead of yes have since understood they were mislead? You don't think that people who voted yes on 8 have seen the progress that has been made in other parts of the country and are ashamed that they are supporting bigotry and ignorance?

We live in a post-8 world. It is ludicrous to ignore the impact that Prop 8 made on California and the country and try and treat this as if it were the first time Prop 8 is coming to the ballot.

As I've said, the momentum is with us, and the time is now. All we need is competent organization, and we can rescue California from ignorance.

but every single solitary model of turnout that has ever been promlogated shows that young people are less likely to turnout in off year elections. This isn't a good thing given who favors and who opposes gay marriage. If the turnout in 2008 had been the same as that in 2006 we would have lost by an additional 3% or nearly double the margin. I have my doubts we made 4% progress, I am virtually certain we haven't made 7% progress. We may well have lost Arizona due to starving it for funds defending marriage in California (something we needed to do). I can easily see both Maine and Washington state suffering the same fate if we aren't careful.

So they can run the ads again talking about how Mr. Obama is against gay marriage?

I think that the turnout in the election hurt us most of all. I think if you run it in 2010 you have a better chance.

The problem that I see is that it really solves nothing. Both sides will continue to file suit and countersuit against it ad nauseum.

I wish you guys well with it, in either 2010, or 2012. From the backwards state of Texas, I will gladly send my meager financial support for you all again, both times or more if needed.

What really.. really.. REALLY.. disgusts me though... Here we are with a great majority of Democrats in the House of Representatives
A strong majority in the Senate,
AND the Presidency.

The need to even DISCUSS proposition 8 should very damn well not even need to be an issue to be discussed come 2012!!!! or 2010 for that damn matter!

I know many of you will think me naive.. heck I even feel i may be.. but I am STILL holding out hope that the Party I've supported will finally do SOMETHING for us (more than good speeches, and promises) prior to 2010. I will not donate another dime, or minute of my time to the party until I see SOME REAL headway being made on finally making us EQUAL citizens!

california equality who has been on the ground on this for a LONG time -- and who may take the place of hrc -- who get out in front all the time -- are right there on this issue.

but what ever -- you could wait on obama.

they are saying hold off until 2012. I am not an expert on California but one doesn't have to be to analyse this data. The simple fact is an off year electorate will be much worse from our point of view. The only way I can see that not being the case is if the prop legalizing marijuana draws young voters to the polls.

we're still out there collecting signatures on weekends.

The federal challenge going forward by two straight men is the correct thinking. You don't subject people's civil rights to a plebiscite.

When our community gets breathless about having another ballot measure, I simply shake my head in disbelief.

We will win this in the federal courts.

If for no other reason than the fact that the Obama/OFA machine wasn't around in 2006. You remember that list of something like a million, or three million, cell phone numbers they could text? What do you want to bet they're going to be getting those people out to vote next year?