Is California a state of prohibitionists?

Prop 8 passed and Prop 19 failed

This is in a state that overwhelmingly elects dems state wide. What's the story in California?

look at this map from CNN...

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2010/results/state/#CA

Obama, Brown, Boxer, etc. win there with the same exact set of voters.

you keep telling yourself that.

I should also remind you that Boxer and Brown came out AGAINST IT.

It is very much that. This state is actually split between the coast and the hinterlands aka the urban vs rural. Used to be north south by the way.

It doesn't matter that the coast is different from the hinterlands. It's the same voters voting for governor that are voting for prop 19.

are pretty socially conservative... but in things like pot... you have quite a bit of dominance from the hinterlands, the churches, etcetera.

Wait for the post mortem, but I can tell you that the people behind the no on 19 were the SAME folks behind Pro - 8.

I live in this state and at times they drive me nuts.

They complain about things like less city services (where I live) but they will not tax themselves up by half a cent...

They complain about cops and the war on drugs, but they will vote against things like 19 and for 8 because the Padre told them.

It is NOT such a liberal state. It is very conservative, with some liberal lights.

:shrug:

Left leaners are the majority there, but the two propositions went to the right. Why is that?

Meanwhile, Oregon will be sending just as many Dems to the House as it has for years, although we are dumb enough to elect and idiot back-up NBA center to the Governorship.

In other words, it appears that marijuana is going down everywhere this year.

How's it doing?

But if it can't pass in CA, can it pass in NY? I'm not so sure.

so I'm not sure we deserve the "prohibitionist" label.

Props 8 and 19 went up for a popular vote. It's not some BS legislature vote. All the voters could vote and both failed. I think it says something about the voters of California.

put either issue up to a vote? Just curious.

At least you didn't elect nutcase Paladino and his goddamn bat.

in California.

because of the churches and millions in outside funding. Prop. 19 has me stumped, however. Maybe if Boxer, Feinstein, Brown, OBAMA AND HOLDER would have come out for it, it would have had a chance.

Large chunks of the state are very conservative.

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2010/results/state/#CA

Review the Senate results by county, for example.

The state as a whole is Democratic. It's the same set of voters in the gubernatorial, and senatorial elections.

And no state "as a whole" is Republican.

And the majority is prohibitionist.

continue to be ignored by the Democratic Party. CA-19 put up a sacrifice candidate who never even campaigned, CA-20 had a Blue Dog who lost and CA-21 went unopposed by the Democrats. It's the same throughout the Valley, so, I ask you, is it any wonder that the central part of the state, always the butt of asinine "jokes" about "hayseeds" from the geographical elitists consistently send Republicans to Congress? It's a self-fulfilling prophecy so before you start blaming the conservative parts of the state, perhaps you can ask the CDP WHERE THE HELL IT WAS during the entire election cycle because they sure as hell had NO representatives in the Valley.

minority voters for H8 based on one poll that turned out to be wrong AND it was later determined that the H8 vote in L.A. County was corrupted.

Red areas in Southern California. At least Northern California remains true blue.

Looks to me like Northern California is VERY red outside the Bay Area.

the split USED to be north south... these days it is East- West.

Prop 19 is losing by 320K votes. Brown is winning by 93K.

many liberal sources (LA times) told people to back Brown but to vote no on prop 19. My own liberal district voter guide left the prop off the list. So it's not so simple to assume a liberal Brown voter was going to vote for this. Had the election climate been better or Prop 19 had some solid organizational people behind it, more people running for office might have backed it. There simply wasn't anyone out there saying how dare Boxer or Brown or even the Rethugs not back this measure. Since no one did, and it pretty much wasn't even brought up as an important issue by any of the candidates, it frankly got ignored by the voters. It clearly was discounted by the major endorsers.

generally props fail in this state when no one backs the prop. In this case there simply wasn't any campaign for it and in a bad political year it simply wasn't on the radar for anyone to back. It was the wrong election for this and the wrong political campaign for this. I think this state is heading for legalizing pot (heck it's basically legal now as a medical pot thing). Most liberal sources left it off their recommendation list or said vote no. So that's pretty much your answer. When it comes back it needs more organization and an economy not in the crapper so people can feel safe backing it.

It's urban vs. rural in that all the people who organize progressive propositions live in the Bay Area and LA and they give up on the rest of the state.

There are about 40 counties in California that are off the map when it comes to democratic candidates or progressive legislation.

The democratic party here SUCKS, in other words.

The fact that with both 8 and 19, you can't have the gays and the potheads run the campaign, because they're too close to the issue. You need someone detached from the issue to run the campaign.

Prop 8 was a clusterfuck, and I got the sense that the people in charge were afraid to leave San Francisco.

19 was fought on the battleground of "How do you tell if someone's driving around high?" and "Fuck Mexicans" while it SHOULD have been fought on the battleground of spending money to keep potheads locked up in prison.

How do you think one would do in your state?

Unfortunately I think there are still too many people, even on the two more left leaning coasts, who don't even know what they are afraid of, when it comes to weed.

And after seeing this, I'm pretty sure it would fail here too.

Minorities (Latinos, Blacks, Asians, Pacific-Islanders) are the majority of the state's population or will be very soon.

That's good for the Democratic Party since minorities are usually Democratic in registration. That is reflected in the state legislative positions, U.S. Reps, and Senators, which are often Democratic.

However, Latinos are quickly becoming the largest voting bloc in the state. Latinos are overwhelmingly Catholic. Catholic conservative. Most have ties to Mexico or other parts of Central America, where about 90% of those countries' populations are Catholic. These are practicing Catholics that go to church every Sunday and also attend Masses.

So, while that means California will have success supporting labor unions, unemployment, welfare, public education, the environment, alternative energy, immigration reform, and other social issues that help all the people, as per the Democratic platform, it also means state propositions that tend to go against conservative Catholicism (and for the most part Protestant Christianity), will struggle.

Prop H8 and Prop 19 went against that religious aspect, and failed. "The official Church position" overrode any Democratic social fairness and justice aspect of these propositions.

Courting and counting on minority voters in California can be a double-edged sword. One edge will help get Democratic people elected and most Democratic policies passed. However, the other edge will cause issues and propositions to fail if they go against minority voters' religious beliefs.

That is reflected in the 2008 election. Eighty percent of Latinos that voted in California voted for President Obama, but only half that, 40% voted NO on Prop H8.

EDIT: Furthermore, most of the immigrant Asians in California come from oppressive authoritarian governments, so they tend to actually join the Republican party which is the champion of smaller, less, or no government.