I’m pretty much come to the conclusion that at this point in the campaign on Proposition 8 in the Golden State, any last minute ad blitz won’t make much of a difference.
What will be decisive (as in the presidential contest) will be how good a job the campaigns do in getting their people to the polls and how the undecideds break. Given their more “organic” organizations, i.e., churches and other religious institutions, the turnout factor is going to help the “Yes” side. These people are more enthusiastic and can more easily sway people they know.
Of those “officially” (i.e, through their public statements to pollsters) undecided, my sense is that most already intend to vote for the initiative. They just don’t want to admit that publicly.
Of those “legitimately” undecided voters, i.e,. those who really haven’t made up their mind, I think a good chunk of them will break against the initiative — or choose to not to vote at all on the proposition. The default reaction of many voters is to vote “No” on an initiative.
Many conservatives, even while uncomfortable with the state Supreme Court decision mandating gay marriage, will, like blogger Patterico, end up voting “No.”
While I believe the undecided Republicans (at least the urban and suburban ones) will break against the initiative, other more reliably Democratic demographic groups will vote in favor.  According to “Patrick J. Egan, an assistant professor of politics at New York University who has studied black voting patterns on same-sex marriage, . . . black voters consistently polled much lower than white voters on approval for same-sex marriage, about 16 percentage points.” An increased black turnout due to enthusiasm for Barack Obama could thus boost support for Prop 8.
Similarly, Hispanic voters, largely Catholic, also tend to oppose gay marriage.
So, what does all this mean in the end? There is a strong likelihood the initiative will pass, but that could change if undecided and wavering Californians actually vote on the initiative rather than leave the issue blank.
It helps that our side needs a “NO” vote. As a general rule, a “NO” vote is worth 5% in any referendum election. My opinion is (from here in Maine) that it’s a state issue. I’m not investing myself too emotionally on this. Besides, even if it passes, couples in California will still have civil unions. Which in California, means they have everything about marriage but the name.
other more reliably Democratic demographic groups will vote in favor. . . black voters consistently polled much lower than white voters on approval for same-sex marriage, about 16 percentage points….Similarly, Hispanic voters, largely Catholic, also tend to oppose gay marriage.
It’s impolitic for me to make any observations here – I’ll leave that as an exercise for the reader.
If I lived in California I would vote No on the issue. Mostly because I am not keen on the idea of amending the constitution to keep the issue out of the hands of the legislature. I am very reluctant to promote anything that amends a state or the federal constitution.
I think this is an issue that really should be decided in the legislature-and I am not a huge fan of referendums anyway, because I think most stuff except for maybe bond issues should be debated in the legislative body. I think the courts tend to mess things up, and I suspect the court decision in California and the one out of Connecticut probably hurt the “no” position.
Interesting just me. I voted FOR the Ohio DOMA because I felt keeping it ‘out of the hands of the legislature’ the price to pay to keep it out of the hands of the courts.
Then again, the Ohio Constitution is fairly easy to ammend.