Based on conversations I’ve had with those close to the leadership of the gay organizations who spearheaded the campaign last fall against Proposition 8 and on what I have read on the web about the “Meet in the Middle” rallies this past weekend, I’d say the prospects look pretty poor for overturning Proposition 8 next fall at the ballot box.
To be sure, a lot could change between now and then. We haven’t yet seen the wording for the ballot initiative. The campaign promoting the initiative could include Republicans–or at least those who know how to communicate with Republicans (but based on past experiences, I wouldn’t bet on it).
The problem is threefold:
- GOP Turnout Will be up in 2010. Based on tradition patterns for off-year election, Republican turnout should be up in 2010. Given GOP outrage over the rapid growth in federal spending and the return of big government, conservatives seem particularly emboldened to head to the polls next fall.
- Left-wing Nature of Campaign to Overturn. The rhetoric at the Decision Day Rally I attended sounded more like that for a left-wing gathering than for a movement ot win the hearts and minds of centrist and conservative voters. The leaders of the movement (as it is now constituted) have a background in “progressive” movements, thus are not conditioned to appeal to those they most need to reach.
- Default Reaction is Voting “No” on Initiatives. When voters don’t know enough about a particular initiative, they tend to vote “No.” This could mean a huge chunk of electorate just votes against some measures as if by rote. Given how much media attention gay marriage attracts, that “chunk” will be much smaller on this issue, maybe 2-3 percentage points, but that could be enough. Bear in mind that in 2010, unlike 2008, a “Yes” vote would be a vote for gay marriage.
Still, it’s early, way early. And the leadership of the movement to overturn 8 does have time to address the second issue, the one they can most readily fix. They should tear a page from Barack Obama’s 2008 general election campaign. Almost as soon as he wrapped up the Democratic nomination, he began to reverse some of his positions and move to the center as he addressed the concerns of voters in the middle, reassuring them that he would pursue a more centrist path.
Right now, the prospects don’t look good for overturning 8 in ’10. But, a lot could change in 17 months.
So, Dan, this looks like a great opportunity to start working with / providing consultation-advice, and build some bridges.
Work on the side, provide input in any way that makes you feel comfortable, or will you close the door on this opportunity to be part of the change?
You would be a wonderful asset!
maybe even Leah could help.
And what about all those Obama voters who voted *for* Prop 8, in 2008? I don’t believe that Republican voters (please note that I didn’t say ‘conservative’) really differ all that significantly from Obama voters (note I didn’t say ‘liberal’, nor ‘Democratic’) on gay marriage.
That, I think, will hurt. Although it seems like they’re off to a good start, with the recent Fresno rally and statements recognizing that they need to persuade more Californians.
That, I think, will also hurt. The 5-point margin last time was lower than I expected. On reflection, I think at least a few percentage points of voters were either confused about how to vote (since a ‘no’ vote meant ‘yes’ on gay marriage) or were voting ‘no’ by default. But in the next battle, ‘yes’ will mean ‘yes’ on gay marriage and ‘no’ will mean ‘no’. Based on that alone, I think the gay marriage supporters will lose a few votes, enough to matter or to increase the number of Californians that they must actually persuade, to achieve victory.
(In other words, in 2008, I think a few Californians voted ‘no’ on Prop 8 either because they automatically vote ‘no’ on propositions, or because they mistakenly thought their ‘no’ would mean ‘no’ to gay marriage. In 2010, their ‘no’ votes will really mean ‘no’ to gay marriage, so the pro-gay-marriage side will have a slightly higher hill to climb. Of course it’s not impossible.)
rusty, have you been reading my notes? 🙂
I plan on doing just that, first in a series of posts, hopefully starting as soon as tomorrow on this very issue.
to give you a taste of my general theme–I’m going to be suggesting they have a conservative legal scholar draft the language of the proposed initiative.
While I wish we had full marriage rights, at least in California you have civil unions. Arizona voted against a referendum to outlaw civil unions among both heteros and homosexuals, much to the dismay of the far right. People voted against it because they supported domestic partnerships. Interestingly, retirees overwhelmingly voted against the domestic partnership ban. So the far right narrowed the wording in a new proposal to define marriage as between one man and one woman. Unfortunately that one passed.
Common cause with others who have a beneficial interest in gay marriage may perhaps be found. For example, businesses, chambers of commerce, state and county bars, libertarians, individual legislators, etc., etc. And yes, retirees.
We’re creating a two-tier class system of gays with gays who want to overturn Prop 8 on top and those of us gays who want to keep Prop 8 on the bottom. Yes, I went there. Why would I be a better gay person for wanting to overturn Prop 8? How does it honor gay history to co-opt and water down a tradition which has nothing to do with being gay? Why are gays so afraid of creating something new?
I think there’s a 4) lurking out there Dan; ‘Anything you say, can and will be used against you’
We’ve seen comments calling Prop 8 not a defeat since the court affirmed the domestic partners need and essentially gave marriage in everything but name.
It does give a line of defense to the pro-8 crowd “Why is the name so important, unless they want to attack/alter the institution.”
Not going to happen because I actually reached out to someone very prominent on the repeal prop 8 and I got slapped down.
My son just published this article in the Stanford Review, http://stanfordreview.org/article/gay-marriage-about-marriage-not-rights/
I’m very proud of him and I wish more people would have as mature an attitude as this 20 year old has.
So I forwarded the article to the prominent gay marriage advocate and I mentioned in my letter that if it weren’t for my son, I’d be against gay marriage. But life circumstances do change peoples minds. I also mentioned that a Federal civil union bill would be more helpful for gays than the State by state fight over the word marriage.
She replied to me:
Here is my reply back to her,
Rusty, if I, a person who used to be called an ally (I hate that term), isn’t good enough to help with the cause, then they will simply be preaching to the choir again, and wondering why they keep on losing.
Leah, good on you for speaking up!
From the perspective of the Northeastern US, one factor against overturning Prop-8 is that typically the G/L organizations will fail to de-couple overturning Prop-8 from their typical slavish-support of Left-Liberal Democrat politics. Rather than educating all of California that Prop-8 affects every community and extended family, they’ll fall into their usual polarizing left-wing cant making it easy for the supporters of Prop-8 to make any overturning as issue of “…us vs. those Liberals in Southern Ca. and San Francisco”. Once it devolves to a battle between Main Street and those “San Francisco-types”…it’s a lost cause.
It can’t just be a political struggle “against” the Mormons and the conservative Black churches…it has to be “for” something positive that enters into every community in California.
For Prop 8 to be overturned, I think it is going to require what could be called the “Cheney” vote. By the Cheney vote, I mean solidly conservative people who are inclined to support (or at least not actively oppose) same sex marriage because they don’t feel threatened by it on account of gay friends/family members and/or because opposing same sex marriage goes against their principles regarding the role of government. These voters may have personal reasons, usually of a religious nature, to oppose same sex marriage and homosexual acts in general, and they may have no intention of changing their personal beliefs on these matters, but as long as they don’t feel government recognition of same sex will someday force them to change their beliefs (for instance, government forcing their church to perform same sex marriages with the threat of changing tax-exempt status), they may be happy to vote for the change. However, so long as the recognizable faces of the anti-Prop 8 movement are folks like Sean Penn and Perez Hilton, a lot of the Cheney vote will vote against same sex marriage, either because they do feel it is a threat to their beliefs or because they believe that Sean Penn and Perez Hilton are big enough jerks that one should reflexively vote against whatever they are for.
I totally agree with Dan about the conservative/GOP vote being huge in 2010. The off-year election will be a chance for voters to vote against Pres. Obama’s policies without voting against Obama the person. (I’m even assuming Obama will still be personally popular in November of 2010, given that survey responders have so far continued to view him much more favorably than they view his policies, e.g., auto bailout, Gitmo closing.) A lot of people showed up last November just to vote for Obama, and he won’t be on the ticket in 2010. To build off of what ILoveCapitalism said, Republicans may not be that much more pro-Prop 8 than Democrats, and it could very well be that Prop 8 could be overturned even during a GOP landslide. (After all, the converse occurred last November.) But no one hoping that Prop 8 gets overturned should take anti-Prop 8 GOP votes for granted.
Dan, one thing I would be interested in your analysis on sometime is…what happens if they try overturning it in 2010 and it fails? Does that make it tougher in 2012 and subsequent elections? Or, maybe, does trying and failing in 2010 make it easier to pass in 2012 than it would be if the 2010 election were skipped as far as this issue goes? Is it better to keep trying and failing, believing that one election cycle one will get lucky and win the vote? Or would it be better to hold one’s fire and wait for an election cycle believed to be most favorable?
(Of course, I’m thinking here of California but the same thing would apply in lots of other states.)
Leah,
Congrats on your nephew’s publishing. Still trying to break out of PDF myself.
And I think this is going to be an example where the perfect is the enemy of the good.
Leah, sorry that you ended up with a very disappointing and frustrating interaction. But Kudos to Yishai. and to you.
Its important to remember that back in 2000 Prop 22 — which also banned gay marriage in California, but did it by statute rather than state constitutional amendment — passed with 62% of the vote, while Prop 8 passed with just under 53% of the vote. I agree with you that there were some short turn factors which benefitted the Dems in 2008 that won’t be there in 2010, and I also agree that a lot of the gay marriage supporters are their own worst enemy on this issue (calling supporters “H8ers” isn’t clever and it only motivates those on the other side to dig in their heels, not change their minds) and a backlash could be brewing on this issue.
But the long term trendline is in favor of support for gay marriage. No, probably not in 2010, but I could see it by 2014 or 2016. Also, whoever said gay marriage supporters should target the “Cheney voters” is right on. That is, if gay marriage supporters really want to win, rather than just feel superior to all the “H8ers” out there.
oh, how much fun that would be to read your notes Dan. Spending some time with you, having some hearty discussions, I guess that would be near the top of my Bucket List. . .