Reading yesterday that some prominent gay donors to the Democrats were pulling out of a party fundraising dinner later this month because the President has been backtracking on promises he made to the gay community helps illuminate San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom’s political strategy. It becomes increasingly clear that his decision to direct city authorities to issue marriage licenses to gay couples in 2004 was a ploy to curry favor with the gay community in anticipation of a future gubernatorial bid.
And now with his rainbow “Newsom 2010,” signs, we see how it’s tapping into our community’s enthusiasm for his actions as he begins that campaign.
With these prominent gay figures pulling out of the national Democratic fundraiser, we are reminded just how generous gay people have been to the Democratic Party and Democratic candidates. While we may not be as demographically strong as some activists might claim, we are a relatively affluent community, thus a ready source of campaign cash for political candidates.
So, Newsom sought to become a folk hero among gays in order to raise money from affluent homosexuals and to seek volunteers among impassioned activists for his 2010 campaign. And Newsom supporters were out in force at the Gay Pride festival this past weekend in Los Angeles. His rainbow signs and stickers were ubiquitous. Those very signs indicated his recognition of the role gay people play in California Democratic politics.
He marched with his supporters in Sunday’s parade:
Newsom’s pandering to the gay community is a smart political strategy. It could put him in a good position to win a potentially crowded Democratic primary. Enthusiastic gay people are more likely to vote than other groups.
It’s not clear, however, how much this will help him in the general election.Indeed, should a proposition appear on the fall 2010 ballot to repeal Prop 8, they would energize evangelical voters–and Republicans would already be energized to vote against big-spending Democrats. That could diminish Newsom’s chances.
Right now, the San Francisco Mayor is focused on winning his party’s gubernatorial nomination. And he seems to be doing all the right things to tap into the financial resources of an affluent community and the energy of that community’s overly politicized activists.
Newsom’s first win as SF mayor was narrow; he barely won over a gay Green candidate, and had some hard feelings to face in the gay community. His campaign to issue marriage licenses turned that around, making him a San Francisco gay hero. Did he calculate the whole thing? Perhaps we’ll never know, though I personally would have my money on ‘yes’.
And he will San Francisco overwhelmingly. The rest of the state? Not so much.
I guarantee with the number of Hispanic and black voters in CA – who voted in large part against SSM, like they did in Texas and other states where DOMA came up – Twosome Newsome’s taking a big risk in alienating this segment of lockbox voters.
All it takes is ONE pastor or preacher at the pulpit to decry his actions, and it’s over.
Regards,
Peter H.
@ILove: Matt Gonzalez isn’t gay.
I honestly don’t know if Gavin can win (the primary). San Francisco’s “progressive” wing still hates Newsom; beyond his gay support, Gavin is perceived of as to the “right” of Jerry Brown. He’s more supportive of business concerns and will desperately need the support of Silicon Valley democrats, who he is simultaneously pissing off over the fight over the 49ers. I’m not sure who will win the Latino vote in the primary, though, and that will likely decide it.
So, the face that he went to rehab for substance abuse and committed adultery with the wife of an aide is a resume-enhancer among Democrats?
Sorry DaveO, I should have said “gay-backed”.
#5: “So, the face that he went to rehab for substance abuse and committed adultery with the wife of an aide is a resume-enhancer among Democrats?”
Not so much a “resume-enhancer,” V the K. More like a “prerequisite.”
@ILove – THe SF gay community was pretty split in 2003’s Newsom v. Gonzalez election. The “progressive” gays backed Gonzalez and the rest backed Newsom, much like the rest of the electorate. I don’t think either really dominated the gay vote in 2003.
from the article: It becomes increasingly clear that his decision to direct city authorities to issue marriage licenses to gay couples in 2004 was a ploy to curry favor with the gay community in anticipation of a future gubernatorial bid.
Increasing clear? It was obvious from the very moment he proposed it.
DaveO, just as I said: Newsom “barely won over a gay[-backed] Green candidate, and had some hard feelings to face in the gay community”. I remember the election, DaveO, though I did not have the privilege of voting in it. Who are the loudest people in the SF gay community, with the longest memories and hardest memories, the ones Newsom needed to make himself a hero to? The progressives.
(sorry, meant to type “with… the hardest feelings”)
As if leftist politics hadn’t already done enough damage to California. An endorsement by the SF gay crowd (any Folsom street sponsors in this lot) certainly doesn’t rate a ‘+’ on my checklist.
Geez – can neither party come up with a decent candidate?
Newsom want’s to bring SF to the rest of the state and the GOP will run an open-borders corporate type.
I met an interesting and tough Republican lady activist this past weekend who raved about Poizner. Is he an open-borders type, unfortunately?
Gadzooks, the thought of Newsom as our Governor is horrifying! Although our state is in such a mess anyway, how much worse could it get? (I just jinxed us, didn’t I?)
Meg Whitman (former CEO of eBay) is running, but I think she voted Yes on 8, so I doubt she’ll be supported by many in the gay community. I’ve heard Tom Campbell is a decent candidate, but am not sure where he stands on the gay marriage issue.
Too bad Newsom’s ex-wife Kimberly Guilfoyle at FOXNews doesn’t move back to Cali and run against him! That would be an excellent smackdown that I’d pay to see!
@Annies – Tom Campbell supports gay marriage.
@ILove – I continue to state that it’s incorrect to say that Gonzalez was “gay-backed”. Newsom was supported by the Alice B. Toklas LGBT Democratic Club, Mark Leno, Susan Leal and Bevan Dufty. Gonzalez was supported by the Harvey Milk club and Tom Ammiano. I looked at 2003 election returns and, even in the heart of the Castro, Gonzalez barely came out ahead.
In other words: Gonzalez did come out ahead among SF gays, if only slightly.
We could quibble over the margin, DaveO, but my point is this: Newsom isn’t stupid… He looked at the returns, too.
Seems to me he’s ready made for his opponent.
“Gavin Newsome flaunted the law as the Mayor of SF. What will he do as Governour?”
Newsom gives the term “trash for cash” a whole new meaning.
Regards,
Peter H.