“A new poll is showing that Californians would be almost evenly divided if the state voted again on same-sex marriage. A Field Poll of 761 registered voters found that 48% of those surveyed would support a new ballot initiative repealing Proposition 8, while 47% would favor keeping the ban in place.
The remaining five percent were undecided.”[Washington Blade]
rogue dandelion
Such good news, especially since the polling was so accurate and useful during the prop 8 campaign…
Raphael
What would be the threshold for a repeal? 50% 67%?
We still aren’t there yet.
Dealmaker
We’re not going to be ready to do this in 2010. That raises the question when we should put this on the ballot.
I bet Obama really doesn’t want a ballot initiative to repeal Prop 8 in 2012. He’ll have to choose between reversing his position on gay marriage or really angering the gay community by not supporting Prop 8 repeal.
Let’s make a deal with him: if you give us ENDA by the end of 2009, DADT repeal by Election Day 2010, and DOMA repeal by the end of 2011, we’ll hold off putting a marriage initiative on the California ballot until 2014.
Robert, NYC
With only 48% in favor of a repeal, I don’t see how that figure is going to increase significantly to reverse Prop.H8. Now, if it were at least 55%, then I could see it happening perhaps. You can bet the haters would come back in even bigger numbers to make sure the ban stays intact. More catholics have moved to California than in any other state as well as latino migration, those are two groups that would definitely not get behind any repeal and those are the very people the proponents of this hate legislation would target.
Chitown Kev
@Dealmaker:
Uh, don’t forget the Matthew Sheperd Act, but yes, a deal like this would work.
Jaroslaw
I’m not exactly sure of the point of this story – other than perhaps to point out the obvious: People aren’t thinking this through. Obviously the idea hasn’t percolated down into mainstream consciousness – “if these rights can be voted away, can MY rights be voted away?”
The issue of a repeal is irrelevant. SCOTUS and other courts in the land have already said in many diverse decisions that the right to marriage is very fundamental. (therefore not up for a vote). What remains now is to see if this right will be extended to an already suspect class – Gays.
Chitown Kev
@Jaroslaw:
Suspect in California, yes. I am not sure whether we have that exact designation in Illinois (though we do have a fully inclusive ENDA), I’d have to check the wording of the law. And gays are not a suspect class at the federal level, that’s why Ken Starr was practically baiting us to take Prop 8 to SCOTUS
Bill Perdue
@rogue dandelion: The field poll is usually regarded as being pretty accurate. I worked against anti-GLBT initiatives in California for years beginning with the Briggs Initiative in 1978. We always disregarded other polls and relied on the Field Poll. A big part of what it represents is the unease that people feel as another angry mass movement breeds discontent. And it represents the beginning of awareness that what happened to us will to others if it isn’t reversed.
@Dealmaker: Why make deals with an unreliable, bigoted political hustler? His party is already fracturing and full of anti-GLBT bigots and Pelosi and Reid can’t guarantee much of anything. Look at New York. We should work independently of the Democrats and Republicans with a mass action perspective and force them to recognize our status as first class citizens.
In a political period encompassed by a failed economy (the failing part is done) and the social pressures generated by a failing and unwinnable racist war in South Asia US society is becoming increasingly polarized and is fracturing. As the shock of a failed economy (4 million out of work in a few months) sets in massive militant movements among labor, minorities and others will increase and then become the norm.
Now is an especially opportune time to organize our own mass action agenda and create alliances. The Democrats gutted ENDA, championed, passed and won’t repeal DOMA and DADT and ditched the hate crimes bill. The Republicans are just as bad (if a lot more honest about their bigotry). Screw ‘em and the horses they rode in on.
We’ve fought other people battles for years, now it’s time to fight ours. No one else will.
Raphael
@Dealmaker:
I don’t bargain away my rights. Let’s make a deal: Start treating everyone fairly, and we will stop demanding to be treated fairly.
Jaroslaw
Chitown Kevin, you are right of course, about suspect class but we are speaking of California, so I didn’t think I had to make the distinction. 🙂
Chitown Kev
@Jaroslaw:
Well, you did mention SCOTUS though. As Ken Starr said, that will come up and there is no recognition of gays and lesbians as a suspect class right now.
And for all of you that are aghast at the idea of making political deals, do you think that black civil rights or civil rights for women would have been accomplished if political deals were NOT made. You may want to go back and read a little about the October surprise of 1960, for example. I love the purism of it all, but in reality, political deals will be made, period.
Though I do agree with you, Bill, that we do need to examine exactly what an appropriate relationship to the political parties our community should have.
kevin (not that one)
I say let’s put it on the 2010 ballot in several states.
We will eventually bankrupt the Mormon Church and Focus on the Family, and even if we lose we would gain by financially crippling them.
Dealmaker
@Chitown Kev: Sure, include the Matthew Shepard Act.
@Bill Perdue: How, exactly, do you propose to get legislation through Congress without support from members of at least one of the major parties?
Jaroslaw
Chitown Kev- are you whacking off while reading here? I said SCOTUS declared MARRIAGE a fundamental right! I’m just kidding, so don’t get mad! 🙂
Bill Perdue
@Chitown Kev: The point is not that deals are bad but that it’s not a deal if we’re dependent, as opposed to independent of the bigots. If we’re in their parties, vote for them and raise money for them we don’t have a chance.
In that context it’s not dealmaking, it’s ‘negotiating’ while we’re bound, gagged and tucked up neatly in rows in front of the Obamabus. They might be nice and take of the snow chains. Or not. In any case that’s not a deal.
We need to build a massive leftwing independent movement with an elected leadership loyal to our agenda not to bigots like Obama. You give too much credit to the bigots who run the Democrat and Republican parties. The proposed ‘deal’ is wildly unrealistic from every point of view.
Chitown Kev
@Bill Perdue:
No, I am not giving them too much credit AT ALL. That’s a big part of the reason that Proposition 8 happened. We agree on this, actually. We deal with the parties on our terms and on our terms alone (double-dipping will be necessary, of course, as it was necessary with King and the civil rights movement) but it must be kept to a bottom line and non-negotiable terms.
Bill Perdue
@Chitown Kev: OK we agree on that much.
But Obama and the Democrats won’t, can’t, to be precise, deal in good faith because they’re bigots. We can fight with them and overwhelm them but that’s not deal making. That’s fighting and winning. I’m all for that.
In the unlikely event this thing pans out and you’re the one chosen to say “Fuck all you married people and wanna get married people – we’re making a deal here so just hold your horses” do me a favor and ‘borrow’ some knightly armor from a museum first. Practice running 20 miles a day in it for a few weeks. Then give your speech. 🙂
Bill Perdue
@Dealmaker: That’s really easy to answer. We do it by forcing them to grant us equality with repeated ‘won’t take no for an answer’ mass actions, boycotts and etc. Over and over, larger and larger until they get the point.
That’s how it’s usually been done in American history. It was the model for trade unions fights in the 1930’s and ’40’s, for winning the 19th Amendment and for terminating the Vietnam War. Etc.
Of course there were exceptions, two of them in fact. One began early on the morning of April 19, 1775 at Lexington Commons in Massachusetts. And the other was when we crushed the slavocracy in 1865. It’s too early to say what will emerge as the model of struggle this time around because things are likely to get as bad as they can with a rapidly degrading environment, a failed economy and a war they can’t win. “Fasten your seatbelts…”
Bill Perdue
@Raphael: A solid 55% or more to account for the GLBT equivalent of the Bradley Effect.
Chitown Kev
@Bill Perdue:
Wow, I never thought about that, but you have to target where that Bradley Effect is coming from. It didn’t come from Alameda County (for example) a lot of that came from Los Angeles County.
The Gay Numbers
How do these numbers factor in the reality that many gays didn’t show up to vote?
The Gay Numbers
@Bill Perdue: @<a = You can’t get half the a gays to show up to vote. You can’t get a portion of them to stop acting like being anti-marriage is a “blow” to the system. Many of them are hopelessly lost in the language and idealogy of hedonism such that they think anyone who wants this is an upper middle class gay white male. The concept of equality of the law is totally lost of this orthodoxy out of the 70s. They got reason to believe it- due to the media. But if they were even remotely interested in the subject, they could look it up online just like I did to find out that this is not true.
Bill Perdue
@Chitown Kev: I expect it’s more a question of ideology, cult membership and perhaps age than geography. My figure of 55% may be low because 30% of self described liberals, 35% of Democrats, 52% of independents, 30% of Obama voters and 43% college graduates voted yes. That’s a bit higher than I thought it would be.
All those numbers would have been lower if No on 8 had scared the bejebuz out of fence sitters with an escalating, demanding, noisy, in your face series of demonstrations at mormon temples, catholic cathedrals and at Obama bedmate Warrens southern baptist klaven before the election And if Obama hadn’t given it away with ‘gawd’s in the mix’.
http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/2008/12/ppic_prop_8_pol.html
http://www.letcaliforniaring.org/site/c.ltJTJ6MQIuE/b.4863891/k.35FC/Driving_Factors_of_Prop_8_Vote.htm
Bill Perdue
@The Gay Numbers: You can’t get half the a gays to show up to vote. That seems like an unlikely number. Can you document it? It’d be interesting and if it were true it’d point to extreme political alienation among GLBT folks. I know you Obama folks are tossing it around as an excuse for losing in California but I can’t find any thing like on the web.
At any rate, for fanatical Obamaites it must be embarrassing to find that most of us are now concluding that it was your candidate Obama’s “gawd’s in the mix” and the inept cowardice of Democrat controlled groups like No on 8 which betrayed our chances to achieve marriage equality in California, Arizona and Florida.
The rest of what you had to say was uncommonly incoherent. I don’t see how any of it relates to our struggle at all. Hedonism?
The Gay Numbers
@Bill Perdue: I can’t handle your irrationality. Rather than addressing the point I made about gay apathy, you turned it into what you think I think of Obama. You have no fucking clue what I think of any politician because when I told you – you still turned it into some sort of high expectations that I must have of a politicians rather than understanding my point. Namely- obama’s a politician. Period. End of story. Treat him as such and life becomes clearer. Again, we are talkin gabout what gays do. If you were such the fucking expert that you claimed, you would know the numbers already. I can assume in all you pontificating on what others thinks, you would know the numbers on gay turn out? I fyou don’t that’s your problem. Figure it. I am done with responding to children in grown men bodies.
Bill Perdue
@The Gay Numbers:
So is this an admission that you have no source for your 50% figure?
“Gay” apathy did not defeat us in California, your guy Obama did.
Raphael
@Chitown Kev: A deal won’t work unless you can get all us homos to accept second class status for a few more years.
I for one do not accept that.
Raphael
@Bill Perdue:
My question was about the legal threshold. Is 50% enough to overturn Prop 8?
Bill Perdue
@Raphael: 50% plus one or the greater if there are two conflicting amendments.
CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION
ARTICLE 18 AMENDING AND REVISING THE CONSTITUTION
SEC. 4. A proposed amendment or revision shall be submitted to the electors and if approved by a majority of votes thereon takes effect the day after the election unless the measure provides otherwise. If provisions of 2 or more measures approved at the same election conflict, those of the measure receiving the highest affirmative vote shall prevail.
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/waisgate?waisdocid=73426515298+5+0+0&waisaction=retrieve
yes
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/waisgate?waisdocid=73334510725+1+0+0&waisaction=retrieve
The Gay Numbers
@Bill Perdue: This is why I don’t want to waste time with you. You again put words in my mouth.
The internet is full of people like you. Once I proved my point, you would still argue the same shit as you are arguing now. The only thing that would change is that I would have wasted my time doing the research of articles that were pretty wide spread at the time of the Prop 8’s passing.
That you keep claiming to be an “expert” on all things gay, but not knowing about gay apathy says a helluva alot about you.
Bill Perdue
@The Gay Numbers: If you’ll notice, what I do claim claim is that Obama and his supporters shoved us under the bus. Again.
I have plenty of opinions but I don’t recall being elected to the Grand Lodge of GLBT Experts. Do you have any citations or links to any claim by me to be an ‘expert’. If not maybe we could end this waste of bandwidth. OK? These pissing contests are pretty silly.
Chitown Kev
@Raphael:
You must live in California, because only California gays have an attitude like that. If that is the case, I understand the anger…other than that, welcome to the world of being a minority.
The Gay Numbers
@Bill Perdue: a) I notice you ability to distort what someone else says, and thus, I’ve watched you lose all credibility with me. I don’t have patient for your type of behavior. I’ve been clear through out what I believe, and I’ve watched you lie about those belief. At best, that makes you someone not capable of communication (because that requires trying to actually comprehend what others have said) and at worse it makes you an liar. Either way, it’s not going to produce any result other than the one you are seeing with me. I don’t like people distorting and lying about what I said.
b) I also notice your inablity to require anything near accountability for gays. You are seriously contending that gays are not generally apathetic (or have been inthe past) on marriage? That alone tells me you are not based in reality. If you can’t honestly assess both our part and the politicians part without trying to reduce it to one and only one element then you are no better than the real Obamabots who seem to think Obama walks on water. I do not. I think he’s a politician, and that defines what we should expect. You can’t see the difference because you are a zealot coming from opposite direction. To you, he’s the devil. Again, the zealots impression is to go to the extreme. That’s not a place from which anyone can have a real conversation with you because you aren’t trying to have a conversation. Again, see point a) as to what I mean by you are not trying to communicate.
c) You don’t have to say a thing to give that impression. There is a a such thing as reading between the lines. Or, is this like apathy from the gay community? Are you going to deny that too? You offer no proof. Others offer you proof- I can certainly cite the lack of financial support coming from the gay community, the lack of volunteering before the defeat by gays, the split about whether some gays even consider marriage important and on and on. And what do you do – you go on some bender about Obama. If you think talking about Obama addresses all the issues in our community- you are again- a zealot. No more better than the Obamabot I argued with today who felt he could do no wrong on the banking crisis. What’s interesting reading both your type of zealotry and listening to hers is how certain you are that anyone who disagrees with you must be as extreme as you are.
Bill Perdue
@The Gay Numbers: You’ve spewed and I’ve got better things to do with my time than examine internet vomitus for meaning.
End the pissing contest. I have nothing to say to you. In any case I have urgent things to do, like catching the next screening of Watchmen. Or whatever. Bye.
Sebbe
@Dealmaker – I like it.
Michael
Sorry, but this poll his statistically insignificant. You could switch the numbers and the poll would mean the same thing: Californians are equally divided on gay marriage.
HYHYBT
If the poll is accurate, it looks like the same 48% who voted against P8 in the first place. But wasn’t it a Field poll last summer that said “no” would win by something like 18%? *This* is considered a reliable poll?
Bill Perdue
@HYHYBT: The Field poll showed us leading 54 to 40 July 18th, with three months to go. Then the youth vote shifted against us and Yes on 8 ran the Newsome ads and by Oct 6 it showed us losing 47 to 42. Their last big poll on Oct 28 was released just as Yes on 8 began quoting Obama to the effect that gawd supported bigotry so it was ok to vote against us had the vote narrowing 49 for, 44 against, with 7 undecided and 3.3% margin of error. After Yes on 8 repeated the the Obama bombshell ad nauseum on radio, TV and robocalls and while No on 8’s ‘leaders’ were busily putting theri head in the sand came the only poll that counts which saw it go against us by almost 5 points.
The Field poll called it as closely as they could.
It’s not the messenger who unreliable, it’s hopey changey the guy who plays both sides of the street who’s unreliable. But if it makes you happy shoot the messenger.
Jaroslaw
So even if this gets to a vote and gets repealed, can’t the ballot process just start over again? We really have to let the CA Supreme Court clarify what a revision to the CA constitution is vs. an amendment.
tom rogers
please sign petiton @ fightprop8.org