bovil: (Default)
Andrew T Trembley ([personal profile] bovil) wrote2008-11-10 03:51 pm
Entry tags:

The blame game...

Hokay.

"Blacks lost us Prop 8!"

Yeah, right.

There was a groundswell of black voters in California this cycle, true. They're still only a large enough voting block to really make a difference in races with tight margins like the Prop 8 race.

It's slicing up the electorate in ways that don't really make sense. The bigger issue is churchgoing and evangelical voters. Here are the "yes" numbers from the exit polls:
  • weekly churchgoers: 84%
  • white evangelicals: 81%
  • white protestants: 65%
  • Catholics: 64%

All of those groups are larger than the black vote, and the first and last include many black voters. Still, that's even slicing up things too simply (well, except white evangelicals). There were faith groups campaigning against Prop 8.

A big bunch of the blame rests with the "No" campaign. The advertising was sucktacular. So much time was spent countering the lies of the "Yes" campaign that our message never got out.

I don't know, though, that the "No" campaign knew how to get our message out.

Where were the "A 'yes' vote is a vote to end our marriage" ads?

Where were the ads featuring interracial straight couples recalling when their marriages were illegal?

Where were the ads featuring supportive ministers of all faiths and denominations asking for the right to perform same-sex marriages?

Where were the ads showing that, while domestic partnerships in law confer all the rights and responsibilities of marriage, we continuously have to fight to get organizations and people to obey that law and grant us our rights?

Where was our narrative?

Oh, and where were the ads featuring Governor Arnie, who constantly walks a tightrope claiming one thing and doing the opposite?
jkusters: John's Face (Default)

[personal profile] jkusters 2008-11-11 12:16 am (UTC)(link)
The "No" campaign started in a place of complacency when they saw the polls looked good for the cause, then had to play a frantic game of "catch up" when the "Yes" campaign acted and performed like a professional political campaign.

(I can't help but wonder what would have happened if the "No" campaign had been run primarily by lesbians instead of gay men. In my experience in community activism, if anything in the gay "community" gets done, it's usually being done by lesbians. :-)

[identity profile] ladycelia.livejournal.com 2008-11-11 12:32 am (UTC)(link)
Having worked the phones for this, I can tell you that the script that had been put together was designed to not raise any hackles, nor challenge anyone in any way. In other words, it was passionless. And I think that more chances needed to be taken--that when someone responded with "I'm voting yes because I don't want my kids to learn about homosexuality in school", or "I'm voting yes because it's Gods law", that there should have been some engagement. Instead, it was "I'm sorry that you feel that way and I hope that you will reconsider" click (I'm paraphrasing the actual script, but that's damned close to it.) The Yes on 8 people were playing on fear and using lies. I don't suggest that the No on 8 people use lies, but they should have addressed them and brought them more to light for what they were.

[identity profile] karisu-sama.livejournal.com 2008-11-11 12:40 am (UTC)(link)
Where were the ads featuring gay families with kids asking that their kids and families remain protected and equal under the law??

[identity profile] chris-sawyer.livejournal.com 2008-11-11 12:50 am (UTC)(link)
This is why we should never have civil rights issues put up for a popular vote.

[identity profile] karisu-sama.livejournal.com 2008-11-11 12:52 am (UTC)(link)
As far as "interracial straight couples", I had earlier asked at several places if we could be in such a sort of thing, but had gotten no answer. I guess we're too young (we were toddlers in '67 and not yet born in '48), and neither of us is black enough. :p

(Or maybe I'm not straight enough, although my marriage is heterosexual...)

[identity profile] voidampersand.livejournal.com 2008-11-11 12:59 am (UTC)(link)
Those are great ideas for ads. I donated $$$ to the No campaign specifically so they could get more air time for their ads, but I don't watch much TV so I'm not as up on what they ran. Did they do anything on how "separate but equal" is not really equal?

[identity profile] trystbat.livejournal.com 2008-11-11 01:06 am (UTC)(link)
Maybe I'm on different mailing lists, but I received about 5 paper flyers with very slick 'no on 8' ads painting the issue as "hey, we're just normal everyday folks like you who want to marry, just like you do." One SJ Merc. columnist mentioned these too as being very classy & 'rising above the fray.'

IMO, the problem was no church outreach, but that's also a problem of legitimacy. We're not really there, we *don't* have support there, so we can't easily work within that system. Frankly, the number of "supportive ministers of all faiths and denominations" is a lot smaller than the unsupportive religious leaders & groups (or at least the 'yes on 8' religious leaders have bigger congregations).

On NPR, several black activists spoke out against the idea that 8 had any similarity to interracial marriage laws. That's a HUGE perception problem within racial minority communities & has been for decades. It's similar to the divide between women of color & white women in feminist circles.

The problems are deeper than just one campaign.

[identity profile] karisu-sama.livejournal.com 2008-11-11 01:31 am (UTC)(link)
I'm thinking "gay" is the "invisible minority", especially within other minority groups. People's hearts need to be touched and their eyes opened, to GET A CLUE that gay people ARE part of their communities, are their friends and neighbors, have been there all along.

[identity profile] thirdworld.livejournal.com 2008-11-11 08:39 am (UTC)(link)
Time to get more organized? Obama showed the way. Bottom-up.

A modest proposal

[identity profile] rinolj.livejournal.com 2008-11-12 09:55 am (UTC)(link)
Ahem (http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/cca5e8a78a/protect-marriage-protect-children-prohibit-divorce-from-jonathan-smith).

May I be blunt? (OK, thank you. You're very kind.) My comment on the above posted to a private mailing list: "Now, that's the sort of advertising the "No on 8" people should have run. Next time, the campaign needs to be run by pissed-off married heterosexual meat-eaters willing to go for the jugular, instead of nice, polite guys from the Castro and West Hollywood trying hard not to offend anyone.