Proposition 8: When asked to do the improbable, some achieve the seemingly impossible

By | November 6, 2008

2008 – California Proposition 8: Ban on Gay Marriage
Yes – 5,376,424 (52%)
No – 4,870,010 (48%)

2000 – California Proposition 22:Ban on recognition of same sex marriages

Yes – 61.4%
No – 38.6%

That’s a near 10% swing in 8 years against one of the largest coordinated campaigns by out of state influences.  California voted for 61 percent in favour of a ban on gay marriage which, when over turned by the courts, created the freedom to marry.

Support for Proposition 8 was down 10% from Proposition 22. The defending team conceded a 10% swing despite the massive resource push into the fight.  They gained no ground on what they had in 2000, they lost substantial ground from where they stood, and they had to fight like mad to hold onto a slender majority.

Given the seemingly impossible challenge of 12.4% swing required to stave off this attack on individual rights, the electorate mustered up a near 10% swing, (which in political marketing terms is this side of a miracle when dealing with an issue with such a well resourced opposition)

Now the margin is 2.1% for a 50.1% majority vote to support same sex marriage.

The battle was lost today in 2008.  The battle for tomorrow is a 2.1% margin from the campaign teams that have a 10% margin gain under their belts already. That future is winnable, because despite the massive resources the various opponents of same sex marriage brought to their fight, they still bleed massive numbers of supports, and a huge slice of the electorate.  Their time is running out, and they just saw their A-game only narrowly scratch out a win

For same sex marriage supports, it’s only a 2.1% margin left to convert.  For the opponents, given they can’t defend a 12% lead?  They’re running out of options, time and support base.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]