Loganotron

The Democratic Strategist posted a fantastic analysis by Jasmine Beach-Ferrara on why we lost Prop 8. She identifies the three key areas that must be addressed in a successful analysis:

• An aerial view of the infrastructure, strategies and mindset of the national LGBT movement;
• A “zoom-in” view of the specific field, messaging, and funding strategies used by the No on 8 campaign; and
• A similar “zoom-in” view of the strategies used by two concurrent, successful national campaigns: “Yes on 8″ and the Obama campaign.

Her piece over at The Democratic Strategist specifically looks at the No on 8 field campaign. The two key failings of the No on 8 campaign, according to Beach-Ferrara, were:

First, the “No on 8″ campaign did not become national until October, limiting both the volunteers and donors it could engage.

Second, the campaign’s field strategy failed to effectively reach enough swing voters enough times to turn them out as “no” voters.

I encourage you to read the whole analysis. It’s a great start to picking ourselves up and reorganizing so that we win the next time in California and elsewhere.

Nate Silver has a great post over at FiveThirtyEight debunking some of the racial myths regarding the passage of Prop 8. He points to generational bias having a more pronounced effect than racial biases:

At the end of the day, Prop 8′s passage was more a generational matter than a racial one. If nobody over the age of 65 had voted, Prop 8 would have failed by a point or two. It appears that the generational splits may be larger within minority communities than among whites, although the data on this is sketchy.

The good news for supporters of marriage equity is that — and there’s no polite way to put this — the older voters aren’t going to be around for all that much longer, and they’ll gradually be cycled out and replaced by younger voters who grew up in a more tolerant era. Everyone knew going in that Prop 8 was going to be a photo finish — California might be just progressive enough and 2008 might be just soon enough for the voters to affirm marriage equity. Or, it might fall just short, which is what happened. But two or four or six or eight years from now, it will get across the finish line.

Olbermann seems to be showing some real emotion here. I’m impressed.

Anderson Cooper and others discuss Prop 8 and the protests. In the first clip the asswad Tony Perkins suggests that protestors are “rioting.” Really? Is that what you call peaceful marches and demonstrations? Riots?! So far, I haven’t even seen anything approaching civil disobedience, much less “rioting.”

So, does this put the issue into perspective? I think it does.

Good for Arnie:

Snarky but heartfelt:

Okay. So Prop 8 passed. Alright, I get it. 51% of you think that I am a second class citizen. Alright then. So my wife, uh I mean, roommate? Girlfriend? Special lady friend? You are gonna have to help me here because I am not sure what to call her now. Anyways, she and I are not allowed the same right under the state constitution as any other citizen. Okay, so I am taking that to mean I do not have to pay my state taxes because I am not a full citizen. I mean that would just be wrong, to make someone pay taxes and not give them the same rights, sounds sort of like that taxation without representation thing from the history books.

Okay, cool I don’t mean to get too personal here but there is a lot I can do with the extra half a million dollars that I will be keeping instead of handing it over to the state of California. Oh, and I am sure Ellen will be a little excited to keep her bazillion bucks that she pays in taxes too. Wow, come to think of it, there are quite a few of us fortunate gay folks that will be having some extra cash this year. What recession? We’re gay! I am sure there will be a little box on the tax forms now single, married, divorced, gay, check here if you are gay, yeah, that’s not so bad. Of course all of the waiters and hairdressers and UPS workers and gym teachers and such, they won’t have to pay their taxes either…

I was just talking with coworkers yesterday and hypothesizing that Newsom will have to postpone his run for the Governorship now. Had Prop 8 failed, he might have had a small chance. But this is bad for him. The only thing most people in California know about him is that he’s the gay marriage mayor. I’m guessing he’ll be appointed to the next Governor’s team (if it’s a Democrat). If not, then who knows. But I think his dreams of a state-wide elected position are probably on hold for now.

Fog City Journal seems to agree.

From the SF Chronicle:

The suit by San Francisco, Los Angeles and Santa Clara County argues that any measure allowing a majority of the public to take away minority rights violates principles of equality at the heart of the state Constitution.

“If allowed to stand, Prop. 8 so devastates the principle of equal protection that it endangers the fundamental rights of any potential electoral minority,” said San Francisco City Attorney Dennis Herrera.

Sponsors of the initiative were unimpressed. Andrew Pugno, lawyer for the Prop. 8 campaign, called the legal challenges “an insult to California voters and an attack on the initiative process.”

I say: Let us begin our attack on the initiative process, then. I’ve never heard anyone in California say, “The initiative process in California is awesome! It’s perfect!” I only ever hear whining and complaining (from the Left and the Right) that half or more of what gets passed down to the voters on ballots should be left to the Legislators to decide. That, “the Legislature doesn’t do it’s job; it just sends everything to the voters.” Okay, so let’s agree that the initiative system is broken. And, let’s FIX IT!

I’m devastated. I just can’t believe it. How? How could Californians overwhelmingly protect the rights of farm animals (Prop 2) and not protect the rights of gays and lesbians?

The only counties to reject this legalized form of hatred were the coastal counties and the two counties near Lake Tahoe. All inland counties decided that gays are the minority group of our time to hate and discriminate against.

County Map via CNN.

Our Governator’s positions on the props are mostly to be expected. A few surprises.

Download the Loganotron SF & CA Voter Guide here.

Here are Governator Schwarzenegger’s positions on the CA Props:

• Prop 1A High Speed Rail Bonds: Yes (Of course, lots of people love this one. It’s a feel-good measure)
• Prop 2 Farm Animal Confinement Standards: No (You’ve been mostly good on environmental and other animal issues, why are you faltering now?)
• Prop 3 Children’s Hospital Bond: Yes (Ok)
• Prop 4 Parental Notification of Abortion: Yes (WHAT?! This one surprised me. Yes on 4 but No on 8?! What kind of social liberal are you Arnie?)
• Prop 5 Nonviolent Drug Offenses, Sentencing & Parole: No (What?! You don’t want to give non-violent offenders the ability to go to rehab instead of clogging our prisons?!)
• Prop 6 Law Enforcement Funding, Gang Penalties: Neutral (Why are you neutral on the law enforcement issues? Take a stand Schwarzie)
• Prop 7 Renewable Energy Standards: No (Right, because everyone hates 7)
• Prop 8 Same-Sex Marriage Ban: No (We knew he opposed this one, no surprises here)
• Prop 9 Victims’ Rights & Parole: Neutral (Again, why neutral? Surprised he didn’t take a stand here)
• Prop 10 Alternative Fuel Bonds: No (Not surprising)
• Prop 11 Redistricting: Yes (Not surprising, since this would give Republicans more power in the redistricting process than they deserve based on representative demographics in the state)
• Prop 12 Veterans Bond Act: Yes (This is generally a yes for most folks, so no surprises here)

There are 34 San Francisco city propositions and California State propositions on the ballot this November. Oy Vey! That’s a lot to figure out for us voters.

Today I sat down and read through my voter guide. And I read through various endorsements and voter guides I’ve received and tracked down online. Here’s my attempt at simplifying the challenge. On the attached PDF, I’ve included my opinion as well as the opinions of various other groups. I’ve also made it one-pager in case you want to have a handy, printable guide to take with you into the voting booth. Hope it helps!

Download it here!

Sure, they happen to be Log Cabin (gay) Republicans who oppose the measure. But it’s worth noting nonetheless. We need all the support we can to defeat this thing.

Just yesterday I was walking down Market Street and noticed that Equality California is headquartered about a block from my house. I think I might just drop in there and see how I can volunteer to help defeat Prop 8.

And, I’m still thinking of writing a personal letter to my many relatives who reside in California, and asking them to vote no on Prop 8. It’s kind of a big decision to ponder, since I am not out to most of my conservative extended family members.

This blog post does a great job of telling it like it is:

So Controller John Chiang says the state has enough money to pay its bills until September. Capitol insiders are saying that a June revenue spike has given the state some breathing room. Yet here’s what the governor had to say with a straight face today when he announced his intention to temporarily cut the pay for 200,000 state workers to federal minimum wage:

QUESTION: Do you think that your action today will force the legislature, the added pressure, to come up with a budget solution faster?

GOVERNOR: This is not meant to do that. … the fact is that we are running out of cash and this is an action that we have to take.

In Jim Bouton’s wonderful baseball book, “Ball Four,” here’s how players liked to respond to preposterous assertions: Yeah, surrrre.

QUESTION: Do you think that your action today will force the legislature, the added pressure, to come up with a budget solution faster?

GOVERNOR: This is not meant to do that.

ALL OF CALIFORNIA AS ONE: Yeah, surrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrre.

(Keep reading for more of the author’s commentary)