|
I'm so excited to watch the anti-gay marriage movement shrivel up and die over the next decade or so.
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2012 20:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 4, 2024 14:05 |
|
|
Unfortunately they've got a pretty easy mark in 2014 when the Indiana amendment goes to the voters, unless something strange happens and Mike Pence and his Republican supermajorities don't advance it again (they will).
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2012 20:44
|
|
|
As a disappointed Californian from 2008, congratulations to you guys who pulled off what we failed to do. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2012 20:44
|
|
|
As a Mormon, I'm really really glad that we stayed the hell out of the fight this time. Not that the institution has gotten any more equality-minded: we suffered massive disillusionment among the younger generation with the whole Prop 8 mess. I think the leadership was not inclined to push the agenda and risk further alienating a generation that's already leaving the church in significant numbers.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2012 20:47
|
|
|
Ytadel posted:I'm so excited to watch the anti-gay marriage movement shrivel up and die over the next decade or so. In blue states, at least. It's going to be a long while before we see a gay marriage bill pass in Alabama... GyroNinja fucked around with this message at 20:56 on Nov 7, 2012 |
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2012 20:52
|
|
|
GyroNinja posted:In blue states, at least. It's going to be a long while before we see a gay marriage bill pass in Albama...
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2012 20:55
|
|
|
Ytadel posted:I'm so excited to watch the anti-gay marriage movement shrivel up and die over the next decade or so. This is going to sound insane coming from a gay person but I'm almost going to miss them a little bit, watching their futile struggle against inevitable generational shift is really loving entertaining.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2012 21:01
|
|
|
MaxxBot posted:This is going to sound insane coming from a gay person but I'm almost going to miss them a little bit, watching their futile struggle against inevitable generational shift is really loving entertaining. still something I'd prefer to only find in the history books though
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2012 21:39
|
|
|
seiferguy posted:Washington State map for Ref. 74 is crazy. All but one county surrounding Puget Sound (Skagit the lone alternative, and it was only within 1 percent) voted in favor of it, but the rest of the state, and overwhelmingly Eastern Washington voted against it. Adams County was 73% against it That's pretty much how every partisan vote goes in Washington (if not even more polarized), and yes, the other counties routinely bitch about the tyranny of Seattle while trying their hardest to ignore that population density is part of reality. Though the vote isn't technically over yet - last I looked, only about 60% of total votes had been counted and the margin isn't out of sight yet. One can remain optimistic, but it's not assured to pass just yet.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2012 21:40
|
|
|
Well, I've gotta say, I'm drat proud of Maine right now. It isn't such a surprise since it was doing well in the polls, but still.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2012 22:27
|
|
|
The Macaroni posted:Sorry, it's an interactive map and doesn't screencap well. Here's the link. Thanks for the link, but I meant just that Frederick and Anne Arundel went along for anything that Montgomery and Howard went for, or City and County went for is pretty drat crazy. The Q6 support ads were done really well, too. I hope states with similar demographics use similar ads in the future. One was "working class white male" stereotype, saying he might have a gay relative across the table from him at Thanksgiving and how gay marriage doesn't change his marriage and the other was "churchgoing black male" stereotype that said discrimination is bad, no matter what. The PG and County votes reflect how effective that messaging was while Frederick and Anne Arundel show how non-partisan the ads came out to be.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2012 22:29
|
|
|
CNN Breaking News just reported on this scene yesterday in Washington, Maryland, and Maine homes.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2012 22:31
|
|
|
Snowbot posted:Well, I've gotta say, I'm drat proud of Maine right now. It isn't such a surprise since it was doing well in the polls, but still. Not only passing, but passing by popular vote... I so glads that wasn't just a beautiful dream I had. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2012 23:13
|
|
|
GyroNinja posted:In blue states, at least. It's going to be a long while before we see a gay marriage bill pass in Alabama... The more blue states that pass it means more momentum to push it at a federal level, and if that happens the red states will have to go along with it. It'll be desegregation mark II. They'll kick and scream and try and circumvent the law but ultimately will have to put up with it and it'll be sweet.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2012 23:26
|
|
|
It's also quite clearly a generational issue, there may be more than enough fiscal conservatives out there to replace the old, but in social issues like weed and gay marriage acceptance, the correlation with age is incredibly high. I mean, Alabama youths 18-29 have the lowest acceptance rate among their peers at about 40% approval. The highest approval for gay marriage among people above 65 is in Mass. at only 35%. 312 fucked around with this message at 23:35 on Nov 7, 2012 |
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2012 23:28
|
|
|
The Macaroni posted:Sorry, it's an interactive map and doesn't screencap well. Here's the link. I'm pretty shocked about Fredneck and Baltimore City, but I guess you can chalk Frederick up to sprawl and luck since it was pretty close. But the City went 57% for it? Holy goddamn. Not at all surprised by MoCo hitting nearly 2/3 for; we have to keep up our reputation for being latte chugging ivory tower liberals, after all. Dr Tran posted:What was different with the 4 results last night and California Prop 8? I don't think I saw a single ad for or against Question 6 and only even saw a single sign about it (anti) when I went to early vote and one sign today (pro). I guess all the ad time was tied up in casinos and the presidential fighting over NOVA?
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2012 23:38
|
|
|
seiferguy posted:Washington State map for Ref. 74 is crazy. All but one county surrounding Puget Sound (Skagit the lone alternative, and it was only within 1 percent) voted in favor of it, but the rest of the state, and overwhelmingly Eastern Washington voted against it. Adams County was 73% against it Skagit is pretty rural, and it has a lot of Evangelicals and Hispanic Catholics. I'm surprised how close the vote was, actually. (+1 from me in Skagit, btw)
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 00:15
|
|
|
2013 will be a great year as long as SCOTUS doesn't overrule every decision in the 8 DOMA cases. Bet all your money on: Hawaii - marriage Colorado - civil unions Very likely: Illinois - marriage Rhode Island - marriage Delaware - marriage Minnesota - one of the two Depends on court scheduling: New Jersey - marriage Colorado is the only one of the bunch with veto referendums and civil unions have huge support in opinion polling.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 00:23
|
|
|
New Jersey seems like marriage will pass easily in 2014 if Christie loses re-election.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 00:24
|
|
|
MagicalDuck posted:Skagit is pretty rural, and it has a lot of Evangelicals and Hispanic Catholics. I'm surprised how close the vote was, actually. (+1 from me in Skagit, btw) I want to know who the people are who voted for pot legalization, yet against same sex marriage, are. Because I expected Ref 74 to a be a slam dunk, and for pot legalization to fail. Not for pot to pass easily, and gay marriage to not be declared yet. I'm imagining that these are farmers in Walla Walla or something. (For the record, I voted 'Approve' on both).
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 00:41
|
|
|
Kiwi Ghost Chips posted:New Jersey seems like marriage will pass easily in 2014 if Christie loses re-election. Any chance Christie has a change of heart with regards to marriage equality after this election? Gay marriage had a sweep this election in four states. That has to say something about the turning tides on this issue. There's talk about the structural problems with the composition of the Republican party and how they need to open up that tent. Christie embracing marriage equality seems like a canny move if he wants to position himself as more moderate and drag the party away from losing issues.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 00:48
|
|
|
The Macaroni posted:I'm proud of Maryland. Marriage equality and the Dream Act. Way to live up to our liberal reputation! Someone asked me why I waited in line for 2 hours to vote when Dem seats were a sure thing: question 4 & 6 were the main reason. Also, the wait had never been that long before...
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 00:48
|
|
|
Cocks Cable posted:Any chance Christie has a change of heart with regards to marriage equality after this election? Gay marriage had a sweep this election in four states. That has to say something about the turning tides on this issue. There's talk about the structural problems with the composition of the Republican party and how they need to open up that tent. Christie embracing marriage equality seems like a canny move if he wants to position himself as more moderate and drag the party away from losing issues. He can remain opposed while the courts legalize it by the end of 2014 anyway. How many people will be swayed from voting for Christie because we complain that he singlehandedly delayed marriage from 2012 to 2014?
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 01:01
|
|
|
As near as I can tell, Washington has not counted a single vote since last night. This is silly. I just want to say that we didn't get upstaged by Maryland, dammit.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 01:09
|
|
|
Qu Appelle posted:I want to know who the people are who voted for pot legalization, yet against same sex marriage, are. Because I expected Ref 74 to a be a slam dunk, and for pot legalization to fail. Not for pot to pass easily, and gay marriage to not be declared yet. I'm imagining that these are farmers in Walla Walla or something. Libertarians who thing gay sex is icky.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 01:14
|
|
|
Minority Deport posted:As near as I can tell, Washington has not counted a single vote since last night. This is silly. I just want to say that we didn't get upstaged by Maryland, dammit. According to the "Next Ballot Count Date/Time" on http://vote.wa.gov/results/20121106/Turnout.html, there should be some updates coming in from 4:00-5:00 or so. With 4:30 for King and 5:00 for Pierce. Not sure how long they take to actually update after those times. They estimate a total 618,300 outstanding votes. King County is getting 65% for the good guys and 163,000 votes withstanding. Pierce is getting 48% for the good guys and 125,000 votes withstanding. I'm not going to bother spreadsheeting it out with all the smaller counties, but I trust the Times and others when they say it looks good, but it's too close to call just yet. tk fucked around with this message at 02:20 on Nov 8, 2012 |
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 01:19
|
|
|
UltimoDragonQuest posted:2013 will be a great year as long as SCOTUS doesn't overrule every decision in the 8 DOMA cases. If you can find a fifth vote in favor of DOMA at the Supreme Court level, you could make a lot of money advising the Republican legal elites, because they already know they're screwed on that one.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 01:22
|
|
|
Minority Deport posted:As near as I can tell, Washington has not counted a single vote since last night. This is silly. I just want to say that we didn't get upstaged by Maryland, dammit. R74 has declared victory, at least according to their facebook page and someone I know who worked on it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 01:31
|
|
|
MagicalDuck posted:Skagit is pretty rural, and it has a lot of Evangelicals and Hispanic Catholics. I'm surprised how close the vote was, actually. (+1 from me in Skagit, btw) I was suprised at how close it was for Clark County, I always figured it to swing more liberal.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 01:38
|
|
|
Qu Appelle posted:I want to know who the people are who voted for pot legalization, yet against same sex marriage, are. Because I expected Ref 74 to a be a slam dunk, and for pot legalization to fail. Not for pot to pass easily, and gay marriage to not be declared yet. I'm imagining that these are farmers in Walla Walla or something. I was pretty bizarroed out by this as well. I was certain we'd be fine on 74 and cautiously optimistic on 502, but it turns out even bigots like to get high.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 02:50
|
|
|
smashthedean posted:I was pretty bizarroed out by this as well. I was certain we'd be fine on 74 and cautiously optimistic on 502, but it turns out even bigots like to get high. What with Rush "gallon zipocks full of oxy" Limbaugh this surprises you?
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 03:10
|
|
|
This is a cool thing https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FQZxF_roWyk
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 05:03
|
|
|
jeffersonlives posted:If you can find a fifth vote in favor of DOMA at the Supreme Court level, you could make a lot of money advising the Republican legal elites, because they already know they're screwed on that one. I honestly wouldn't be surprised if DOMA were struck down (at least partially) in a 7-2 decision since it's on fairly shaky legal ground even without a need for citing Equal Protection.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 08:51
|
|
|
In forty years, kids in elementary school will wonder why this was ever an issue. This was a great day for civil rights in America. Still a lot of work to do.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 10:08
|
|
|
eSports Chaebol posted:I honestly wouldn't be surprised if DOMA were struck down (at least partially) in a 7-2 decision since it's on fairly shaky legal ground even without a need for citing Equal Protection. I'm not an expert on SCOTUS, but I agree. I can't see any conservative argument upholding DOMA that isn't rooted in insane biotruths, bigotry, or twisting of the constitution. It's quite clearly an overreach of the federal government by the standards set by even the conservative justices. States are in charge of marriage. So for the federal government to tell a state to gently caress off in terms of which marriage licenses are acceptable and which are not is beyond the pale. It seems like a slam dunk unanimous decision based on the constitutional arguments. Are there any solid conservative arguments anywhere that don't rely on bigotry? That's not a rhetorical question, by the way. I'd like to read them. It feels like the DOMA will be so limited that conservative justices will have no problem signing onto the decision for technical reasons -OR- it'll just expose which members of SCOTUS are unapologetic bigots. I would hope the justices are either decent people underneath it all or they're vain enough to be concerned about whether or not people think they're homophobes in 20 loving 13.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 12:06
|
|
|
UltimoDragonQuest posted:I wouldn't be shocked, but I think signing the law hurts him more in the Republican primary than it helps in the general. I actually think the opposite of this. He's positioning himself as a moderate and I think when 2016 rolls out the biggest way to assure liberal and minority voters he isn't another GOP social conservative monster, is by weakly embracing these things. He'll brandish his initiatives against the drug war and say he supports gay marriage (on a state deciding by itself level) just to protect himself against the chance of Akin or Walsh making a stupid comment. Christie is one hell of a politician and extremely intelligent despite what his brashness and weight might tell you otherwise. It's the best way of winning over the youth vote and women voters, this election cycle proved it. Wait for the 'personal revelation' strike him.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 12:23
|
|
|
ErIog posted:I'm not an expert on SCOTUS, but I agree. I can't see any conservative argument upholding DOMA that isn't rooted in insane biotruths, bigotry, or twisting of the constitution. It's quite clearly an overreach of the federal government by the standards set by even the conservative justices. States are in charge of marriage. So for the federal government to tell a state to gently caress off in terms of which marriage licenses are acceptable and which are not is beyond the pale. It seems like a slam dunk unanimous decision based on the constitutional arguments. What I really want to know is how defenders of DOMA respond to the Full Faith and Credit Clause objection to it. I cannot understand why a heterosexual marriage performed in Massachusetts is recognized in Texas, but a same-sex marriage performed in Massachusetts wouldn't be recognized in Texas. How do you get around that without blatantly flouting the Constitution? It just seems like the courts are extremely divided on the matter, so why not just get rid of a really stupid law that makes no sense and nobody can get a good, coherent response to why it isn't unconstitutional. Not to mention it's a relic at this point in terms of how far this country has come since 1996 on same-sex marriage being legal, not just in terms of judicial and legislative victories, but also popular support.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 12:27
|
|
|
Undead Unicorn posted:I actually think the opposite of this. He's positioning himself as a moderate and I think when 2016 rolls out the biggest way to assure liberal and minority voters he isn't another GOP social conservative monster, is by weakly embracing these things. He'll brandish his initiatives against the drug war and say he supports gay marriage (on a state deciding by itself level) just to protect himself against the chance of Akin or Walsh making a stupid comment. Except Romney could quite happily have positioned himself as a moderate if he wanted to. The primary process pushed him right and unless there's a fundamental change in the direction of the GOP then the same thing will happen again in four years time.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 14:03
|
|
Alchenar posted:Except Romney could quite happily have positioned himself as a moderate if he wanted to. The primary process pushed him right and unless there's a fundamental change in the direction of the GOP then the same thing will happen again in four years time. I wouldn't be shocked to see a lot more fracturing; I think 'not liberal enough' was largely the accepted narrative among the elites after McCain (and honestly they didn't expect to win with Bush pulling in 30% approval ratings), but I think this election was a pretty thorough trouncing of the far right and I wouldn't be surprised to see splintering. I think a lot of the party really believed the polls were wrong- mainly I don't think they thought the composition of the electorate could be changing so quickly. 2008 could have easily been argued to been an oddity, but now you have : 2000: 80% white 2004: 77% 2008: 74% 2012: 72% with latinos and asians going heavily for Obama and growing quickly. They will soon realize (many already have) the southern strategy is now pointless and cozying up to the religious right is costing far more than they are gaining, because an issue like marriage equality is exactly what they need to embrace if they have any hope of winning younger voters or minorities, as there is now strong support for it among all races and genders under 60. They simply can't win the white vote in high enough numbers (this year beat 1988, the last record year) to win with a 30% minority vote going against them 80 20.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 21:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 4, 2024 14:05 |
|
|
Yeah as gay marriage becomes more and more of a losing issue for conservative politicians, I imagine a lot of the vocal opposition to it will disappear, making it possible for more people to support it, making it even more of a losing issue. It's snowballing.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 22:30
|
|
