Thoughts On Maine: We Will Prevail (Eventually)

Yesterday's election results are in and it is becoming pretty clear that Maine voters have voted to prevent their state's marriage equality law passed by the Legislature and signed by the Governor from going into effect.

With 96% of precints voting, Question 1 is passing:

Yes	296289	52.79%
No	264970	47.21%

As my fellow blogger Greta Christina says, I hope that people looking at these results will give up the fiction that Proposition 8 passed last year because of the No On 8's alleged incompetency (or Black voters' alleged homophobia). Everyone agrees that Maine's No On 1 ran an excellent campaign and most rational people understand that religiosity not race is the most significant factor in voters' position on marriage equality. And she also makes the point that people who are gunning to return to the ballot in 2010 might want to reconsider that notion:

It could well be that Prop 8 won in California because the No on 8 campaign made mistakes. But it could also be that Prop 8 won in California because same-sex marriage has never, ever won at the ballot box in the U.S. It could be that Prop 8 won because same-sex marriage is just a really hard sell right now. I do think time is on our side... but when it comes to the ballot box, it isn't on our side yet.

Two: I hope the people who want to put same-sex marriage back on the ballot in California in 2010 take a long, hard look at whether that's really a good idea, and whether the timing is right.

Same-sex marriage is just really hard to win at the ballot right now. I think we need to accept that. We stand a much better chance of winning in 2012 than we do in 2010. To be blunt about it: Support for same-sex marriage skews, more than with almost any other demographic, according to age. The younger people are, the more likely they are to support it. To be brutally blunt: As more old people die, and as more young people become old enough to vote, the odds skew more and more in our favor. Also, the economy in California truly and profoundly sucks right now, and people just won't be able to donate the kind of money to a political campaign that they did in 2008. And 2012 is a Presidential election year, when voter turnout is always higher -- and high voter turnout almost always means more young voters, and almost always favors liberal candidates and causes.

I bolded the key sentences in the excerpt above. Greta Christina is just saying what MadProfessah and others have been saying since July: 2012 is the earliest Californian's should consider returning to the ballot to restore marriage rights to same-sex couples.

There are now 32 states where voters have been faced with the question of whether to be pro-gay or anti-gay with regards to relationship recognition for same-sex couples. The anti-gay side has won 31 times and lost twice (Arizona voters defeated a ballot measure that would have banned marriage for same-sex couples AND domestic partnerships in 2006 but then approved an initiative that only banned same-sex marriage in 2008. In 2009 it looks like we are winning Referendum 71 in Washington State).

On the question of marriage equality itself without domestic partnership or civil unions in the picture LGBTs have lost 31 statewide elections.

Do we really want to make it 32 in 2010?