Same sex marriage in trouble in MaineBy Steven T. Jones
The referendum in Maine challenging same-sex marriage is starting to look like it's going to pass, dealing another blow to the national marriage equality movement that San Francisco played such a key role in. It's still close, but the gap is widening with about 70 percent of votes counted as I write this, so it's not looking good.
digg •
del.icio.us •
sphere •
google
•
Rob Anderson: There are in fact 11 people listed as working in the Bike Program on MTA...
marcos: Steve, your piece celebrates what should be the final skirmish of a batt...
glen matlock: I love when San Francisco "progressives" complain about lawsuits....
Steven T. Jones: I don't think there are anywhere close to 11 on the bike program staff. ...
FukinRightAgain: Steve Tought, when all are morons except YOU!...
Steven T. Jones: Glen, you take your "wisdom" from an idiotic right-wing criminal? Why do...
Jason Grant Garza: Jason Grant Garza here ... please read ( www.sfbg.com/entry.php?entry_id...
glen matlock: Spiro Agnew said it best "If you tell me hippies...
Comments (7)
Remember it is 70% of precincts in not votes counted. There are still substantial votes out there.
Posted by Lucas | November 3, 2009 09:25 PM
It's now at 87 percent and still widening. Sorry, folks, it's done.
Posted by Steven T. Jones | November 3, 2009 10:28 PM
So, in Maine voters rejected (74%) a decrease in the car tax, rejected (60%) voter approval of tax increases and supported (58%) medical cannabis, all progressive positions. Why did same sex marriage fare so poorly in that favorable electoral climate? Some have got some 'splaining to do. Again.
-marc
Posted by marcos | November 4, 2009 09:30 AM
That's a good question, Marc, and I don't have the answer, but I did forward it to Paul Hogarth, who volunteered on the campaign and wrote this morning that they did "everything we could. Unlike Prop 8 last year, we *cannot* blame people who ran a bad campaign."
Posted by Steven T. Jones | November 4, 2009 10:47 AM
I'd imagine that parachuting folks from around the country into Maine played about as well as parachuting in teabaggers from around the country into NY-23. Locals don't cotton to outsiders telling them how to vote.
The campaign was bad because it lost, that much is axiomatic.
Unless there is public support behind this kind of policy, and unless there is a local grassroots base capable of winning an electoral campaign, then legislative and judicial remedies are ill advised in jurisdictions with voter review.
All of this time, military and marriage have sucked energy from noncontroversial federal housing and jobs protections while conservative lesbians and gays, aided by their patronizing het allies like Clinton and Newsom, have pushed controversial measures.
-marc
Posted by marcos | November 4, 2009 11:27 AM
Marc, I'm always struggling with what your exact position is on this. Are you for the push for marriage equality or not? You can't simultaneously upbraid people for leading a losing campaign and complain about them pushing controversial issues. Which is it?
Posted by Marke B | November 4, 2009 01:56 PM
Marke B, I'm for contesting electoral campaigns we can win and building support for those we cannot win right now.
Are you suggesting that, like the bike plan, we just sit by while people continue to pick fights and get our collective asses kicked repeatedly, all while we gain acceptance by most every other measure?
It does not matter what my opinion is on same sex marriage until more than half of an electorate anywhere supports same sex marriage.
Many LGBT folks have never been gung ho about same sex marriage. Yet failures of marriage fetishists, like the failures of gays in the military fetishists, have dragged down progress for many more.
Harvey Milk rallied folks to beat the Briggs initiative back during much more difficult circumstances. We're supposed to stand on the shoulders of giants, not piggy back on them.
-marc
Posted by marcos | November 4, 2009 02:21 PM