Imagine an Obama spot that went something like this:Hi, I'm Barack Obama. I wanted to take a moment to talk to you about Proposition 8. It's a divisive constitutional amendment here in California designed to distract from the vital issues we face in this election. I know there are disagreements on same-sex marriage, but surely we can agree that all people have the right to live lives free of discrimination, and not to have their rights taken away from them by right-wing extremists. I hope you'll vote for me this November 4th, and when you do, please, vote against Prop 8.This is the ad that is somehow going to make Ohio factory workers concerned about layoffs, Colorado moms concerned about McCain's their kids' health care, and Virginia coal miners concerned about gas prices, suddenly switch gears and vote for the guy who believes "the fundamentals of our economy are strong" and has a new economic plan every twenty-four hours?
In order for that to happen, a hearty combination of the following things would have to be in place: (1) persuadable voters in OH, VA, FL, etc. with televisions tuned into California media markets; (2) a Republican candidate willing to demagogue the issue, or even discuss it; (3) a loathing of gays among those persuadable voters that's so intense, they would readily ignore every other issue and vote against a candidate who took any position mildly favorable to gay rights on a consitutional scheme in another state.
We have a combination of three related conditions.
- For condition (1), replace "televisions tuned into CA media markets" with "YouTube."
- For (2) replace "a Republican candidate" with "a person." All we need is one person with some technical know-how to see the ad on TV in CA, digitize it and put it on YouTube, and then send around the link to anti-gay-rights groups, conservative churches, etc.
Moreover, on point (3), we don't need anti-gay fervor in all of the persuadable voters, just a small subset. Why? Because an Obama victory could be razor-thin; it could come down to 1,000 votes in one state or another. Also, calling an explicit Obama appeal against Prop 8 an example of "any position mildly favorable to gay rights" is a massive understatement. Marriage is the Holy Grail, the ultimate goal, of LGBT activists in the U.S. (A position "mildly favorable to gay rights" would be something like hospital visitation rights, about which very few get riled up these days). What I'm getting at--and probably his advisors are getting at--is that any in-person, explicit endorsement of gay marriage in California from Obama will play up his socially liberal credentials and worry people who are on the fence. Let's go through this and do the math.
Let's say that in a given swing state (e.g. Florida or North Carolina), most of the swing voters, perhaps three-quarters, are against gay marriage--not necessarily rabidly, but just against it in some fashion. That is a safe, conservative estimate--remember, we're talking about swing voters, people not already lined up behind Obama, people likely to be socially conservative. Of these people, let's also say that most of them are unsure about Obama because he might be "too liberal." Let's quantify "most" as another 3/4. Anecdotally, I would guess the two most common (reasonable) problems people might have with Obama is his "lack of experience" or his "liberalism" (followed by more irrational and insidious problems, like disliking him for his race of for things he isn't actually, like being "Muslim" or a "terrorist").
So, let's revisit: 75% of the undecideds in a (hypothetical) state are against gay marriage and, of them, 75% worry that Obama's too liberal. So that's 56% of the swing vote. But, of course, most of these people are rational (to some extent) and also feel strongly against 4 more years of Republican (mis-)rule--after all, they're not telling pollsters they're for McCain--so they're not all going to switch to McCain. So let's say only a third of this 56% decide that a Obama ad expicitly urging people to support gay marriage is, well, over the top. So a third of 56% is about 19% of the total of the swing vote. Keep in mind, this ad is being propagated through the internet and possibly through direct mail DVD's (depending on how early it's aired), keep in mind that hundreds, if not thousands, of church pastors are mentioning Obama's "gay marriage" position in Sunday sermons across conservative America, 2 days before the election. So now for the math:
In certain swing states, up to 8% of the voters may still be undecided. I get this figure by looking at recent polls for critical states (e.g. here). Poll results like McCain 48, Obama 45, for Ohio, suggests 7% in that poll were undecided, third-party, or didn't answer. To be safe, for swing states in general, let's round this up to 8%. So what's 19% of 8%? It's 1.5% of the electorate, which translates to thousands of voters, which is just too big a margin to lose. (And while our remarks on "myopia" were probably too strong, we continue to hold that working toward an Obama victory is more important than same-sex marriage in California, in general, for the world, at this time in history.)
There is another, perhaps larger problem, in Obama's making a forceful, public plea, again going back to the perception of his "liberal" credentials. Regardless of what percentage of the swing voters a gay-marriage ad would turn off, it will definitely turn on the McCain-Palin base, who would work even harder on their own last-minute canvassing and GOTV efforts.
Contrary to what Present Tense presents (tensely), we at Red Yellow Blue are not disdainful of the importance of the Prop 8 issue--we have, in fact, made donations and e-mailed all our friends pleading for money on the NoOnProp8 campaign. We think, and have written elsewhere, that this is a critical civil rights issue (see below). And we think you are right about Obama's influence in bringing some black Californians away from supporting Prop 8. The question is how to undercut the risks posed for Obama to come out strongly, risks like losing 1.5% of the undecideds and energizing McCain's right-wing base?
One answer would be for Obama to air the ad on Sunday afternoon, after church, thus undercutting the ability of right-wing pastors to broadcast this news from the pulpit. A second answer for risk management would for Obama to (disingenously) mention a caveat in his ad, namely that he is "against same-sex marriage," while stating that Prop 8 is not the vehicle by which to oppose it. Or he could simply state that he is against federal "re-definitions of marriage," that he leaves it "up to the states," but that he is also "aganst taking away rights that have already been granted." With careful wording and the avoidance of any quick, out-of-context sound bites that sound like "I support gay marriage," or "I want my kids to learn about ass-fucking," or what have you, we might be safe enough. Barely.
But I'd like to ask a larger question---why Obama? If the problem in CA is black voters, why not have civil rights leaders like Rev. Jesse Jackson or other black-church figures make an ad, or a speech, or join the No-on-Prop 8? Yes, yes, I know, because he is the reason that black voters are turning out in droves. But given that they're already turning out in droves, why not get some other black leader to address this issue?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
P.S. We feel obliged to demonstrate our commitment to bringing down Prop 8 by sharing an e-mail we wrote to our friends on October 9:
Dear Friend,
I am writing to you because of a very serious issue facing voters this
November in California. Now wait, I know you do not live in
California, but this affects ALL of us, so hear me out.
Proposition 8 is an initiative on the ballot that threatens to
eliminate the right to marry for same-sex couples in CA. Mind you,
this proposition would *revoke* the more than 10,000 same-sex
marriages that have already taken place there! This proposition
affects ALL of us, straight and gay alike, because a step backward in
California tarnishes the entire country, making California and the
U.S. a more hostile, less accepting place.
I'm writing to ask you to do whatever you can to help defeat Prop 8.
If you have friends and family in California, especially those who
might not have thought about this issue, can you please talk to them?
Send them an e-mail? Or would you consider donating, as I have done,
to help "No on Prop 8" groups in their publicity and outreach efforts?
The coordinating website for these efforts is at:
http://noonprop8.com
Sincerely,
R*****
No comments:
Post a Comment