Do you agree with Jesse Ventura's statement?

[Kulindahr]

Carter is the modern MLK and his peers hate him because he's peace-loving.

Carter doesn't even measure up to MLK's left foot.

 

[Kulindahr]

As far as Age

the 18-29 year old crowd was the ONLY crowd that voted overwhelmingly "No"


39% voted "Yes" and 61% voted "No". If the other Age brackets would have voted along the lines of the 18-29 year olds, then obviously the bill would have failed.

. . . .

If we are going by AGE and bottom line numbers according to this exit poll, all Age Brackets who were 30 and above PASSED the bill.

And yet:

This whole discussion was made here several weeks ago. I've quoted my post from a previous thread below.
. . . .

Based on real votes, 18-30 year olds had the power to beat Prop 8 but didn't bother to vote. More 45-64 year old Californians voted against Prop 8 than did 18-30 year olds.

All those younger folks who didn't care enough to go vote effectively voted for Prop 8. That's why I've said before that the real blame for the loss of that battle falls at the feet of LL's age group, because a great number didn't care enough to get off their asses and spend a brief period of time making their voices heard.

So one way to support gay rights is to bitch about old people while you wait for them to die, and hope that younger generations don't become more conservative as they get older (which of course people usually do). Maybe we'll get those rights ... in 20 years or so?

Another way is to actually use your energy to rally younger people to vote, to get younger people to help in the fight for equal rights today, not in 20 years. In the process you might even sway a few older voters too.

Which option do you think has more chance of succeeding?

Many 60s liberals are now conservatives -- even many former hippies are now conservatives!
That trend has been observed throughout history, and isn't likely to change.

 

[Lostlover]

And if enough people half my age had been tolerant, Prop 8 wouldn't have passed.

He did it again Midnight! Blame the most tolerant group for Prop 8 passing!

 

[Lostlover]

Lost, you totally misrepresent what he said. As often before, you whine that because people are proud of the progress we've made, they must be against gay rights. All you're doing here is griping that those who came before didn't do all the work, and you might have to do some.

Actually, I have said it countless of times before that I feel for older gays. They've lived in times that were less tolerant.

My disagreement is where posters like Iman are totally happy with how gays are treated today. I'm not! More needs to be done. That's my whole point.

But as Alfie keeps asking, just what have you done? Have you dared to be out in places where that could mean getting bones broken and your vehicle smashed? Have you talked with an Evangelical who thinks you're bound for hell and disputed the assertion that being gay is a choice? Have you been to places where rednecks surround you, all holding guns, and calmly admitted you're gay? Have you stood calmly while some parent abused and attacked you verbally for being a pervert who was molesting his children merely by being at the same swimming hole -- and answered quietly with facts?

None of us are "happy getting the short end of the stick". What we are is thankful that people before us (that means older people) got us this far along the path, thankful that when others want to go gay-bashing, the law is now (mostly) on our side, thankful that the really big issues (like being locked in a psych hospital and subjected to a battery of drugs) are behind us, thankful that even though "big ticket" items keep getting beaten down small steps to progress are made steadily.

Can I answer the question in bold by telling you what I haven't done?

My solidarity believe it or truly is with some of the older gays. I am sympathetic. I just don't like how your peers vote. And why you and other posters would defend them is beyond me.

 

[andysayshi]

My solidarity believe it or truly is with some of the older gays. I am sympathetic. I just don't like how your peers vote. And why you and other posters would defend them is beyond me.

There is the problem. I doubt older gays want your sympathy. But I'm sure many of them deserve your respect, which your ageism certainly doesn't provide.

 

[MystikWizard]

Kuli, let's look at something you said ....

All those younger folks who didn't care enough to go vote effectively voted for Prop 8. That's why I've said before that the real blame for the loss of that battle falls at the feet of LL's age group, because a great number didn't care enough to get off their asses and spend a brief period of time making their voices heard.

And as we can see, Lost called you out on those comments ...

He did it again Midnight! Blame the most tolerant group for Prop 8 passing!

And I have to agree with Lost on that one, Kuli.

Because essentially what you are doing is excusing bigoted behavior amongst older people simply because "they are older".

Again, let's look at the breakdown by Age:




18-29 years old (20% total vote) 39% voted YES / 61% voted NO
30-44 years old (28% total vote) 55% voted YES / 45% voted NO
45-64 years old (36% total vote) 54% voted YES / 46% voted NO
65 years and older (15% total vote) 61% voted YES / 39% voted NO



So young adults did get out there and more young adults turned up than the Senior crowd did. However, it obviously wasn't enough.

But let's eliminate that line of thinking for one moment. And I had to do this with the Blacks and Latinos scenario I did earlier, as well.

Let's pretend for one moment that there were no 18-29 year old even out there to vote. That would mean that the only groups out there would be the 30-44, 45-64, and 65 years and older crowds ... all of whom voted in favor of Prop 8, with the 65 year and older crowd actually hitting above the 60% mark in favor of the proposition. Now, if we don't have any 18-29 year old voters out there that were eligible to vote on this, would you excuse the bigoted behavior of all the other age groups, especially the Seniors?

If the Senior crowd voted in the same percentages as the 18-29 year olds, then the bill clearly would have failed.


Again, these were the final percentages of Prop 8:

YES- 52.24%
NO- 47.76%


Going back to the Age brackets:

65 years and older comprised 15% of the total actual vote. 9.15% of the Total Actual Vote were Seniors who voted YES on Prop 8 (15 x .61). If the Seniors had instead voted in the same percentages as the 18-29 crowd with only 39% voting YES, then they would have comprised only 5.85% of the Total YES vote.


9.15 - 5.85 = 3.3%


If we subtracted 52.24% minus 3.3%, then the Yes vote would equate to 48.7%, and clearly the bill would have failed.



Now, I am not saying that this is a realistic scenario, to expect Seniors to change their votes from a 61% Yes and 39% NO to a 39% Yes and a 61% No. However, if we want to get technical, then one could clearly say that Seniors were another huge group responsible for getting Prop 8 passed.


Again, looking at the total vote and these numbers, I am looking at these groups:

1) Seniors = 15% of Total Vote= 61% YES / 39% NO
2) Blacks = 10% of Total Vote = 70% YES / 30% NO
3) Hispanics= 18% Total Vote = 53% YES / 47% NO


These are the three Groups that got Prop 8 passed.

 

[andysayshi]

^ Firstly, MystikWizard, can you please post the source of all the data you are basing your posts from? Your stats are different to the Gallup poll oft referred to by Lostlover, and to the DBR poll I referred to earlier in this thread. (Note that both these polls have equal sample sizes, but the DBR poll was conducted within days of the Prop 8 vote, and is generally considered a truer indication of actual voter attitude than the Gallup poll, which was conducted months after the real vote.)

I could continue to blather about percentages and numbers, but here's what I think really needs to be said about this whole matter:

I haven't seen anybody on this Forum actually dispute the fact that the majority of over-65 voters were for Prop 8. It's a plain fact. But it's also a fact that Lostlover's dividing line for "older people" has changed over time. People well under 65 have been in his sights repeatedly in the past.

But let's talk about the future. If it's not baiting, what exactly is the point of repeatedly posting about "older people" being the cause of gay's lack of rights, when posting on a gay forum? It is clear as day that this forum is populated by people of all age ranges, and the constant attack on "older people" being bigoted will, obviously, ruffle some feathers. As it has. After all, on THIS forum, it's very likely that the older people reading are people who have been fighting for gay rights before you or I were born. At the very least, most older people on this forum are probably not anti-gay bigots.

So, other than as a baiting insult, what exactly is the point? What is the productive use of this constant ageist attack, other than to inflame arguments or garner attention?

The results can only be negative. As a gay collective, we stand to gain knowledge, wisdom and support from older members of our community. We can learn about their struggles in the past, about how they won the support of politicians and the straight community. We can ask them to engage other people of their own generation to support our struggle. Most importantly, perhaps we can learn how they came together as a unified group to stand up to oppression, something which seems sorely lacking today.

But what person will be engaged, will be supportive, if we keep giving them the finger? Why should they give a fuck about us if we keep badmouthing them? Lostlover will step back a few paces when he's called on it, and say he doesn't mean ALL older gay guys - after all, he "sympathizes with them".

But the tone and frequency of his posts ARE insulting to older gay men who use this forum. Don't take my word for it - the posts are too numerous to mention in every ageist thread Lostlover creates or hijacks. It's an attitude that can only damage us. It won't garner support, it won't bring us together, it won't help us achieve any rights. United we stand, divided we fall.

We have very real opposers, and statistically they are best highlighted as people with conservative political ideology (82%) and people with strong religiosity (70%). Both higher than the 61% of 65+ voters in Mystik's post. So not only is beating the ageist drum unproductive on a gay forum, it's also not targeting the real offenders in the straight world either. And as I've pointed out earlier, under-30 voters in Cali had more than enough power to overturn the Prop 8 Yes vote, but the majority of their age group failed to vote at all. More 45-64 year olds voted NO to Prop 8 than 18-29 year olds.

In my opinion, there's just no defense for these constant age-bashing rants on a gay forum. They are insulting to many members here, and irrelevant to the audience to whom they are provided anyway. At best, they are poorly targeted criticism, and at worst they are just plain nastiness. Either way, they serve no purpose on this forum other than to bait arguments. Maybe they'd have some relevance or purpose in a general senior-citizens forum, where some attitudes might be changed, but here?

Considering this is Pride week in the US, how tasteless and unfair that some older members of this forum feel forced to defend their actions of the past, feel the need to argue their non-bigotry, or remind us of the marches and the riots and the petitions and the protests that they were a part of, so that you and I can have the right to this debate on a public forum today.

To our over-65 JUBbers, I raise my glass to you in respect and thanks. I honor your service to our community, and I recognize the freedom your sacrifices may have provided me. Sometimes "service" is nothing more than living your life with honesty - it's not always protests and marches. I pay tribute to the men who died prematurely, when a disease was ignored by the establishment because it wasn't then killing many straight people. And I offer you my hope that, in the future, we will be able to see and enact as much change as you have already provided us.

 

[Lostlover]

Kuli, let's look at something you said ....






And as we can see, Lost called you out on those comments ...





And I have to agree with Lost on that one, Kuli.

Because essentially what you are doing is excusing bigoted behavior amongst older people simply because "they are older".

Again, let's look at the breakdown by Age:




18-29 years old (20% total vote) 39% voted YES / 61% voted NO
30-44 years old (28% total vote) 55% voted YES / 45% voted NO
45-64 years old (36% total vote) 54% voted YES / 46% voted NO
65 years and older (15% total vote) 61% voted YES / 39% voted NO



So young adults did get out there and more young adults turned up than the Senior crowd did. However, it obviously wasn't enough.

But let's eliminate that line of thinking for one moment. And I had to do this with the Blacks and Latinos scenario I did earlier, as well.

Let's pretend for one moment that there were no 18-29 year old even out there to vote. That would mean that the only groups out there would be the 30-44, 45-64, and 65 years and older crowds ... all of whom voted in favor of Prop 8, with the 65 year and older crowd actually hitting above the 60% mark in favor of the proposition. Now, if we don't have any 18-29 year old voters out there that were eligible to vote on this, would you excuse the bigoted behavior of all the other age groups, especially the Seniors?

If the Senior crowd voted in the same percentages as the 18-29 year olds, then the bill clearly would have failed.


Again, these were the final percentages of Prop 8:

YES- 52.24%
NO- 47.76%


Going back to the Age brackets:

65 years and older comprised 15% of the total actual vote. 9.15% of the Total Actual Vote were Seniors who voted YES on Prop 8 (15 x .61). If the Seniors had instead voted in the same percentages as the 18-29 crowd with only 39% voting YES, then they would have comprised only 5.85% of the Total YES vote.


9.15 - 5.85 = 3.3%


If we subtracted 52.24% minus 3.3%, then the Yes vote would equate to 48.7%, and clearly the bill would have failed.



Now, I am not saying that this is a realistic scenario, to expect Seniors to change their votes from a 61% Yes and 39% NO to a 39% Yes and a 61% No. However, if we want to get technical, then one could clearly say that Seniors were another huge group responsible for getting Prop 8 passed.


Again, looking at the total vote and these numbers, I am looking at these groups:

1) Seniors = 15% of Total Vote= 61% YES / 39% NO
2) Blacks = 10% of Total Vote = 70% YES / 30% NO
3) Hispanics= 18% Total Vote = 53% YES / 47% NO


These are the three Groups that got Prop 8 passed.

Thanks for looking up data. I stopped looking for data because they knew it existed and they knew it weakened their arguments but they still bitched and moaned.

 

[Kulindahr]

He did it again Midnight! Blame the most tolerant group for Prop 8 passing!

Make that the MOST APATHETIC group, the group who cares so much about tolerance they didn't get off their asses and vote for it.

If that age group had gone to the polls in the proportion that the over-forty crowd did, Prop 8 wouldn't have had a prayer.

Tolerance is fine, but if apathy overrules it, what good is it? People who don't care about tolerance enough to vote for it are part of the problem, however much their responses may look good in opinion polls. I can answer a question on a poll that says I oppose job discrimination, but if I don't show up at the rally on the capitol steps when a related bill is being voted on -- when the trip takes less than a half hour -- then my "opinion" is nothing but hot air.

And that's what your "most tolerant" group did with Prop 8 -- they blew a lot of hot air. My thanks to those who got out and voted, but the rest aren't worth the amount of effort it takes to scrape gum off my shoe.

 

[Kulindahr]

My disagreement is where posters like Iman are totally happy with how gays are treated today. I'm not! More needs to be done. That's my whole point.

There's one of your problems: he never said that.

Can I answer the question in bold by telling you what I haven't done?

You could, but... you didn't.

All those things I listed -- I've done... in the past two years. What have you done?

My solidarity believe it or truly is with some of the older gays. I am sympathetic. I just don't like how your peers vote. And why you and other posters would defend them is beyond me.

Pointing out that someone's generalizations are false isn't defending anyone. I pointed out a number of accusations against Bush which were in error, but that didn't mean I was defending Bush, it just meant I want clear, reasoned argument.

What I can't understand is why you refuse to acknowledge that the older generations have accomplished anything, even as you complain that they didn't accomplish everything for you.

 

[Kulindahr]

http://www.livescience.com/health/080310-liberal-seniors.html

The article says: "Busting Myth, People Turn More Liberal With Age"

No dog in this fight, but I do notice a stereotype going on by both sides of this ... odd argument.

Interesting!

They'd have just as well have voted AGAINST it had it failed, by that logic. That's a specious argument, Kuli. Apathy, across all age groups, does not necessitate endorsement of the prevailing political trend. You can only thank or blame those who participate, not those who don't give a shit. Who knows how many of the apathetic would have voted for it anyway.

"Your honor, my client is obviously not guilty of this crime. Had others stopped him, the victim would be just fine and we'd not be here right now. Surely it is everyone else's fault."

Polls show that the age group in question are in fact more tolerant. Therefore, every batch of them who didn't go to the polls was a net loss for tolerance. Thus, if a larger portion had gone to the polls, there would have been more votes for tolerance -- so by not going, as a class, they voted for intolerance.

Failing to vote constitutes a vote -- a vote saying, "Whatever you other people decide is fine with me." What that younger, non-voting group in California said, then, is that bigotry and discrimination, bundled in religious discrimination, are fine with them.

 

[Kulindahr]

And I have to agree with Lost on that one, Kuli.

Because essentially what you are doing is excusing bigoted behavior amongst older people simply because "they are older".

Funny you can say I'm saying anything at all about older people, when I wasn't talking about them.

The fact is that the younger bracket voted in a very low percentage. Lost asserts that as a group they are more tolerant, which is what polls indicate. So if they'd gone to the polls in the same portions as older voters, there would have been a major net gain in anti-8 votes.

I can't find the link, but at least one analyst did the math to show that if the 18-29 bracket had turned out as well as the older two brackets, Prop 8 would have gone down to defeat (if they'd voted as they poll).

Again, looking at the total vote and these numbers, I am looking at these groups:

1) Seniors = 15% of Total Vote= 61% YES / 39% NO
2) Blacks = 10% of Total Vote = 70% YES / 30% NO
3) Hispanics= 18% Total Vote = 53% YES / 47% NO


These are the three Groups that got Prop 8 passed.

You're looking at the people who actually voted -- I'm looking at those who 'voted' with their lazy asses. If, say, 80% of every group had gone to the polls and voted as the opinion polls show their views, Prop 8 wouldn't have had a prayer. So when you get down to it, the people who didn't vote made the difference -- and those who excelled in not voting were in the lowest age bracket.

 

[Kulindahr]

^I'm not completely sure I can agree with the idea that attrition equals intolerance, Kulin.

Rather, I'd say that those people just didn't give a fig, the topic being of complete disinterest to them.

If they don't give a fig, then they're okay with intolerance, and by their silence they abet it.

That's how the Communists came to power in Russia: a lot of people just didn't give a fig, so they let it happen.

According to opinion polls, though, these folks do give a fig... but they were too lazy to get out there and actually say so. That's what used to be called "fair weather friends" -- or worse.

 

[MystikWizard]

Funny you can say I'm saying anything at all about older people, when I wasn't talking about them.

The fact is that the younger bracket voted in a very low percentage. Lost asserts that as a group they are more tolerant, which is what polls indicate. So if they'd gone to the polls in the same portions as older voters, there would have been a major net gain in anti-8 votes.

I can't find the link, but at least one analyst did the math to show that if the 18-29 bracket had turned out as well as the older two brackets, Prop 8 would have gone down to defeat (if they'd voted as they poll).



You're looking at the people who actually voted -- I'm looking at those who 'voted' with their lazy asses. If, say, 80% of every group had gone to the polls and voted as the opinion polls show their views, Prop 8 wouldn't have had a prayer. So when you get down to it, the people who didn't vote made the difference -- and those who excelled in not voting were in the lowest age bracket.

And yet younger people, at the same time, still outnumbered Seniors at the polls. Go figure. I need to see some statistics to your claim that "Younger people did not get out and vote". What was the turnout of each of the Age brackets? Do you have something that says that?

Again, you are excusing bigoted behavior by trying to pass the buck onto a certain age bracket, who I have yet to see you provide any turnout percentage for based on Age Demographics. And again, I am not talking about actual real percentage, but rather I am talking about turnout percentage who showed up at the polls by age group vs the total eligible voters by age group.

I'm not saying you're wrong, but the more data we have, the better. I feel like I have done my part in posting a lot of data in this thread. So if you could take a turn, that would be great.



And, with all due respect, I agree with Lost in that you are avoiding the issue at hand. After we square that out of the way, once you post some numbers, I'd like you to address the behaviors and attitudes within the groups on focus. The groups with the high percentage of Yes's. If we are looking at Age, then we are looking at Seniors. 61% of the entire Senior vote voted "YES".

We are also talking about Blacks. 70% of all the Black vote voted "YES".

We are talking about Hispanics. While only 53% voted "YES", the problem was that they represented 18% of the Total Actual Vote, while the Black vote comprised 10% of the Total Actual Vote. So in doing the math, 7% of the entire "YES on 8" vote came from Blacks. And 9.54% of the entire "YES on 8" vote came from Hispanics. 9.15% of the entire "YES on 8" vote came from Seniors. Keeping in mind that this Senior vote, of course, is comprised of all Races.



I am talking about examining and addressing attitudes and behaviors by group. And I have yet to hear you address any of this. Rather, I only hear you blame more young people for not getting to the polls, while seemingly leaving the other groups off the hook, despite their internal behaviors. Unacceptable.

^ Firstly, MystikWizard, can you please post the source of all the data you are basing your posts from? Your stats are different to the Gallup poll oft referred to by Lostlover, and to the DBR poll I referred to earlier in this thread. (Note that both these polls have equal sample sizes, but the DBR poll was conducted within days of the Prop 8 vote, and is generally considered a truer indication of actual voter attitude than the Gallup poll, which was conducted months after the real vote.)

Andy, I have posted the link once before. I grabbed it off Wikipedia, which had the exit polling posted.


Again, here is the link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_8_(2008)


Now, if we think there is more accurate polling other than the exit polling conducted right after the votesm feel free to pass it along. I noticed you listed a couple, but I actually have to leave the house now, so I can't look at them. I'll be back on in a couple hours and look at them, and continue discussing this, though. But if you could let me know why you feel that polling is actually more accurate, then let me know.

Again, if anyone else has other polling data on the day of the vote or AFTER the vote, feel free to post the links. Again, my opinions and statements were pretty much based on the Exit Polling the day of the election.

 

[Kulindahr]

And yet younger people, at the same time, still outnumbered Seniors at the polls. Go figure. I need to see some statistics to your claim that "Younger people did not get out and vote". What was the turnout of each of the Age brackets? Do you have something that says that?

Again, you are excusing bigoted behavior by trying to pass the buck onto a certain age bracket, who I have yet to see you provide any turnout percentage for based on Age Demographics. And again, I am not talking about actual real percentage, but rather I am talking about turnout percentage who showed up at the polls by age group vs the total eligible voters by age group.

andysayshi posted the figures earlier; I don't remember whether it was in this thread or not.

But I'm not excusing anything; I'm merely pointing out that if younger voters had voted in the same proportion as their elders, the issue would have gone the other way.

And, with all due respect, I agree with Lost in that you are avoiding the issue at hand. After we square that out of the way, once you post some numbers, I'd like you to address the behaviors and attitudes within the groups on focus. The groups with the high percentage of Yes's. If we are looking at Age, then we are looking at Seniors. 61% of the entire Senior vote voted "YES".

We are also talking about Blacks.

I am talking about examining and addressing attitudes and behaviors by group. And I have yet to hear you address any of this. Rather, I only hear you blame more young people for not getting to the polls, while seemingly leaving the other groups off the hook, despite their internal behaviors. Unacceptable.

I'm not interested in any of that. What I'm interested in is that Lost keeps blaming "the older people", when in fact if "the younger people" had gotten out and voted in the same proportions as those folks he derides, those people wouldn't have mattered. He harps on how other people blew it, but his generation is "the most tolerant", but if his generation had the commitment to get out and vote what they believe that others do, the people he complains about wouldn't have even been a factor. In fact, I'd be willing to bet that if his generation had gotten out and voted at the rate that the religious right folks did, Prop 8 would have failed even if everyone over 60 had voted for it.

That's the issue. Instead of whining about other people, he should be getting his ass in gear and motivating his own, self-praising generation. If they are truly tolerant, let him rouse them, drag them, bribe them, tease them, seduce them, or whatever it takes, just get them to the polls and vote those tolerant convictions.

It's a strategy that can work. My dad and a friend put it into practice here on a couple of occasions, getting out just a small percentage more of people to get the candidates they wanted for city council, mayor, county commissioner, and some other positions -- and as a result got some serious issues decided in a sensible way (as opposed to dithering for years until the state decided them for us).

I've posted some things I've done for "the cause". All I'm asking is that LL put his energy on the line and do something substantial to get his generation to the polls -- because if two out of three of them would vote the way they poll, this war would end rather rapidly.

 

[andysayshi]

Andy, I have posted the link once before. I grabbed it off Wikipedia, which had the exit polling posted.


Again, here is the link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_8_(2008)


Now, if we think there is more accurate polling other than the exit polling conducted right after the votesm feel free to pass it along. I noticed you listed a couple, but I actually have to leave the house now, so I can't look at them. I'll be back on in a couple hours and look at them, and continue discussing this, though. But if you could let me know why you feel that polling is actually more accurate, then let me know.

Again, if anyone else has other polling data on the day of the vote or AFTER the vote, feel free to post the links. Again, my opinions and statements were pretty much based on the Exit Polling the day of the election.

For some reason the link doesn't work for me, but I followed through to the Wiki article no problem.

First, note this statement in your Wikipedia article:

...exit polls are more inaccurate than regular opinion polls, due to an intrinsic geographical bias stemming from the fact that most precincts are not sampled.

The location of an exit poll will severely skew the results.

For this reason, the DBR poll I've quoted is scientifically a more accurate representation of the electorate - it's a statewide scientific poll, without geographical bias, taken the day after election day. LL's Gallup Poll was taken months later.

Here it is again:

These stats seem more logical to me than those of the exit poll, because they better represent the final outcome - there was only a 2.5% swing required to overturn Prop 8, or around 325,000 votes. There is only a 45/55 split in 18-29yo votes in the DBR poll.

The US Census tells us there are around 5,400,000 18-29 year old Californians, but only 3,595,000 over 64. At 17% of the vote, that means only 2.2 million 18-29 year olds voted. If just 15% more of the eligible 18-29yo's had bothered to vote, and the voter trend remained the same, Prop 8 would have failed easily.

But again, the number game can be debated forever. What is the point, exactly, other than to insult and bait the older audience on this Forum?

 

[MystikWizard]

For some reason the link doesn't work for me, but I followed through to the Wiki article no problem.

First, note this statement in your Wikipedia article:



The location of an exit poll will severely skew the results.

For this reason, the DBR poll I've quoted is scientifically a more accurate representation of the electorate - it's a statewide scientific poll, without geographical bias, taken the day after election day. LL's Gallup Poll was taken months later.

Here it is again:

These stats seem more logical to me than those of the exit poll, because they better represent the final outcome - there was only a 2.5% swing required to overturn Prop 8, or around 325,000 votes. There is only a 45/55 split in 18-29yo votes in the DBR poll.

The US Census tells us there are around 5,400,000 18-29 year old Californians, but only 3,595,000 over 64. At 17% of the vote, that means only 2.2 million 18-29 year olds voted. If just 15% more of the eligible 18-29yo's had bothered to vote, and the voter trend remained the same, Prop 8 would have failed easily.

But again, the number game can be debated forever. What is the point, exactly, other than to insult and bait the older audience on this Forum?

I originally stated that based on Exit Polling, I was looking at 3 Primary groups that passed Proposition 8.

I said that based on the Exit Poll numbers, that I was looking at:

1) Seniors
2) Blacks
3) Hispanics


And again, just to refresh, this was the Actual Vote:

YES- 52.24 %
NO- 47.76%




Now, looking at the DBR Poll, what I see are some varying degrees between the Yes/No percentages as well as their total makeup for the total vote. This was most obvious with the Black vote.


The Exit Poll had Blacks listed as: comprising 10% of the Total Vote, and ranked Blacks as being 70% FOR the Proposition. This would imply that 7% of the Total "YES on 8" vote came from Blacks. This DBR Poll would indicate that 4.6% of the Total "Yes on 8" vote came from Blacks.

If Blacks would have voted in the same percentage as Whites, according to the DBR poll, then the total "YES on 8" vote from Blacks would have been 3.43%. That's a reduction of 1.17% from the total "YES on 8" vote, which would have brought that vote down to:

YES- 51.07%
NO- 48.93%


The bill still would have passed.


Looking at Hispanics:


The Exit Polling indicated that Hispanics comprised 18% of the Total vote, with 53% in Favor of "YES on 8". This would mean that 9.54% of the "YES on 8" vote came from Hispanics.

In the DBR Poll, it indicates that 14% of the Total vote were Hispanic, with 59% of Hispanics supporting the amendment. This would mean that 8.26% of the "YES on 8" vote came from Hispanics.

Now, if Hispanics voted in the same percentage of Whites did (again, according to this poll, then 6.86% of the Total "YES on 8" vote would have been as a result of Hispanic voters. That is a difference of 1.4% and would thus bring the vote down to:


YES- 49.67%
NO- 50.33%



And the Group that deserves the most praise (again, according to that poll) were Asians, who voted 48% YES, while Whites voted 49% Yes.


The only two Race groups that were UNDER 50% in that poll were Whites and Asians. So again, I have to ask, "What really changed between this poll and the Exit Polling?" The bottom line is that there is clearly still more Homophobia running rampant in BOTH the Black Community AND the Hispanic Community ..... and over 50% of those voting within their own Community voted "YES on 8".

Had those groups voted UNDER 50%, along with Asians and Whites, then the amendment would have failed.




Now, looking at Age.


The Exit Polling indicated the following:

18-29 (20%) 39% YES
30-44 (28%) 55% YES
45-64 (36%) 54% YES
65 + Older (15%) 61% YES

And the DBR indicated some different results:

18-29 (17%) 45% YES
30-44 (21%) 48% YES
45-64 (38%) 47% YES
65 + Older (23%) 67% YES

The BIG Difference between this Poll and the Exit Polling is that instead of JUST the 18-29 crowd being UNDER the 50% threshold, 3 of the 4 groups were all UNDER the 50% threshold .....

Except for .... you guessed it ... Seniors.


Who, in this particular case, had an even larger "YES on 8" percentage than the Exit Polling indicated.

If Seniors had voted along with any of the other 3 age brackets, the amendment would have failed.


According to this, Seniors were the absolute biggest factor in the passing of Proposition 8, accounting for 15.41% of the Total "YES on 8" vote. Again, if we are going by these numbers, Lost is absolutely correct in wanting to place the blame for this bill passing on them.

All groups that were over the 50% mark, which includes:


Seniors
Hispanics
Blacks


deserves the appropriate credit in this bill passing.


So in reality Andy, even though you posted a poll with some different numbers, what really changed? The same 3 groups still voted to support Proposition 8, with each over 50%.

 

[NickCole]

Nope. This is why I pointed out often the very striking similarities between Lostlover and NickCole. But, it is ok for NickCole to do it, but god forbid Lostlover ever point out the same argument but in reverse. June 12th of 2008: http://www.justusboys.com/forum/showpost.php?p=3992449&postcount=56

That's a great link because it proves you wrong, proves a big difference, not a similarity, between the point I've made about generations versus the one dimensional hostility LL demonstrates.

What I wrote about generations that you quoted in that link:

Obviously what I write about Millennials does not mean every single human being born within the years of the Millennial Generation respond exactly the same way. It's, as I've repeated often, about common generational experience and response. ...

Yes, and the parents and grandparents you refer to were once the younger generation -- and when they were the younger generation they, too, were appalled by the older generation's attitudes about race, gender and sexuality. It's the work THEY did --the parents and grandparents you refer to-- that made it possible for Barack Obama to run and win this Primary. And for gays to live fully out of the closet, live anywhere and perform in any job they want, even made same-sex marriage a real possibility. It's the work THEY did that led the way for today's younger generation's attitudes about race, gender and sexuality. The older generation you refer to are the ones who changed it; this younger generation didn't make the change, they're the beneficiary of that change. ...

The lack of respect and generosity for the people who did this work, who made the real sacrifices and took the real chances, is shameful.

I love it when you quote my old posts. What I wrote there is spot-on.

 

[NickCole]

The chapter is called "Thinking War in a Peaceful Place" and he goes through recent American history (1950's and on) about how the government has made a concerted effort at times to go to war and that basically the government will and has lied to justify military intervention.

He goes on about how corporate America is making a killing on projects in Iraq (Haliburton, Blackwater, etc.). According to Ventura, there's a 2 to 1 ratio of private security agents like Blackwater to American soldiers!

Obviously he spoke about Iraq but also the Gulf of Tonkin incident that was a government lie to get us involved in Vietnam.

He also fillets people in his generation like Bush and Cheney who got deferments to stay from fighting (Cheney enrolled at a community college after getting his JD to avoid serving his country. Cheney filed for deferment 5 times!).

This quote below sticks out the most to me from this chapter.



The original quote was asking how people in Ventura's generation that have seen the cruelties of war now be the staunchest supporters of military involvement. Voluntary military involvement in another country?

Basically, he's just as pissed off as I am. And he's speaking right to me.

I agree with what Ventura wrote, in the context he placed it.

But as is too typical with too many Obama supporters, you're using it to try to make a point he doesn't make. That's intellectual dishonesty.

 

[NickCole]

I'm not baiting. You, as a gay man, should be just as angry as I am. But to not know who your enemies are is probably why gays are scraping the bottom of the barrel for things like health benefits in 2009.

You're right you've got to know who your supporters are and who your enemies are, even if the answer to that is inconvenient or not what you'd like.

We knew, in the 60s, 70s and 80s, who our enemies were. Otherwise there is no way we'd have achieved what we did. In the 90s it got murky. Clinton was our supporter but in that post-80s environment he couldn't succeed at what he tried to accomplish for gays -- thanks in no small part to Democrats like Sam Nunn.

Today, in the past month, I think a divide is beginning to form within the gay community. On one side are those who believe Obama no matter what he says versus what he does, and on the other are those who are seeing him for who he really is.

If Obama doesn't push Congress to repeal DOMA now, it's not going to happen. And if it isn't repealed, it doesn't matter how many states legalize same sex marriage -- we still pay the same taxes as hets and are left out of more than a thousand federal benefits. And repealing DADT without providing equal benefits to gay partners is little more than officially infantalizing us -- "letting" us be openly gay while we serve but not providing benefits for our partners that heterosexual spouses receive. Obama promised to work to repeal DOMA and failing to even try, with a Democratic controlled House and Senate, reveals the truth of what he supports and what he does not.