« So much for prognostication.... | Main | iPod disk drama »

November 03, 2004

The party of homophobia

Too tired to do the math, but I'm sure there will be plenty of commentary later today on the nationwide success of "Protection of Marriage" measures and their correlation with Bush's success. In Ohio, for instance, Issue 1 passed 62-38.

Coincidentally (hah!), in Ohio, I show Bush taking 63 or so percent among people who attend church at least weekly, and 83 percent among people who said "moral values" were the primary determinant of their vote (Source: CNN Exit Poll).

Other states with an anti-gay marriage measure included Georgia (to our everlasting shame), Kentucky, Michigan, Mississippi, Montana, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, and Utah.

Florida decided to direct its moralizing at the children, and so passed a parental notification amendment that probably served a similar role in mobilizing thumpers. Again, somebody else will probably run the numbers.

Looks like the social engineering measures probably gave Bush Ohio, gave crazy Sen. Jim Bunning (who was reportedly suggesting his opponent might be "light in the loafers") a win in Kentucky, and might have made the difference in Arkansas (measure passed 75-25 with almost 700k votes, Bush won 54-45 with 530k votes), and kept it close in Michigan (Bush lost by less than 100k votes, measure passed by 650k votes).

Democrats used a similar strategy in California, where the stem-cell measure passed 59-41, with 3.7 million 'yes' votes, and Kerry won 54-45, with 3.6 million votes. Unfortunately, that's the only place where Democrats successfully bucked the conservative tide.

November 3, 2004 in Current Affairs | Permalink


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference The party of homophobia:


It's a shame, really. The Republicans seemed to have an interesting set of economic policies that I was willing to try, but their disgusting social leanings turned me off again, and again, and again.

Can the state just one time NOT try and regulate my personal life? They seem to love lifting regulation for business, why must they make such demands on me?

Posted by: michael at Nov 30, 2004 7:43:51 AM