To defeat Obama, conservatives take the initiative (Ballot propositions)

[flashl]

They're putting questions on state ballots designed to turn out GOP voters.

LA Times

Social and religious conservatives are placing an increasingly large wager on a strategy they believe may overcome their constituents' lack of enthusiasm for Sen. John McCain, giving him a competitive edge over Sen. Barack Obama even in states as deeply blue as California.

Essentially, the strategy is a reprise of one Karl Rove used to push George W. Bush to victory in 2004, when he helped place measures banning same-sex marriage on the ballot in 11 key states. The Republican incumbent carried them all as religious conservatives -- particularly evangelical Protestants -- flocked to the polls to support the initiatives. This time around, similar measures denying marriage to gay and lesbian couples will be on the ballot in California, Florida and Arizona.

...

Across the country, close to 100 statewide questions already have qualified for the ballot in the November election. As many as 60 could be added. Many of these involve social questions about which ideological and religious conservatives have strong feelings.

Colorado -- a pivotal swing state -- has two. One would define the moment of conception as life's legal beginning; the other would end affirmative action in college admissions and government hiring. South Dakota will consider banning abortion except in cases of rape, incest or threats to the mother's health. California will (once again) vote on parental notification in abortion cases. Arizona will weigh a proposal to deprive employers who hire illegal immigrants of their business licenses. Missouri will decide whether to make English its official language. Oregon will consider drastic restrictions on bilingual education.

[Franks Wild Years]

1. The USA is as democratically illegtimate as...

...North Korea or Zimbabwe if this kind of strategy should lead to a McCain victory. I think it's a bit head in the clouds to think that this will swing California to them, but the very thought of this sort of campaign by these odious people is one that makes my blood boil. It angers me so very greatly.

Personally, I do not believe that these sort of issues should be on the ballots in elections for any kind of office. They should be held seperately on a different day - Otherwise it detracts from the true issue at hand and makes the whole affair a pathetic pantomime among certain bigoted groups.

[flashl]

3. All politics is LOCAL, that's why it is used. nt

[Franks Wild Years]

4. I understand that...

...but I believe there SHOULD be a responsibility to vote for people and these extremely divisive, incendiary local issues seperately on their own merit. Sinister attempts to tarnish candidates by putting 'fag hating' and anti-choice issues on the very same ballots people are using to vote for positions of vital importance, including what I believe to be by far the most important political choice in the world does not sit well with me. But that's just my opinion.

[flashl]

5. No challenge here. It's just discouraging to see the rollout of 'old tricks' used

with some success again and again.

[Youphemism]

8. In California, the initiative is there because of the recent court ruling...

It could well be a ploy in other states, but here in California it's a response to the court ruling that allowed same sex marriages.

FYI, though historically the majority of Californians have sided against same sex marriages, the polls now are showing that this vote will be very close.

It's interesting to note this, because if the vote goes against the initiative, it's unlikely that there will ever be another challenge to same sex marriages in this state.

The idea of putting partisan issues on the ballot is clever and sneaky. But it could sort of backfire, if those initiatives lose. Once civil rights win a popular vote, they probably won't be voted away again.

[4themind]

2. This could be a problem

, the question is, has a strategy (and infrastructure) been developed to combat these things, or will we be playing catch up again.

[flashl]

6. Under estimating the strategy will be the problem. nt

[MonkeyFunk]

7. They always do this

and I never understood why Dems don't do the same thing.

Take some of OUR popular issues and get on the ballots.

[Barack_America]

9. Wow. Looks like CO wants to cut off all federal funding...

With that affirmative action vote.

[flashl]

10. Thank Ward Connerly's American Civil Rights Institute

3 States Poised to Vote on Affirmative Action

The Chronicle

State organizations affiliated with Ward Connerly's American Civil Rights Institute said this month they had gathered more than enough signatures to get measures limiting affirmative-action preferences on the November ballots in Arizona and Nebraska.

With petitions submitted on behalf of a similar ballot measure in Colorado in March, there appears to be a good chance that three states will vote this fall on the proposals, all of which would bar public colleges and other state and local agencies from granting affirmative-action preferences in employment, contracts, and decisions related to education.

Mr. Connerly, the institute's chairman, hoped to put similar measures on the ballots in Missouri and Oklahoma as well, but his organizations in those states failed to gather enough signatures before deadlines earlier this year.