No on 8 campaign was in turmoil in last weeks

[cboy4]

This is hardly surprising. I know I was deeply disappointed with the campaign



By Aurelio Rojas
[e-mail]
Published: Thursday, Nov. 13, 2008 | Page 1A

A week after California voters approved Proposition 8 and decreed they wanted to end same-sex marriage in the state, details are emerging of an opposition campaign that was in disarray.

Key staff members – including the campaign manager – were replaced in the final weeks as polls turned dramatically against the No side. Their replacements say they found an effort that was too timid, slow to react, without a radio campaign or a strategy to reach out to African Americans, a group that ultimately supported the measure by more than 2 to 1.

Gay marriage supporters are looking to the courts to overturn the decision. But if another political campaign is waged, said Dennis Mangers, co-chairman of the No on 8 Northern California Committee, "we'll have to do better."

No on 8 campaign manager Steve Smith was shoved aside three weeks before Election Day, after he was slow to counter TV ads in which the measure's supporters claimed that same-sex marriage would be promoted in schools if the measure failed.

Two Sacramento political consultants – Joe Rodota, a Republican, and Gale Kaufman, a Democrat – were brought in by the No campaign. Republican consultant Rick Claussen was asked for advice.

http://www.sacbee.com/111/story/1393623.html

[ananda]

1. How is it that hate and phobia..

.. are so much better organized and funded
than love and inclusion?

You gotta wonder.

[keepCAblue]

2. The people behind Yes on 8 have been at it longer...they have

waged similar campaigns in several other states, dating back to 2000. They are also part of a large network of professional campaigners whose expertise and consultancy they use routinely. And, remember, according to the Mormon Church memo (dated 1997) exposed a couple days ago, the Mormons and Catholics have been strategizing for 11 years to strip GLBTs of their rights and social acceptance. It was a David vs. Goliath scenario. These same people have either directly or indirectly succeeded now in getting constitutional bans in 30 states - 2/3s of the entire U.S.

[bluedawg12]

6. Probably because phobia

is their cover for their real agenda, remaining in power because there is a huge amount of money at stake by maintaining the rw power structure.

[yardwork]

3. Why should anybody have to defend their civil rights?

The whole idea is disgusting. Must every minority group now hire high-priced, highly experienced campaign managers, publicists, web managers, etc. to ensure that the majority won't take away their rights? Since everybody belongs to some minority category or another, this will eventually affect everybody!

Is this what this country has come to now?

[cboy4]

4. You're right, it's totally disgusting. All those millions of dollars

to play defense, while the majority took away rights of a minority.

How proud they must feel. :puke:

[yardwork]

5. Exactly. And what a waste of money - just as California is going bankrupt.

[bluedawg12]

7. Yup.

The Marxist guy on the other thread yesterday talked about playing the different factions within the liberal coalition and identity politics.

That means we are now forced into creating our own.

This is factionalism going back to Nixon's southern strategy.

[David__77]

8. I agree, the no campaign sucked big time.

And I'd say that even if it hadn't passed. The timidity was appalling. We've seen that the whole "regardless of how you feel about marriage" appeal isn't going to work. This is yes/no, black/white issue.