Whither Prop 8?

Starting in 2004, one of the keys for conservatives to get elected was to put gay marriage on ballots. Often, these measures were conservative in nature, reaffirming straight marriage. The idea was often a twofer. Convince conservatives that if they didn't vote for conventional marriage, then this would open the floodgates and allow gay marriage and gay lifestyle to run rampant, and while such voters were being baited to come to the polls, they'd also vote conservative.

Except in normally very blue California, the current polls suggest Proposition 8 which affirms conventional marriage (ironically supported by a treasure trove of Mormon funding which lead to misleading ads) is likely to pass. This is even as many celebrities are against it, many leading Democrats are against it, and even Republican governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger, is against it.

The problem is, alas, a lack of education. It is both a combination of fear and loathing for gay marriages from socially conservative Latinos and African Americans who voted increasing Democrat, despite not supporting many of the more socially liberal views. Indeed, were the Republicans not so reliant on race-baiting to convince conservative poor religious whites to vote against minorities, you could almost imagine African Americans supporting Republicans.

I can see the Republican party splitting in two directions. One is moderate Republicans which is heading to the center on social issues, but staying conservative on fiscal issues. The other way, which seems more likely and was spearheaded by Huckabee, is to be socially conservative, but still looking at supporting the poor. This side would have to embrace African Americans and Latinos. The problem, for now, is the lack of a charismatic candidate, and no, I don't consider Sarah Palin that person.

The key to real changes is improved education. Religious conservatives believe in loyalty to religion above all. If a kid lacks education, this seems a bonus, even if this makes people increasingly susceptible to the weakest arguments.

Gay marriage is a perfect example. Statistics show that LGBT people make up maybe 5% of the population. Even if every one got married, it's still a very small percentage of American marriages. Even so, there's a perception that being gay is a choice and that people can be "wooed" into it, even as there's really no evidence of this. This is that fear and people's general discomfort as well which they back by pointing to a religious tome to back their prejudices.

If Obama is to truly make the changes he wants, he really has to figure out how to make education more valuable to people, but that is tough. Education is a multi-year goal that not everyone agrees. While there is no guarantee that well-educated people are going to be more liberal (there are bright conservatives), the chances are still far better than if they are not well-educated.

To be well-educated is not about knowing more facts than the next person. No, it's about thinking critically. It's about listening to someone's statements and pointing out its inaccuracies. Too often, people listen to an argument and if it sounds good, they think it is good. They lack the mental acumen to see if the argument truly makes sense. Obama and his wife, with their training as lawyers, have learned to dissect arguments, argue its pro and cons. It's perhaps not surprising that Clinton was also a lawyer.

They've all learned, of course, that you can't present standard logical debate arguments to the average American who can't appreciate such arguments. Appeals are made to emotion. I'm moved by Obama's soaring rhetoric too, but it's true that emotion is just that. You can use it to lead and convince, but it leads and convinces with the heart, rather than with the mind.

If Prop 8 passes, it will be because a very blue California is still easily swayed by misleading ads, and even as they voted for Obama, they couldn't bring themselves to vote No to 8.

Obama himself wasn't willing to expend political capital to put his full support behind no on 8. In the end, he knew that was a powder keg that could have derailed his presidency before it started. Now he has to tread a fine line to figure out how to deal with this issue. Certainly, he's likely to avoid it for a while as he tries to pass other initiatives.

Consider the start of Clinton's administration where capital was wasted on gays in the military and for health care reform where strong opposition built up and Clinton had to back down. President Obama will look for safer ground before he tries something with more controversy.

Indeed, if he thinks he can win in 2012, then he may push all those initiatives to the second term, unless his first term goes so swimmingly well that he'll tackle issues few people thinks he will.

Still, I think few people would have thought gay marriage would have gained this much traction. It's not there yet, as it's still being used as a wedge issue to convince religious conservatives to vote conservative, and while certain states have voted against it, there's a possibility that, with the right Supreme Court mix, it could eventually be defeated through the courts. Indeed, court appointments will become a huge issue.

What Obama will do, I'm sure, is to use the grassroots organization to build support from the ground up even during his presidency, and may represent the most novel politician ever, if he takes advantage of it.

Now the question is how will he lead?