Maine: Question 1, Prop 8 part 2 (And WA's R-71)

[Pint0 Xtreme]

Here we go again!

Maine Vote Is Focus of Gay-Marriage Fight

A week before Maine voters decide whether to repeal the state’s new same-sex marriage law, donations and volunteers are pouring in to sway what both sides call a nationally significant fight.

Supporters of the marriage law, which the Legislature approved in May, have far more money and ground troops than opponents, who have been led by the Catholic Church. Yet most polls show the two sides neck and neck, suggesting that gay couples here, as in California last year, could lose the right to marry just six months after they gained it.

Although Maine’s population is a tiny fraction of California’s and the battle here has been comparatively low profile, it comes at a crucial point in the same-sex marriage movement. Still reeling from last year’s defeat in California, gay-rights advocates say a defeat here could further a perception that only judges and politicians embrace same-sex marriage.

But if Maine’s law is upheld, it would be the movement’s first victory at the ballot box; voters in about 30 states have banned same-sex marriage.

Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts and Vermont allow gay couples to marry, but courts and legislatures, not voters, made it possible.

“It’s a defining moment,” said Marc Mutty, chairman of Stand for Marriage Maine, which is leading the repeal effort. “What happens here in Maine is going to have a mushrooming effect on the issue at large.”

Maine had planned to allow same-sex marriage starting in September, but put it off until the outcome of the referendum. It is the only state with a same-sex marriage question on its ballot this fall.

The outcome could have particular resonance in California, where same-sex marriage supporters have been debating how soon to seek a repeal of their own state’s ban.

Mr. Mutty’s group has repeatedly warned voters that if same-sex marriage survives in Maine, public schools will most likely teach children about it. That strategy proved effective in California, and even after Maine’s attorney general announced this month that the state would not require same-sex marriage to be taught, opponents have continued raising the possibility.

One of their television ads warns that in Massachusetts, where same-sex marriage has been legal since 2003, some teachers answer “thoroughly and explicitly” when students ask about gay sex.

But Stand for Marriage has not been able to advertise nearly as much as the lead group campaigning to save the law. That group, Protect Maine Equality, has raised $4 million, compared with Stand for Marriage’s $2.6 million. Its overarching message is that all people, including gays and lesbians, should be treated equally under the law.

“You may disagree,” a gray-haired lobsterman says in a Protect Maine Equality advertisement, “but people have a right to live the way they want to live.”

The group has raised much of its money on the Internet, where it has also recruited volunteers from around the country with a Web site, http://www.travelforchange.org. Stace McDaniel, a retired teacher from Atlanta, said he decided to spend a few weeks volunteering for Protect Maine Equality after attending his first same-sex wedding this summer.

“I can’t believe I’m doing this,” said Mr. McDaniel, 57, who said he took out a $5,000 home equity line of credit to finance his trip. “It was a chance to do something really important. I don’t know anyone in Maine, but here I am.”

One of the volunteers working phones at the Stand for Maine offices last Thursday was Bonnie Johnstone of Portland, who said she had decided to help after hearing about the campaign at her Mormon church. But while Mormons played a huge role in California’s same-sex marriage ban — providing reserves of money and volunteers — they appear to be far less involved here, partly because the Mormon Church has a much smaller presence in New England.

The repeal effort has drawn a small number of volunteers from other states, Mr. Mutty said, including a group of students from Brigham Young University, a Mormon school in Utah.

Stand for Marriage hired the same consulting firm that ran the California campaign against same-sex marriage, Schubert Flint Public Affairs, based in Sacramento, to produce its ads. And most of its financial support has come from the National Organization for Marriage, a conservative Christian group based in New Jersey that has fought same-sex marriage in other states.

But the Roman Catholic Diocese of Portland has played the most tangible role in the repeal movement, even urging its parishes to collect donations by passing a second collection plate during Mass.

The Maine Ethics Commission is investigating whether the National Organization for Marriage has violated the state’s campaign finance laws by keeping its donors anonymous. The group has responded with a lawsuit challenging Maine’s financial reporting requirements.

With no big races drawing voters to the polls this year, both sides say that get-out-the-vote efforts will be crucial. Supporters of same-sex marriage are targeting college students, while opponents are focusing on older voters from the state’s more conservative central and northern regions.

“Their voters are going to be weather-dependent, mood-dependent,” Mr. Mutty said. “Our voters tend to vote no matter what.”

Since polls have historically undercounted opponents of same-sex marriage — and none have shown supporters of the law more than a few points ahead, anyway — Protect Maine Equality is taking nothing for granted.

“We have every reason to think this will be a razor-thin election,” said Jesse Connolly, the group’s campaign manager.

Katie Zezima contributed reporting from Portland, Me.

What's working against us:
- This is an off-off-election year (I mean, who the fuck votes in 2009?) so older people and more conservative people usually turn out.
- The same guys who won Prop 8 are also running this campaign and are slamming us with the same fear mongering ads. (Compare Prop 8 vs. Ques 1)

What's working for us:
- Strong ground campaign. Unlike last year, nothing has been taken for granted. NoOn1 have been fielding much stronger canvassing programs and having one on one conversations with voters.
- Unlike NoOn8, the NoOn1 campaign have been outreaching to religious communities and have been attacking the idea that this is a religious vs. gay fight.
- We've also outraised our opponents in fundraising almost by a 2:1 margin through this month. (Regardless, the YesOn1 campaign have actually been more dependent on out of state funding than the NoOn1 campaign)
- NoOn1 has gotten the endorsements from Maine's major newspapers, Governor Baldacci and the YesOn1 claims have been debunked officially by the Attorney General of Maine (Though such endorsements weren't enough to defeat Prop 8 last year)

So some poll numbers:
Nate Silver at FiveThirtyEight.com has produced a pretty good blog about polling and turn out.
A somewhat recent PPP survey (PDF) had 48Yes-48No-4Undecided figures last week, which runs this election very close. But also, the Pan Atlantic SMS poll (PDF) two weeks ago and yesterday, showed much more optimistic results with 41Yes-53No-6Undecided. Both polls surveyed likely voters. The PPP poll had a larger sample and is a national poll whereas the Pan Atlantic SMS had a smaller sample and is a local poll. But if Nate Silver's analysis is worth anything, then there's some hope since he puts the probability of the marriage ban passing at a 2-5 disadvantage.




Also, Washington State has a referendum to repeal domestic partnerships. It's pretty fucked up since this is domestic partnerships and not marriage. (Washington state residents should vote APPROVE R-71 to keep domestic partnerships). The good news is that we're winning in the polls there. The bad news is it's uncomfortably close for something like domestic partnerships.

Washington poll: Gay-rights measure headed to victory; spending limit may lose
By Jeff Mapes, The Oregonian
October 27, 2009, 10:18AM
If you believe a new poll from the University of Washington's survey unit, the domestic partnership measure on the Nov. 3 ballot is headed to victory.

The Washington Poll found that 56 percent of voters say they will vote yes on Referendum 71, which would uphold the law passed by the Legislature that extends a wide variety of benefits to same-sex partners. It's often referred to the "everything but marriage" law.

Another 39 percent said they are opposed and only 5 percent say they are undecided. Including only likely voters barely changes the numbers.

The fight is a little closer on the other big measure on the ballot, Initiative 1033, which would put a strict spending limit on state and local government. That measure, by prolific initiative activist Tim Eyman, has activated all of the usual debate over over whether the limits would put a straitjacket on Washington government or merely keep government from growing too big.

In any case, the survey shows 41 percent of voters supporting 1033 and 46 percent opposed. A still-hefty 13 percent say they are undecided. One other interesting finding that has to concern supporters of 1033: among those who have already cast their mail ballots, 55 percent said they voted no, and 45 percent said they were for it. That's a sign that the opposition is doing a better job of getting their voters out.

The university's survey center also did a separate poll on the Seattle mayor's race and found Joe Mallahan leading with 39 percent while Mike McGinn was at 32 percent. Among likely voters, Mallahan led, 44 percent to 36 percent.

In both cases, though, there are still large percentages of undecided voters. Clearly, though, it's a poll that has to cheer the Mallahan campaign.

UPDATE: The McGinn campaign, noting that pollsters underestimated McGinn's strength in the primary, question the validity of the poll, seattlepi.com reports.

The election is next week November 3rd, 2009. I'm crossing my fingers that we win in both states!

[The Duchess of Zeon]

The problem with R-71 is that a fair number of people are probably going to vote no in an effort to keep domestic partnerships from losing all the new rights because they're confused about the state's admittedly bizarre confirmation vote system. I suspect actually 60% of people are for domestic partnerships... But 4% think they're being for it by voting no. Or possibly even higher.

[Pint0 Xtreme]

The problem with R-71 is that a fair number of people are probably going to vote no in an effort to keep domestic partnerships from losing all the new rights because they're confused about the state's admittedly bizarre confirmation vote system. I suspect actually 60% of people are for domestic partnerships... But 4% think they're being for it by voting no. Or possibly even higher.

It depends on who you talk to I think. Both the NoOn8 and NoOn1 campaigns have found supporters who were confused by the wording too. I phone banked for Maine on Sunday afternoon and talked to at least three supportive voters who didn't know which way to vote to keep marriage equality. And we're now one week away from the election! Washington's election system on the other hand requires our supporters to give an affirmative vote by marking "Approve" at the ballot. But perhaps after all this No On X to keep marriage equality, we've gotten too used to the negative side of the vote. Also interestingly, Maine's election system allows voters to vote early both by absentee ballot and in person.

[Master of Ossus]

At least Maine doesn't have a Gavin Newsome to get everyone who hates obnoxious jackasses against this.

[SirNitram]

I expected this to be talked about ALOT earlier. I've been following the antics and occasional investigations into Yes On 1.

[Duckie]

I like how the day after the reporting deadline for monetary funds, Yes on 1 received a 1.1 million dollar check from the Mormon Church completely unaffiliated political advocacy group NOM, bringing them equal in funds to No On 1. It's only because they- we- expected this to happen, so were raising money too, keeping the 2:1 advantage in money.

Thankfully, from what I've been hearing, No on 1 is ridiculously corrupt and sending absurd payments to friends for their 'services', like 30,000 dollars for 'web design'. Every dollar they steal for themselves is a dollar that isn't going into winning this. Let's hope that the awesomeness of Maine and the terribleness of the opposition combine and magnify eachother.

[Duckie]

ghetto edit- Both polls in the OP have their downsides:

The close voice one: The crosstabs IIRC show just under 50% in the old age bracket and 16% in the young bracket, which might be true on an off-year, but I would hope it'll be higher, increasing support. It also was done by automated landline calling, which many people, especially young people, especially Mainers who live in remote areas often, would not have. However, it was automated, and there is a Bradley effect whereby bigots will not tell live people they are bigoted, which is why live polls in California pre-Prop-8 all stated there'd be a huge win for gay rights.

The winning SMS one: SMS Polls catch a disproportionate number of young people, which is why there's so much support in that one. I don't believe there'll be a +10% win for one minute, especially when you consider Prop 8 has taught us every single "undecided" is actually "I loathe gays but don't want to tell you that".

Basically it depends on youth turnout, like any modern civil rights issue, since people under 30 have a much larger chance of being good people. Maine is not a very old state by and by, and almost half of its population lives in a single city which is also adjacent to a gay resort town. It also has a large university level. It's an extremely non-religious state, as Nate points out, and that might make the difference if his regression model (0.9+ points of anti-gay per every point of religious people) is correct.

However, it also has the catholics- without the catholic church raiding its "save our churches from going under the water during the recession" fund and using it to try to fight gay rights, this attempt would have been stillborn. Maine is also very rural, although I'd like to think we have a better quality of rural person than the south in terms of being a valid human being. And Maine has to overcome the "THINK OF THE CHILDREN (subtext that they won't say out loud: GAYS WILL RAPE YOUR KIDS)" and "homosexuality is gross ew" barriers, both of which haven't been overcome easily.

[Pint0 Xtreme]

I don't believe there'll be a +10% win for one minute, especially when you consider Prop 8 has taught us every single "undecided" is actually "I loathe gays but don't want to tell you that".

Precisely. We cannot count on any undecideds since when election day comes, undecided voters tend to vote overwhelmingly against us.

Basically it depends on youth turnout, like any modern civil rights issue, since people under 30 have a much larger chance of being good people. Maine is not a very old state by and by, and almost half of its population lives in a single city which is also adjacent to a gay resort town. It also has a large university level. It's an extremely non-religious state, as Nate points out, and that might make the difference if his regression model (0.9+ points of anti-gay per every point of religious people) is correct.

As far as the polls go, I thought the way Pan Atlantic SMS poll identified likely voters was somewhat peculiar. Generally speaking, the best way to identify a likely voter is by looking at their previous voting pattern because past behavior is the best predictor for future behavior. For example, if someone voted 4 out of 5 times in the last 5 elections, they would generally be considered a likely voter - the kind of voter who would vote in a 2009 election. Although the PPP survey didn't specify how they identified likely voters, I suspect this is the methodology they used. Hence, their poll surveyed a very large disproportionate percentage of elder voters as opposed to younger voters since very few people would typically vote on such an off-off-year election.

If you look at the Pan Atlantic SMS poll, however, they actually indicated that they identified likely voters by asking voters if they were likely to vote. On the surface, this seems to be an inferior method of identifying likely voters since past behavior tend to be better predictors of future behavior than the word of registered voters. But this isn't a normal off-off-year election. If the NoOn1 campaign have done their work, they would have allocated tremendous amounts of their resources to getting the vote out. The barrage of ads from the multi-million dollar campaigns have also brought this issue to heightened levels of awareness in the state. And not to mention, the campaign is running a large grassroots oriented canvassing program and getting volunteers to personally reach out to fellow Mainers. As a result, the Pan Atlantic SMS poll's methodology of identifying likely voters may actually end up being more accurate since this is an unusually visible election. At least, that's what I'm hoping for.

I think Nate sees this as well. He indicated that if the turn out is anything like 2008's election, the marriage ban would no doubt fail. But he also said that if the turn out is equivalent to a normal off-off-year election, the outcome would more or less be a toss-up as reflected in the PPP survey. However, if the NoOn1 campaign can generate a turn out somewhere in between those two scenarios, then it may be just enough for us to win. I personally think this is the closest we've ever been to winning one of these god damn referendums. Out of 30 states where these voter referendum fights have been held, we have lost all 30 (Arizona, California and Florida being the 28th, 29th and 30th). Winning the fight in Maine is more important to the national movement than most people realize.

However, it also has the catholics- without the catholic church raiding its "save our churches from going under the water during the recession" fund and using it to try to fight gay rights, this attempt would have been stillborn. Maine is also very rural, although I'd like to think we have a better quality of rural person than the south in terms of being a valid human being. And Maine has to overcome the "THINK OF THE CHILDREN (subtext that they won't say out loud: GAYS WILL RAPE YOUR KIDS)" and "homosexuality is gross ew" barriers, both of which haven't been overcome easily.

Admittedly, the messaging by the other side have been very smart and insidious. They understand that most of the population on some level aren't ready to accept gay couples as equals into society yet. But they also understand that framing the question uniquely will yield differing emotional results from voters. Most people don't have a very high degree of opposition towards marriage equality if they don't think it will affect them much. But what the "They will teach gay marriage in schools OH NOES!" message does is it subtly reminds people that marriage equality will ensure that gay couples are treated as equals in society by reminding people that their children will think differently from themselves in the future. Now people don't really consciously follow those lines of thought but subconsciously, it hits them right there.

[Feil]

I went ahead and voted early today (by 'absentee ballot' even though I'm registered here). There was already a long line.

Also, the University of Maine is flying the Pride flag today.

[Pint0 Xtreme]

I went ahead and voted early today (by 'absentee ballot' even though I'm registered here). There was already a long line.

Also, the University of Maine is flying the Pride flag today.

That's great! Considering how few people are going to be voting in this election, every single vote counts more than ever. I'd strongly encourage you to reach out to as many people as you know to tell them to vote NO on 1 early. Or, if you have any spare time, volunteer for the campaign.

[Pint0 Xtreme]

And the CRAZIES come out!

’Americans for Truth’ Too Homophobic Even for Maine Marriage Equality Opponents

Marriage equality opponents in Maine offer arguments against domestic parity for gay and lesbian families that some may find dubious: unsupported (and, say state authorities, spurious) claims that unless marriage rights for for gays are repealed, school children will have to learn about gay families in schools; the oft-repeated but ill-explained notion that marriage rights for gay couples will erode marriage for heterosexuals; concerns that religious freedoms will automatically be trampled if family freedoms are expanded.

But there’s one anti-gay group that is so far beyond the pale that even the state’s opposition to legal recognition for gay and lesbian families don’t want to be associated with them: the people behind anti-gay blog Americans for Truth About Homosexuality (AFTAH). Stand for Marriage Maine, the state’s official campaign to pass the anti-gay ballot initiative, was quick to disavow the group when another anti-gay organization, the Maine Grassroots Coalition, embraced the visit of AFTAH leader Peter LaBarbera and anti-gay activist Brian Camenker of the anti-gay group MassResistance, who was also present at a press conference organized by the Grassroots Coalition.

At a press conference, the Maine Grassroots Coalition’s leader, Paul Madore, who a local newscast said "brought" AFTAH and Camenker to Maine, repeated the claims that marriage equality would lead to a campaign to silence critics of gay families, made the claim that a "national campaign" to bring out-of-staters into Maine and defraud voters on election day. However, as the newscast also reports, the official Yes on 1 campaign, which seeks to rescind marriage rights for Maine’s gay and lesbian families via a Proposition 8-like voter initiative, "disavows" Madore and AFTAH.

Local news course The Record offered its slant on AFTAH’s visit to Maine. Among a number of other articles on the subject of marriage equality--all negative--The Record offered an Oct 28 item that called Madore and the others "leaders of the pro-family movement" and said that they had "expose[d] the hidden agenda of the same sex marriage movement." The article also took a not-too-subtle dig at the news media, saying, "The press conference was heavily attended by reporters who in addition to hearing the unvarnished truth about the homosexual rights movement, got a much-needed lecture on journalistic ethics." Added the article, "Throughout the press conference, Madore faulted the media for their blatantly obvious double standard in the battle over homosexual marriage."

Mainstream publications, however, reported that Stand for Marriage Maine was definite about distancing itself from AFTAH and MassResistance. An Oct. 29 article in the Bangor Daily News quoted Stand for Marriage Maine spokesperson Scott Fish as saying of the press conference, "We disavow anything said today as being in any way connected to the Stand for Marriage Maine campaign.... Whatever was said today was simply the words of the people speaking at the press conference."

The article also zeroed in on some of the more extravagant claims made by the anti-gay extremists, such as LaBarbera’s claims that the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force operated from "one of the most radical sexual agendas ever conceived."

LaBarbera reiterated claims that young children would be indoctrinated in schools if gay family rights were not revoked. "Very clearly there is already a very aggressive agenda in the schools," the article quoted him as saying. "Homosexual so-called marriage only fuels that agenda. It institutionalizes it so that there can be no difference in how this aberrant form of ’marriage’ is compared to the real thing."

The article reported on the response by the Task Force’s national field director, Dan Hawes, who called LaBarbera’s assertions "just ridiculous," including claims that the GLBT rights group promoted the eradication of laws against public sex and prostitution.

Even as the anti-equality side was making sure to put distance between itself and those at the press conference, the pro-marriage side of the debate was calling for a definitive refutation of what No on 1’s Jesse Connolly called a "political stunt" filled with anti-gay rhetoric, including claims of sexual radicalism. Connolly told the paper, "If radical means loving the person you’ve been with for many years and trying to provide for that family and for your kids with that committed partner, then I see nothing wrong with that."

Gay bloggerJoe Jervis, who runs the online site JoeMyGod.com, has been embroiled in a cxyberspat with LaBArbera lately. JErvis seized the shunning of AFTAH by the Yes on 1 group, posting the comment, ""Congratulations, Petey--you’re the new Fred Phelps! Even your fellow Christianists won’t be seen in the same room with you." Jervis was referring to the Topeka, Kansas preacher who heads Westboro Baptist Church, and whose congregation travels around the U.S. picketing the funerals of fallen American troops and demonstrating at schools that produce the play "The Laramie Project," based on interviews with residents of Laramie, Wyoming, the town where openly gay murder victim Matthew Shepard lived.

Text at the church’s Web site reads, "In 1991, WBC took her ministry to the streets, conducting 41,226 peaceful demonstrations (to date) opposing the fag lifestyle of soul-damning, nation-destroying filth.... God is america’s enemy: 5,200 dead soldiers; $11 trillion+ in national debt."

[Duckie]

Noteable fact that article fails to mention: MassResistance is classified as a hate group similar to the KKK or Aryan Nations according to the Southern Policy Law Center's hate group tracking.

Also, +2 votes for Marriage Equality- got my remaining family to vote. Even in exile from the state and unable to afford to contribute to the campaign at least I managed to add a pair of effective votes (converted a yes on 1 voter to a no on 1 voter). I wish I could do more.

[Pint0 Xtreme]

Noteable fact that article fails to mention: MassResistance is classified as a hate group similar to the KKK or Aryan Nations according to the Southern Policy Law Center's hate group tracking.

Also, +2 votes for Marriage Equality- got my remaining family to vote. Even in exile from the state and unable to afford to contribute to the campaign at least I managed to add a pair of effective votes (converted a yes on 1 voter to a no on 1 voter). I wish I could do more.

That's awesome! Every vote is critically important. A converted vote even more so. You don't need to make a financial contribution to help. The key action at this point is turn out, turn out, turn out! We need to mobilize every single supporter to come out to vote if we are to win. You can help get out the vote if you can donate some free time. A recent Daily Kos/ Research 2000 Maine poll released today shows 47% Yes, 48% No, 5 Undecided among 600 likely registered voters.

The election is in four days

[Feil]

God. I'm getting bombarded with "GAY MARRIAGE MEANS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL STUDENTS WILL BE TAUGHT ABOUT GAAAAAAAAAYS" web ads. Funny how they can't seem to make an ad campaign without resorting to outright lies and distortion....

[Serafina]

Who did come up with that shit? Seriously, where is the connection between the two?

[Master of Ossus]

God. I'm getting bombarded with "GAY MARRIAGE MEANS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL STUDENTS WILL BE TAUGHT ABOUT GAAAAAAAAAYS" web ads. Funny how they can't seem to make an ad campaign without resorting to outright lies and distortion....

Is that seriously an ad there?

I mean, it's a good thing that running "public service" messages about gay marriage won't lead kids to ask questions about gays. No, sir. Not possible.

[Grandmaster Jogurt]

God. I'm getting bombarded with "GAY MARRIAGE MEANS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL STUDENTS WILL BE TAUGHT ABOUT GAAAAAAAAAYS" web ads. Funny how they can't seem to make an ad campaign without resorting to outright lies and distortion....

Every single Google ad I've seen at my home over the past several days has been the same few from Yes on 1. Every single one. Haven't seen any while on the campus computers, though.

Who did come up with that shit? Seriously, where is the connection between the two?

The connection is that there is a children's book about families of different kinds, including families with two parents of the same sex. And, according to a talking-point training sheet for Yes on 1 supporters, the idea is that supporters of same-sex marriage could have banned that book from schools any time they wanted, but they didn't! So obviously they want all of our kids to learn that same-sex couples exist, which is horrible for some reason.

And as Ossus pointed out, their massive ad campaign obviously has the complete opposite effect, or else why would they do it with this as literally their only cause of concern!

Since they're everywhere for me, I might as well show what one of the ads looks like:

[WesFox13]

Well I already filled out my Ballot for the Washington State elections and I voted Yes for R-71 even though I lied to my mom about voting "no" on it.

[Pint0 Xtreme]

Nate Silver puts out one more blog on Question 1

2009 Elections Preview: Maine Question 1 (Gay Marriage)
by Nate Silver @ 1:30 AM

Maine -- Question 1 -- "Do you want to reject the new law that lets same-sex couples marry and allows individuals and religious groups to refuse to perform these marriages?" .

The Positions: A 'Yes' vote overturns same-sex marriage, which the state legislature approved in May. A 'No' vote preserves same-sex marriage.

The Polls: As in the other elections this cycle, recent polling shows somewhat contradictory results. A Research 2000 / Daily Kos poll shows Question 1 losing by one point. A Pan Atlantic SMS poll shows the initiative losing by 11 points. But a fresh PPP poll shows it passing by 4 points. The Research 2000 and Pan Atlantic polls showed slight movement toward the 'No' side from their previous surveys, while the PPP poll showed movement toward the 'Yes' side. The only other pollster to have surveyed the race is Democracy Corps, which had shown Question 1 losing by 9 points among both registered and likely voters, although that poll is now five weeks old.

Analysis: All the polls show a very low number of undecideds, so like most close elections, it's a question of turnout. And the pollsters have different opinions about what turnout is liable to be. PPP has people under 45 representing about 38 percent of the electorate, whereas Research 2000 has them at 51 percent of the electorate. PPP's figures are a closer match for Maine's 2006 electorate, when 36 percent of voters were 45 or under.

On the other hand, PPP shows conservatives outnumbering liberals 36-23, whereas those numbers have been about evenly split in exit polling of Maine's elections in 2004, 2006 and 2008. Were the liberal-conservative split to match 2006, for example, when Maine's electorate was 26 percent liberal, 26 percent conservative, and 48 percent moderate, then Question 1 would fail 46-53, according to PPP's internals.

While an electorate that favorable to liberals might be somewhat unlikely in an off-year election, there is also not a lot of evidence that conservatives have the edge in terms of organization or enthusiasm. On the contrary, the No-on-1 campaign has received contributions from 9 times as many Mainers as the Yes-on-1 side, and Yes-on-1's messaging has been haphazard, to put it generously. With that said, the gay marriage question is one on which conservatives have typically had an enthusiasm advantage, although that may be changing, with conservatives devoting more of their energies to abortion and fiscal policy.

One last methodological issue worth mentioning may be cellphone-only households, which continue to make up a higher and higher percentage of the survey base and which none of these pollsters, to my knowledge, are including in their surveys. Some previous studies have found a particularly strong split on the gay marriage question based on cellphone usage, with the younger and perhaps more sociable cellphone-only crowd tending to be more supportive of gay marriage.

The Odds: A statistical analysis I conducted last month, which was based on the results from previous gay marriage referenda in other states, gave the Yes on 1 side just an 11 percent chance of prevailing, although the fraction rises to 32 percent after an ad-hoc adjustment for the fact that this is an off-year election. In spite of the PPP poll, I'm not especially persuaded to deviate substantially from those numbers: the polling average still favors the 'No' side, albeit narrowly; the 'No' side seems to have run the superior campaign, and the cellphone issue may be worth a point or two. The tight polling, certainly, should keep everybody on their toes, and gay marriage could quite easily be overturned. But I'd still put the Yes on 1 side as about a 5-to-2 underdog.

Let's hope the analysis is accurate. It would be our first referendum victory in the country. To everyone who have voted, are planning to vote, or have helped convinced people they know to vote to help preserve civil rights for gay and lesbian couples, thank you all for your support! This means a lot to me and to everyone who have worked tirelessly on this campaign for the past several months.

[Pint0 Xtreme]

High turnout in Maine

Turnout high in Maine

Maine Secretary of State Matt Dunlap told me just now that turnout there is far exceeding his projections -- news that would be good news for backers of same-sex marriage.

"We're seeing heavy and very steady turnout," he said, attributing the surprise to the contested vote on a "people's veto" of a same-sex marriage law driving Mainers to the polls.

The city of Bangor -- Maine's third largest, and likely to tilt against repeal -- is projecting turnout over 50%, he said, and local analysts have said that higher turnout would likely favor the marriage law.

"I think we could be over 50%" for the state," Dunlap said. "We originally projected 35%."

The day is "comfortable," he said, by local standards, partly cloudy with weather in the upper 40s. The polls close at 8:00 p.m.

[Duckie]

YORK - Turn out was heavy at the York polls on Tuesday, about 200 voters an hour, according to Town Clerk Mary-Anne Szeniawski.

Szeniawski said she believed by the time the polls closed at 8 p.m., York would have a turn-out rate of 50 to 60 percent of registered voters.

At least 30 percent of York's 10,800 registered voters cast ballot by absentee. The town clerk's office issues 3,300 absentee ballots for the Nov. 4 referendum, which is "huge," Szeniawski said.

Szeniawski believes Question 1, whether to repeal same sex marriage, got people out to vote, either in person or by absentee.

York is pretty liberal, and an adjunct of Portland. I hope Portland is turning out as much as York is- I don't think my old home is so different from the main city, so it's possible. In any case we need said college and city votes.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

Washington State is AWESOME! They forced Focus on the Family, which is running "Children will be forced to learn about gay men in kindergarten" ads here too, to add at the end of the advertisement that "This is a message paid for by Focus on the Family USA, of Colorado Springs, Colorado" .

[The Defenestrator]

Nate Silver on R-71

2009 Elections Preview: Washington Referendum 71 (Domestic Partnership)
by Nate Silver @ 4:19 PM
Bookmark and Share Share This Content

Washington (state) -- Referendum 71 -- "This bill would expand the rights, responsibilities, and obligations accorded state-registered same-sex and senior domestic partners to be equivalent to those of married spouses, except that a domestic partnership is not a marriage. Should this bill be Approved or Rejected?"

The Positions: An Approve (Yes) vote upholds the expanded domestic partnership rights approved by the state legislature. A Reject (No) vote withdraws those rights and benefits, although it does not overturn domestic partnership itself.

The thing to notice is that the language is the functional opposite here of what it was in Maine or California. An affirmative (approve) vote is good news for same-sex couples, and a negative (reject) vote is bad for them. This has caused some confusion; one pollster has stated that as much as 10 percent of the electorate might vote in a way opposite to their true intentions.

The Polls: The only independent polling in the race is from SurveyUSA, which shows the Approve side winning 50-43, an improvement from 45-42 a month ago. GQR also polled the race on behalf of the pro-domestic partnership group Washington Families Standing Together and showed it passing 53-36, although the usual caveats apply as this is a nonindependent poll.

Analysis: Washington is similar to Maine in certain respects, being white and fairly secular, and since I think the pro-gay marriage side is more likely than not to prevail in Maine, you might think I feel the same way about the initiative in Washington state. Indeed I do feel that way, although the initiatives are not directly comparable. On the one hand, Referendum 71 does not go as far as Maine's Question 1 or California's Proposition 8 since it seeks to reaffirm an "everything but marriage" bill that does not formally bestow the title of marriage upon same-sex couples. On the other hand, a rejection of the referendum would not overturn Washington's 2007 domestic partnership law, but instead only the expanded, marriage-like benefits that were afforded to those couples this year.

Were Washington to vote on a measure to ban domestic partnership outright, it would almost certainly fail and fail badly: by a 58-42 margin, according to my statistical model. A measure to ban gay marriage but not domestic partnership would be much closer; I have such a measure failing 52.5-47.5, but there is a good deal of uncertainty there, and in an off-year election the numbers might be closer to 50:50. Referendum 71 appears to be polling somewhere in between those two goalposts, which makes sense, since it takes Washington somewhere in between domestic partnership and full-blown marriage.

There is also arguably less uncertainty about the outcome in Washington than in Maine. This is because, as in California, most Washingtonians vote by mail, and SurveyUSA has the Approve side leading 53-42 among those who have already voted. A small bit of good fortune for the Approve side is that there is a highly competitive mayoral race in Seattle, which might encourage turnout in that obviously very liberal corner of the state.

The Odds: Although there is a lot of uncertainty in both the polling and the statistical model because of the ambiguity of the measure under consideration, they do tend to point toward the same result: Referendum 71 passing by a margin on the order of 7-10 points. Coupled with what appears to be movement toward the pro-domestic partnership side -- which may reflect voters familiarizing themselves with the language of the ballot -- and what also appears to be an advantage for the Approve side in votes collected thus far, Referendum 71 appears to be fairly safe. I would give about 10-1 odds against its being rejected.

Things are looking up.

[Pelranius]

Voted today, obviously no on 1. A thousand people (or maybe it was 500. There were two ballots and I'm not sure how the machine was counting it) had voted already at that station, and it was only 3PM.

[Pint0 Xtreme]

Polls close in 10 minutes. The Bangor Daily News is hosting a live report on the count. The first few votes have already been counted.