Ding ding ding, we have a winner!

2012 give us the time to do the one on one ground work that must be done to reach minority communities and old white folk to get them to change their minds.

I agree that Jeff Kors needs to take a back seat in this campaign. But Eqca seems to be doing a very good job of getting people out to canvass. I observed a group in Sacramento last Saturday that talked to over 300 residents in Citrus Heights. I think they told me they only had 5 that said they would change their vote so much wowrk needs to be done in that area.

EQCA’s Marc Solomon – a Massachusetts import – says wait. As do Evan Wolfson and other non-Californians.

But I’ve yet to speak to a single gay Californian (the type who has actually lived here a while) that thinks it is smartest to delay the process until 2012.

That may be a reflection of my associates. Or perhaps it’s an in-state-talking-to-the-people-we-know v. out-of-state-relying-on-specialists kind of thing.

Whenever it happens again, I hope California gets it right next time.

What do we have to lose at this point if a measure is defeated? —Matt

Good question and the answer depends on the periodic behavior of electorates, the economic and social climate of the times, and the nature of those campaigning on both sides of the question.

We have fairly reliable data about the disposition of the California electorate on this question. At least, we know how the vote went, and we have information on the demography of the voting. That information is time-valued to be sure, in more ways than one, and having information that is 2 years old is better than 4 year old information about something that is as dynamic as an electorate. Nevertheless, each election is different, and assuming a two year period, a lot of things can change, especially the general voting climate, such as presidential versus mid-term.

The resource most highly correlated with the outcome of an election is money: the side with the most money generally prevails when the electorate is roughly evenly divided on a particular candidate or question.

I don’t think it is reasonable to expect that the battle in 2010 will be any less expensive than the one in 2008. None of the players will have disappeared, certainly not the Mormon church and their allied evangelicals whom oppose marriage equality for same-sex couples. Their activism, as we have seen, is more than capable of raising tens of millions of dollars.

There is reason to believe that a measure of fatigue will set in. Frankly, we have more to gain than our opponents and I would expect that some who supported them will not continue to financially back something that does not materially effect their lives, especially given the time to reflect on the general trends in acceptance of same-sex marriage by mainstream society while in a recession. Granted, our opponents do have a hard core base and will do as they are told by their leaders even if it is against their personal best interests.

The fatigue sword cuts both ways though. We too are feeling the pinch of the current economic hard times, and some of us have little in the way of spare funds to devote to yet another battle for something it seems we just contributed to.

Time can work for and against us, too. It can work for us through attrition as some have pointed out: younger people are generally more in favor of marriage equality than older people, and in 3 years, more young voters will have registered than in 15 months. It’s hard to say how genuinely significant this will be.

It is also clearly advantageous to our cause when field marriage equality activists have the time, organization, and resources to contact and positively influence voters to take the marriage equality side. We are speaking of small percentages of a large number making the difference between victory and defeat.

It is often said that time is on our side, and it appears to be. That suggests a carefully selected interval between our last defeat and our next battle might be critical to bringing in victory sooner rather than later and at manageable expense, be it 15 or 39 months hence.