US Presidential Elections 2

[Leferd]

Looks like Prop 8 will pass.

 

As of 30 minutes ago:

 

55% yay

45% nay

 

With 23% reporting. Will the state Supreme Court rule against it, just like Prop 22 a few years ago?

[Calax]

Looks like Prop 8 will pass.

 

As of 30 minutes ago:

 

55% yay

45% nay

 

With 23% reporting. Will the state Supreme Court rule against it, just like Prop 22 a few years ago?

My hope is yes under "separate but equal"

[Leferd]

Looks like Prop 8 will pass.

 

As of 30 minutes ago:

 

55% yay

45% nay

 

With 23% reporting. Will the state Supreme Court rule against it, just like Prop 22 a few years ago?

My hope is yes under "separate but equal"

 

Indeed. Brown v Board of Education. Was that what they used to strike down Prop 22?

[Aristes]

I wouldn't count on it, Leferd. 23% is pretty meaningless, since that's not a straight 23% across the board. You don't know which precincts have reported yet or not. That said, I think there was more support for prop 8 than the polls suggested. I still think it's iffy. The really bad thing about prop 8 is that it's a constitutional ammendment, which is overkill. If the Supreme Court hadn't gone activist on the issue, then it would have remained a law. If prop 8 wins, then it become part of the constitution, which then makes it harder for the law to change. Of course, this is California, so it could change next cycle, but it won't be as easy to change if it had remained a law.

 

If prop 8 passes, then I think you can call and thank the many people who gloated about the Supreme Court decision. Most specifically, folks who didn't want to see the measure pass should resent the hell out of Gavin Newsome.

 

The fact that Newsome managed to flaunt the will of the people is the primary reason I voted for prop 8. In principle, I disagree with the initiative. However, I am more concerned that the California Supreme court be put in its place. I think gay marriage will come. I will welcome the day, but it should not be imposed by the state supreme court intent on placing its heal on the backs of the voters. We shall overcome, but better to overcome by convincing people that it's the best thing for everyone than having the Supreme Court strike down the will of the people. If we eventually vote to allow gay marriage, won't that be a sweeter victory? If prop 8 fails, I'll live with it, as I live with the results of every election. If it fails, put a proposition on the ballot explicitly allowing gay marriage. I promise I'll vote yes.

 

EDIT: The state supreme court would be even more desperate if they tried to strike down a law that is literally part of the constitution. They would have to argue that other laws within the constitution disallow other laws. That will undoubtedly create a constitutional crisis.

Edited November 5, 2008 by Aristes

[Calax]

Looks like Prop 8 will pass.

 

As of 30 minutes ago:

 

55% yay

45% nay

 

With 23% reporting. Will the state Supreme Court rule against it, just like Prop 22 a few years ago?

My hope is yes under "separate but equal"

 

Indeed. Brown v Board of Education. Was that what they used to strike down Prop 22?

:digs through wikipedia:

Well the courts ruled that under Article 1 Section 7 of the california Constitution Prop 22 and the 1977 law were unconstitutional. Prop 8 however would be a constitutional amendment thus getting around that little roadblock. I'm just thinking that the elimination of the rights of Gays and Lesbians to wed and (from what I've heard) instead give them "civil Unions" would fall under the shadow of Brown v board of education in that the civil unions would inherently be inequal. My guess is that if it passes the Gay rights movement will promptly turn around grab it and take it to a federal level as best they can.

[Leferd]

I wouldn't count on it, Leferd. 23% is pretty meaningless, since that's not a straight 23% across the board. You don't know which precincts have reported yet or not. That said, I think there was more support for prop 8 than the polls suggested. I still think it's iffy. The really bad thing about prop 8 is that it's a constitutional ammendment, which is overkill. If the Supreme Court hadn't gone activist on the issue, then it would have remained a law. If prop 8 wins, then it become part of the constitution, which then makes it harder for the law to change. Of course, this is California, so it could change next cycle, but it won't be as easy to change if it had remained a law.

 

If prop 8 passes, then I think you can call and thank the many people who gloated about the Supreme Court decision. Most specifically, folks who didn't want to see the measure pass should resent the hell out of Gavin Newsome.

 

The fact that Newsome managed to flaunt the will of the people is the primary reason I voted for prop 8. In principle, I disagree with the initiative. However, I am more concerned that the California Supreme court be put in its place. I think gay marriage will come. I will welcome the day, but it should not be imposed by the state supreme court intent on placing its heal on the backs of the voters. We shall overcome, but better to overcome by convincing people that it's the best thing for everyone than having the Supreme Court strike down the will of the people. If we eventually vote to allow gay marriage, won't that be a sweeter victory? If prop 8 fails, I'll live with it, as I live with the results of every election. If it fails, put a proposition on the ballot explicitly allowing gay marriage. I promise I'll vote yes.

 

EDIT: The state supreme court would be even more desperate if they tried to strike down a law that is literally part of the constitution. They would have to argue that other laws within the constitution disallow other laws. That will undoubtedly create a constitutional crisis.

 

 

Hmm...you're right. I may have been too hasty.

 

The gap is actually closing in. It's now 52 to 48 with 29% reporting in. You're right about the constitutional amendment part. I definitely glossed over that part. Thanks for the explanation. I guess we'll find out how it fares tomorrow.

[Aristes]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Pr...ition_22_(2000)

 

"Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger immediately issued a statement pledging to uphold the ruling, and repeated his pledge to oppose Proposition 8, a constitutional amendment initiative that would override the Court's ruling and again ban same sex marriages by placing the text of Proposition 22 in the State Constitution.[20]"

 

Thanks. I'd forgotten which proposition it was. Anyhow, I voted against it at the time. ...And I was pretty vocal far and wide as to my reasons. Like I said, the 4-3 state supreme court decision really irritated me. I think the supreme court decision, along with Gavin Newsome's response in San Fransisco, really set gay civil rights back. The people aren't that far away from allowing gay marriages. We're closer than when prop 22 passed. Don't harden the people against your plight by wishing for a legal showdown.

 

However, I would be more willing to accept SCOTUS involvement on the issue. I would much rather the scenario play out at the state level because I think it would be better for the gay and lesbian community.

[julianw]

Some of the ads for prop 8 here in California are really shameless and much of them are financed by the Morman Church from Utah nonetheless.

 

Personally, I am not a big supporter of gay marriage and more in favor of civil unions but I would hate the fact that somehow the Morman Church would affect the laws passed here in California.

[Leferd]

Steve Young, yes THAT Steve Young, is actually actively supporting the NO on Prop 8 campaign. Which I found surprising since he is a well documented Republican AND the direct descendant of Brigham Young.

 

Go Niners!

[Aristes]

Hell, more money has gone into the anti 8 warchest from out of state than has for proponents. However, I resent all the outside interests sending money. However, I don't resent it tooooo much in the case of homosexuals because they see this as an epic struggle for equality. While I don't share their view that gay marriage is somehow the equivalent of bi-'racial' marriages, I do have sympathy for their perspective.

[Calax]

Hell, more money has gone into the anti 8 warchest from out of state than has for proponents. However, I resent all the outside interests sending money. However, I don't resent it tooooo much in the case of homosexuals because they see this as an epic struggle for equality. While I don't share their view that gay marriage is somehow the equivalent of bi-'racial' marriages, I do have sympathy for their perspective.

I think that the involvement of the Utah Church made prop 8 into a beast that will cause problems in the future. I don't like getting calls from utah about a CA only amendment. It just irks me that they'd try to run another state when they have their own to manage. Would they like me to come into their state and initiate a process that allowed their daughters to have abortions without telling the parents (I think that was actually California Prop 4 >.>) ?

 

anywho I think that this is going to have to go to the US supreme court simply because it'd be the only way to get rid of the constitutional amendment and it's MUCH harder to change THAT constitution than our own.

[mkreku]

Congratulations USA! 91% of the Swedes think Obama will make a great president :D

[Humodour]

Obama won North Carolina and Indiana. That puts Obama on 364 Electoral Votes. He seems to have about 5% or more of the popular vote margin.

 

Missouri is dead even - literally 413 votes difference between Obama and McCain with like 1% or 2% of the votes left to count. Ralph Nader has 17,591 votes. Bah!

 

Montana has McCain up again (by 10,000 votes), but there's still 20% of the vote left.

 

Chambliss doesn't look like he'll make 50%, so it'll be a run-off.

 

Franken... well, who knows.

 

And so far, Alaskans (50% counted so far) prefer a convicted criminal to a vigorous fresh new face. Stevens is delusional. Even if he won, he'd be booted straight back out again in January. McCain and Obama asked him to step down. As, I believe, did the Republican senate minority leader.

Edited November 5, 2008 by Krezack

[Calax]

Obama won North Carolina and Indiana. That puts Obama on 364 Electoral Votes. He seems to have about 5% or more of the electoral vote.

 

Missouri is dead even - literally 413 votes difference between Obama and McCain with like 1% or 2% of the votes left to count. Ralph Nader has 17,591 votes. Bah!

 

Montana has McCain up again (by 10,000 votes), but there's still 20% of the vote left.

 

Chambliss doesn't look like he'll make 50%, so it'll be a run-off.

 

Franken... well, who knows.

 

And so far, Alaskans (50% counted so far) prefer a convicted criminal to a vigorous fresh new face. Stevens is delusional. Even if he won, he'd be booted straight back out again in January. McCain and Obama asked him to step down. As, I believe, did the Republican senate minority leader.

It should be noted the FORMER senate minority leader. His seat got taken in the elections iirc.

[Gorth]

Personally, I am not a big supporter of gay marriage and more in favor of civil unions but I would hate the fact that somehow the Morman Church would affect the laws passed here in California.

How about just doing away with marriages alltogether (as a legal status) and then have civil unions for all? Then they could leave it up to people of different faiths how they want to reconcile a legal, civil union with their traditional wedding rituals

[Calax]

question to the legals around these here parts,

 

Would a federal law supersede a state constitution? or would a state constitution be grandfathered into the federal law.

 

It should be noted that all marriages already performed by the State of California will be legal AFTER the amendment is successful (if it is (theres still hope!)) because they cannot retroactively annul that many marriages.

[Humodour]

It should be noted the FORMER senate minority leader. His seat got taken in the elections iirc.

 

Nah, Mitch McConnell kept his seat.

 

Aww, Montana and Missouri look like they are safely McCain. No technical landslide.

[jaguars4ever]

question to the legals around these here parts,

 

Would a federal law supersede a state constitution? or would a state constitution be grandfathered into the federal law.

 

It should be noted that all marriages already performed by the State of California will be legal AFTER the amendment is successful (if it is (theres still hope!)) because they cannot retroactively annul that many marriages.

Technically, nothing can supersede the Constitution.

 

However, it can be amended if a proposition by Congress is assented to by 2/3 of both the Senate and the House of Representatives, in addition to 3/4 of all states.

[taks]

uh, he's referring to a state constitution, and whether or not a federal law overrides it. the answer: it depends. states can overcome federal law by appealing (and winning, of course), or they can simply ignore the law, but that's risky. of course, many states ignore DEA laws w.r.t. marijuana, but that's not as politically risky as others can be. as far as i know, there typically isn't any "grandfathering in," either.

 

since palin is still governer of AK, she might be able to appoint a replacement for stevens should he get the boot, which would mean another republican anyway. looks like a supermajority is out either way, and i'm guessing lieberman isn't caucasing with the democrats anymore, either.

 

taks

[Calax]

question to the legals around these here parts,

 

Would a federal law supersede a state constitution? or would a state constitution be grandfathered into the federal law.

 

It should be noted that all marriages already performed by the State of California will be legal AFTER the amendment is successful (if it is (theres still hope!)) because they cannot retroactively annul that many marriages.

Technically, nothing can supersede the Constitution.

 

However, it can be amended if a proposition by Congress is assented to by 2/3 of both the Senate and the House of Representatives, in addition to 3/4 of all states.

I think you are thinking of the wrong constitution.

 

Nothing can supersede the US constitution but I was lead to believe that if the federal government had a law about thus and such then the States HAD to follow that law. I'm wondering because Prop 8 is a state constitutional amendment, and I was wondering if the Feds had the power to override the legislation with their own legislation.

[Aristes]

I don't see why Lieberman wouldn't caucus with the Democrats unless they do something stupid like punish him for supporting McCain. Since they'll need his vote as part of any coalition to overcome a republican veto, I'm thinking they'll treat him better than they would if they had won a straightout super majority.

 

If Lieberman had run in and won the Democratic primary, I would have voted for him. It's not that he's a super conservative Democrat (sure, okay, independent) but he's more stable than McCain and most of McCain's conservative credentials come from the social rather than fiscal side. In terms of policy, I was hoping that McCain would win, but there are good things about an Obama presidency. While they're mistaken, and often myopic, about US policy and what Obama means to it, our European friends do seem to love the guy. He's not exagerating when he compares himself to JFK. ...And he certainly had a more impressive win.

 

Obama was a protest vote. With Bush's low rating and the economic crisis, McCain didn't have any business getting even as close as he did. Is the fact that the race wasn't a complete blowout a function of racism? I don't know.

 

One thing I really like about Obama is that he is an articulate speaker and he stays cool under pressure. Good attributes. Hell, some folks say all he has is a speech he gave, but I think the ability to share a vision for the future is vital in a president, and McCain was lacking in that regard. He either lacked vision, or lacked the ability to share it with the American public.

 

I'm going to put my conservative friends on notice. No conspiracy theory bullcrap. Don't send me emails about Obama sniffing coke out of a dead hooker's belly button. No ten page forwards, not including the two pages of forward information embedded at the top, proving that Obama has five wives, sells coke on the street, and has personally funded the Iranian nuclear program. No funny pictures of Obama murdering people in downtown DC. If there's no smoking gun, I don't want to hear it. No more Clinton/Bush style insanity. NO MORE. Tell your crap to someone else. I don't want to hear it. If you cannot prove it, don't say it to me. If you can prove it, take it to the FBI.

[Humodour]

The Georgia early vote has not been counted yet. That accounts for 2 million (of 5.5 million) votes.

 

As such, Chambliss will likely lose his senate seat (either in run-off, or outright to Martin). Georgia's electoral votes will likely still end up going to McCain, though.

 

And I doubt Lieberman will jump ship just because he doesn't like blacks.

[J.E. Sawyer]

I can't wait for conservatives to lead the charge for a D.C. ballot initiative to throw out SCOTUS's overturning of the D.C. handgun ban.

[Volourn]

"Obama was a protest vote. With Bush's low rating and the economic crisis, McCain didn't have any business getting even as close as he did. Is the fact that the race wasn't a complete blowout a function of racism? I don't know."

 

L0L I like how this nimplies that racism is some sort of white person's disease. I mean, this suggests that 100% of those who voted for Obama didn't do so simply ebcause he was black. I bleieve Obama got 96% of the black vote. I ahve no doubt a decent percentage of those did so simply ebcause he was black.

 

Racism/bigotry is a disease shared by all races. Not just whites.

 

Anyways, Obama is cool as Prez. Thankfully, it wasn't Hilary Clinton as the first female Prez should be someone worthy of being Prez.

 

GL Obama, you gonna need it!

[Aristes]

Oh, I was going to take J.E.'s bait on prop 8. Two things stop me from doing so. First of all, it looks like it's going to pass, which would make pretty much any response I made seem like gloating, which I don't want to do. The other thing is, I really think, if it's as close as it looks that there is a chance, going forward, to overturn this. My beef has honestly never been with gay marriage. I just don't care about it. I would go to a gay marriage if invited. I would be best man. I would speak at it. I would support it. I would do anything short of engaging in one, since that would make me a polygamist and I'm more interested in marrying women at any rate. I don't care. I will gladly vote for an initiative that allows gay marriage, which will now require a constitutional ammendment.