True, both parties did a helluva job in mobilizing their support bases. No doubt about it. And, I admit to being very
impressed at the voter turnout. Kudos to both parties on that score. But, there was one other difference between this
election year and the 2000 election year. This year, 11 states (including Ohio, crucial to determining the Presidency)
had one issue on their ballots ... guaranteeing to mobilize the religious right REGARDLESS of who was running for
President. I'm talking about the issue of Gay Marriage.
11 states had constitutional amendments proposed for state constitutions to define marriage as a union between one man and
one woman. And all 11 states passed their respective amendments, including my state (Oregon) considered to be the one
state where such a proposal might fail. Just as some Gore supporters blamed Ralph Nader for siphoning off votes in 2000,
I don't think it would be too far fetched for Kerry supporters to blame gay activists for choosing 2004 as the year to
make Gay Marriage an issue. There is certainly no way to prove this ... but I suspect that if gay activists had waited
until 2005 to make it an issue, a lot of religious right voters may have stayed at home. And, as a result, there may have
been a different result in swing-state Ohio ... and possibly other close states as well. This may have been a big blunder
on the part of gay activists. Certainly, Gay Marriage would have fared better under a Kerry Presidency than under a Bush
Presidency. Food for thought.
***UPDATE, Nov. 4*** - On CSPAN today, James Rosen, White House Correspondent for Fox News, mentioned that a
Republican "retreat" was held in Philadelphia just prior to the failed attempt to propose a Constitutional Amendment
banning same-sex marriage. Retreat attendees knew the attempt would fail but said it would be "enough" for the President
to show support for it. This would appease his religious right constituents. But, they also discussed how they could
"use" this issue to the President's advantage. They remembered that the closeness of the 2000 election was partly due to
a low turnout among religious right voters. THAT is when it was suggested that Republicans should champion
such amendments to state constitutions and make certain that the religious right voters knew it was an issue ... thereby
assuring a much higher voter turnout among them. The strategy succeeded in all 11 states.
Whether or not this was a "determining" factor in who got the vote in the close swing-states is still a matter of
conjecture. But it's clear that Republicans knew it would be a factor.