Just a moment...
www.politico.com

The pushback from the right has relied heavily on anti-trans rhetoric, a line of attack that internal polling shows has proven persuasive to voters in battleground House districts, three people who have reviewed the data told POLITICO. They were granted anonymity to discuss the inside information.

Without a well-funded campaign to defend and bolster the equality amendment, deep blue New York could reject a referendum in support of abortion rights — with dire national political implications for Democrats.

…

In addition to cementing protections for reproductive health care and LGBTQ+ rights in the state constitution: It includes language also meant to bolster rights based on age. On LGBTQ+ protection it specifies: sexual orientation, gender, gender expression and gender identity.

Republican candidates for the House and state Legislature warn the amendment would lead to trans people playing in women’s sports or weaken statutory rape laws — claims supporters of the amendment have said are false and amount to fearmongering.

GOP candidates running statewide on an anti-abortion platform have not been successful, but their approach to the amendment is different. And Democrats competing in battleground House seats acknowledge that unanswered attacks against it could be effective.

…

One Democratic consultant who has reviewed internal polling found voters in battleground House districts are susceptible to the argument that the amendment would harm kids. Voters generally support abortion rights and the rights of LGBTQ+ people, the polling found.

“But if you add in the far-right talking points about this — boys competing in girls’ sports — support erodes quickly, and in these swing districts it can dampen the enthusiasm for the candidates who are running on a support position,” said one Democrat who reviewed the data and was granted anonymity to speak frankly about the internal polling.

  • @[email protected]
    12•4 months ago

    The unwillingness to spend has some party operatives concerned state Democratic leaders are failing to effectively counter an opposition that has seized on the amendment’s expansive language pledging rights for LGBTQ+ people. The so-called equality amendment would ban discrimination against “gender identity” and “pregnancy outcomes,” adding to current constitutional protections for race and religion.

    Maybe make the fight more about abortion then? Banning abortion is already wildly unpopular with most voters. The policy would just advertise itself.

  • @[email protected]English
    8•4 months ago

    “As the Equal Rights campaign has made clear, in order for Prop 1 to be successful it must remain nonpartisan. Democratic leaders and the state party are fully in support of the NY ERA and will continue to follow the strategic guidance of the campaign to ensure its success,” said the Democratic official, who was granted anonymity because of the sensitivity of the discussions.

    Maybe in Kansas, but this is New York where the Democrats have a supermajority. If they think the campaign being associated with the Democratic party will risk its passage, that’s an indictment on them, not some truism of politics. You don’t need conservatives and independents to win votes in New York.

    On the other hand, the NY Democratic Party has been spectacularly bad at winning what should be a very easy state with party leadership more worried about keeping the left in check than actually promoting Democratic values.

    • @UnderpantsWeevilOPEnglish
      4•4 months ago

      this is New York where the Democrats have a supermajority

      New York doesn’t have a supermajority. They periodically don’t even have a majority in the State Senate, thanks to Governor Cuomo handing the Republicans a conservative gerrymander back in 2014.

      On the other hand, the NY Democratic Party has been spectacularly bad at winning

      Look who they elect. Governor Hochel fucked the city on congestion pricing in the name of a purely ficticious pool of car-reliant small business owners. Gillibrand spends more time going to crypto-bro fundraising events than constituency meetings. Schumer’s got the hand of Wall Street so far up his ass he coughs fingers. Hillary Clinton got to be a Senator for a term just by showing up and handing the state party a carpetbag full of cash. Mayor Adams literally lives in New Jersey and hates anyone who rides the Metro to boot. AOC took the seat off the most not-appearing-in-this-district Congressman since Tom DeLay in a primary that barely broke double digits. This was the state that gave us Rudy Giuliani, Michael Bloomberg, Donald Trump, and Jeffery Epstein.

      New York politicians suck ass. The only thing that keeps the state from swinging red is the fact that Republicans are everything terrible about Democrats plus they’re even more racist to boot. Even then, they’re not above handing out taxpayer money to host the GOP’s convention every couple of decades.

      • @[email protected]English
        4•4 months ago

        New York doesn’t have a supermajority.

        It literally has a supermajority right now. 42-21 in the upper house and 102-48 in the lower house.

    • @UnderpantsWeevilOPEnglish
      9•4 months ago

      If they weren’t popular, people wouldn’t find them so divisive. These tend to be issues that people feel strongly about because they affect them on a deep personal level.

      • @[email protected]English
        -1•4 months ago

        Sure . Everyone has a strong opinion on abortion - because its both binary and emotive.

        But 630,000 abortions were performed in 2019, on a population of 330,000,000.

        Which I think is about 0.2% of Americans.

        So assuming when you vote you are voting to improve your own situation or for a better America., and whether you are pro life or pro choice, should this be the No.1 issue on the card for most people ?

        When you stack it against universal health care, or getting the federal minimum wage to $20, or school meals, or fracking, or taxation , it doesn’t come close in terms of number of people affected.

        This is no way to belittle the trauma experienced by those directly affected by it.

        It is just to illustrate how emotive and polemic issues are used to divide the electorate and avoid them voting in unison on other, arguably bigger issues .

        • @UnderpantsWeevilOPEnglish
          0•4 months ago

          But 630,000 abortions were performed in 2019, on a population of 330,000,000.

          Which I think is about 0.2% of Americans.

          This is bad math on a bunch of levels. Abortion laws don’t just affect people who get abortions, because the laws prevent access to abortions. You have to look at the total pool of pregnant women, of which there are around 3.6M/year. That’s 1.2% of the population.

          And the consequences of not getting a pregnancy don’t end the year you’re pregnant. A woman who is forced to carry an ectopic pregnancy to term or give birth to a still born baby will carry the physical and psychological impact of that her entire life. So now you’re talking about pregnancies per lifetime rather than per year. And now you’re talking about 84.6% of the population of American women.

          Now we should talk about men, because anyone who has been married to a pregnant woman will tell you they are also affect by pregnancy. So add in the 66% of the male population that’s married.

          That’s a significantly bigger cohort than your 0.2%

          • @[email protected]English
            0•4 months ago

            Well it’s a good point - my math is not bad but it is limited, as you have shown.

            However, I wouldn’t rush to support your effort to amortise the issue over such a broad cross section of the electorate and certainly not to speculate about a lifetime impact.