Midterm Election Results: The Blue Ripple

Well, the American populace had its say on Trumpism last night, and spoke out of both sides of its mouth.  The Democratic Party hoped a big "blue wave" of fired-up voters would give them control of Congress; but they gained a majority only in the House of Representatives, the Republicans still controlling the Senate.  Well, that's disappointing, but it's a start.  At least now there is a power of resistance to the Trumpocracy in one of the three branches of government.

I found some videos that concisely summarize the election returns and results, in case my readers (like me) weren't glued to the TV set last night.  But whether you are interested in those or not, do take a moment to watch this rather heartwarming story of civility in a political race in Vermont - introduced by the delightful and ever-pleasant Jane Pauley, whom it's so nice to see again on screen.  (Where has she been all these years?  And why didn't NBC hang on to her, the fools?)



Well, that was a sweet story.  Maybe there' s still some hope left for this country.  Let us pray.

Wikipedia has the breakdown on all of last night's races here, if you want to burrow down into the numbers (though not all returns are in yet).  You could also take a look at the BBC's informative charts and maps if you care to.  If not, here's a quick summary of last night's election coverage from the Wall Street Journal:




The New York Times gives brief glimpses of some notable Democratic winners, including Jared Polis, the first gay governor of Colorado, or of any state, hooray:




Who knows what the percentage of red and blue will be, come the next election?  The NYT guesses at the future of American politics in this prognostication:

At Seventeen

Wow, guys . . . this just blew me away big time. You gotta see this clip from the public hearings just before Vermont passed the equal marriage bill last month. James Neiley is just 17 - the kid has got BIG balls:

James is a bigger man than most guys twice his age. He reminds me so much of myself at that age - only back then, I couldn't have imagined speaking out publicly about the torments of high school hell. It wouldn't have been allowed, anyway: nobody cared, nobody wanted to hear it - teachers, counselors, preachers, parents. Nobody.

Just shut up and suffer, faggot, you're going to burn in hell anyway: That was the message all of society put out; and I took it in, all alone. Somehow I survived. Lots of kids don't.

I'm so glad all that is finally changing now, and about damn time. Kudos to James for the bravery and courage to speak the truth with the whole world watching.

Reflections on the Prop 8 Hearing

Rachel Maddow interviews San Francisco city attorney:

Rex Wockner's take on the hearing: "not a happy day in San Francisco."

Disaster. They constantly interrupted the gay side with aggressive questions, but let Ken Starr go on and on and on. They were obsessed with the fact that the
domestic-partnership law gives the same rights as marriage, and they completely ignored the fact that they so eloquently argued that separate isn't equal in their previous ruling. They seemed enamored of the notion that the people can do almost whatever they want via the ballot-box amendment process -- including repealing freedom of speech, banning gay adoption, pretty much any damned thing they choose. We're not winning this one. It could even be unanimous. That leaves the gay side with two options: Return to the California ballot with a pro-active initiative to attempt to undo Prop 8. Or take it to the U.S. Supreme Court, using the U.S. Supreme Court's pro-gay ruling in the Colorado Amendment 2 case as a spot-on precedent.

And an oblique reference by Andrew Sullivan:

A bill to turn the state's civil unions into civil marriages has been put on the fast track by the legislature. The main question seems to be whether the governor would veto the bill. The Senate has a veto-proof margin of support - but not the House. I have to say I prefer this legislative grind to a court diktat. The same process is slowly working in New York state. Very soon, we are likely to have marriage equality in Iowa as well - and another legislative and democratic fight to retain it. Those of us fighting for civil equality need to relish these battles rather than try to short-circuit them. Because we have the better arguments.

What I say: Boys and girls, does it really come as a great shock to you that your rights are subject to majority vote?

Welcome to reality. Everybody's rights are always subject to majority vote - and to the whim, the moral fashion of the times.

And ninety percent of what we call morality - right and wrong - is just that: a fashion. Something that changes, something that is not carved in stone.

I tend to agree with Sullivan: it would be nice to have some court magically whisk away all the discriminatory laws against us, and make everything pretty overnight, magically, without risk, without effort.

But that's a kind of cartoon way of thinking. Look back in your history books, you'll see that no minority, no oppressed group in this country or any other has ever gotten their wish that way. It takes a determined struggle, and changing the laws, which is often messy and not always easy.

But getting the majority to support a change in the laws is a far more secure position to be in, once we convince them of the need for change. Yes, a court ruling can overturn a law; but then a new law or new ruling can overturn that one.

So the struggle goes on, and it's a long one that requires patient, persistent effort. Are you up for it, guys?