New HBO News Segment focuses on LGBT issues, touches on Monson, Priesthood

[JulieM]

54 minutes ago, Bob Crockett said:

And I dispute your assertion.  With statistics.

Those specific statistics you’re using do show that the black vote was ONE factor that was significant.

But was it the “single most significant” factor?  That’s up for debate.  Just because some have made statements agreeing with you doesn’t change the fact that there were quite a number of factors that contributed to getting prop 8 passed.

There are statistics showing how much of the money was donated by members of the church. These are just as valid statistics as your statistics, but just in another area that influenced voters. It was also a factor in getting it passed.  Many believe the money (and time) from Mormons was the single most significant factor in getting 8 to pass.  They have statistics too.  

Edited January 12, 2018 by JulieM

[Bob Crockett]

40 minutes ago, rockpond said:

It's odd to me that so many LDS seem to want to not take credit for what they helped accomplish in California.  If it was the right thing to do, why downplay their role?

Am I? Not true.  My only point is what it is and nothing more.  The single most significant factor was what it is.

Edited January 12, 2018 by Bob Crockett

[Bob Crockett]

53 minutes ago, JulieM said:

Those specific statistics you’re using do show that the black vote was ONE factor that was significant.

But was it the “single most significant” factor?  That’s up for debate.  Just because some have made statements agreeing with you doesn’t change the fact that there were quite a number of factors that contributed to getting prop 8 passed.

There are statistics showing how much of the money was donated by members of the church. These are just as valid statistics as your statistics, but just in another area that influenced voters. It was also a factor in getting it passed.  Many believe the money (and time) from Mormons was the single most significant factor in getting 8 to pass.  They have statistics too.  

1

Untrue.   The most significant factor is the black vote.  It is not up to debate.  Unless you debate statistical proof. 

Perhaps you don't know the meaning of statistical proof, as you use the word "statistics" to denote money donated by members of the church.  And, indeed, there are no statistics about money donated by members of the church.  Church affiliation is not a factor collected.  There was a malicious effort by a former member of the church in Cedar City to identify members of the Church from public contribution records, but it was highly inaccurate.  I know about that effort as I was personally targeted for harassment for once a private website went up with my name on it, based upon public contribution records.   I received unwanted harassing emails from former members of the church for my $5100 contribution. 

You say:  "Many believe the money (and time) from Mormons was the single most significant factor in getting 8 to pass.  They have statistics too."  No, they do not have statistics.  Otherwise you'd cite them. The only legit statistics are voter exit polls. 

Edited January 12, 2018 by Bob Crockett

[rockpond]

17 minutes ago, Bob Crockett said:

Am I? Not true.  My only point is what it is and nothing more.  The single most significant factor was what it is.

That question (why downplay their role) was not directed at you.

[rockpond]

5 minutes ago, Bob Crockett said:

Untrue.   The most significant factor is the black vote.  It is not up to debate.  Unless you debate statistical proof. 

I don't argue that the correlation exists.  I think I, and others here, are questioning that the correlation with the Black vote (which is significant) can be referred to as the "single most significant factor" in the passing of Prop 8.  The be accurate and aligned with the data, that phrase would need some clarification and/or qualifiers.

[JulieM]

4 minutes ago, Bob Crockett said:

 You say:  "Many believe the money (and time) from Mormons was the single most significant factor in getting 8 to pass.  They have statistics too."  No, they do not have statistics.  Otherwise you'd cite them.

There are statistics as to how much of the total money donated came from church members.  Or are you disputing that?

(I think someone already posted here the amount and that it was either half or over half the total).  

There’s no way that was not a very significant factor in getting prop 8 to pass.  There is simply not just one “single” significant factor but many.  

[Jeanne]

57 minutes ago, rockpond said:

It's odd to me that so many LDS seem to want to not take credit for what they helped accomplish in California.  If it was the right thing to do, why downplay their role?

IMO...shame.

[Bob Crockett]

19 minutes ago, JulieM said:

There are statistics as to how much of the total money donated came from church members.  Or are you disputing that?

(I think someone already posted here the amount and that it was either half or over half the total).  

There’s no way that was not a very significant factor in getting prop 8 to pass.  There is simply not just one “single” significant factor but many.  

I'm amazed.  Facts don't matter?  Evidence doesn't matter?  My post focuses upon statistics and science, not your gut feel or my gut feel.  If you want my gut feel -- yes, I think the Coalition had an effect.  But:  Exit pollers did not detect the LDS presence nor the advertising campaign as a significant factor.  That would seem to be the only relevant evidence, not gut feel supposition.  Exit pollers were looking for this stuff.  Not significant.  I'm surprised that you and others don't understand the meaning of most significant.  The correlation factor is a mathematical number derived from sample size, a pre-determined significance factor and polling results.  If something is determined to be "significant" unless it is a mathematical tie, there will always be a "most significant" and a "second most significant" if there is more than one.

When I use the word "significant" I use it in a scientific statistical sense.  Not a subjective gut-feel sense. 

And it is not the case that the government requires the collection of religious affiliation for contributions.  There are no such statistics.  There are estimations made by persons hostile to the Coalition.  But they have no way of knowing who is and who is not a member of the Church.  I had a friend contribute $25,000 through his business.  The business is owned by Mormons and non-Mormons.  What decision was made about that contribution?  I have a friend who is head of his Muslim congregation and they made a contribution, which appears to be added to the Mormon number.  I don't dispute that money was contributed by members of the Church.  But focus on reliable evidence.  Not PC anti-religious claims without bases.

And I don't downplay the Church's role in this case.  My interest is in statistical exit polling, and it surprised me and caused me to rethink opinions formed on the basis of many sources hostile to the church, like this Board.  Again, I ask, since exit polling is considered to be rather standard data upon which to rely, why wouldn't you trust this data over supposition?

Edited January 12, 2018 by Bob Crockett

[JulieM]

6 minutes ago, Bob Crockett said:

I'm amazed.  Facts don't matter?

Of course.  But you seem to only look at one of the many, many facts (black vote) about the different factors involved with what accomplished the passing of prop 8.  The amount of money and time donated by Mormons is also a fact.

Look at all of them.  It’s then a person’s opinion which one was the “single most significant” (if it can even be narrowed down to a “single” one.)

[rockpond]

5 minutes ago, JulieM said:

Of course.  But you seem to only look at one of the many, many facts (black vote) about the different factors involved with what accomplished the passing of prop 8.  The amount of money and time donated by Mormons is also a fact.

Look at all of them.  It’s then a person’s opinion which one was the “single most significant” (if it can even be narrowed down to a “single” one.)

Based on Bob's data, I would suggest that being Black was the single most significant factor in casting a "yes" vote on Prop 8.  I think the data supports that.

The data does not support that the Black vote was the single most significant factor in the passing of Prop 8.  Far from it.

Edited January 12, 2018 by rockpond

[Bob Crockett]

You have misread the numbers.  Without the black yes vote, it wouldn't have passed.   Again, exit polling data which Julie doesn't think is worth much.  She wants to stand on gut feel evidence. 

So, many on this board just seem to go with gut-feel instinct.   Even the social scientists like california boy. Troublesome.

Edited January 12, 2018 by Bob Crockett

[rockpond]

5 minutes ago, Bob Crockett said:

You have misread the numbers.  Without the black yes vote, it wouldn't have passed.   Again, exit polling data which Julie doesn't think is worth much.  She wants to stand on gut feel evidence. 

Without the white yes vote it wouldn't have passed either.  And the white yes vote was larger.

[Bob Crockett]

Well, that's true, but being white was not a statistical factor of significance.  

[JulieM]

15 minutes ago, rockpond said:

Based on Bob's data, I would suggest that being Black was the single most significant factor in casting a "yes" vote on Prop 8.  I think the data supports that.

The data does not support that the Black vote was the single most significant factor in the passing of Prop 8.  Far from it.

I agree (which is what I was trying to say, but you stated it better).  There are simply too many factors to narrow it down to just one.  For me, I believe it would not have passed without the influence of the advertisements paid for by the church and other religions and organizations.  Without the effort of members, I doubt it would have passed.  If I had to name a single factor, that would be it.

Edited January 12, 2018 by JulieM

[rockpond]

2 minutes ago, Bob Crockett said:

Well, that's true, but being white was not a statistical factor of significance.  

Being white was not a statistically significant factor in voting yes.  Being black was a statistically significant factor in voting yes.  But that does not mean that the black vote was the most significant factor in getting Prop 8 passed.  For the Black vote to have been the single most significant factor in getting Prop 8 passed than the removal of the Black vote would have to produce the biggest change in outcome... and it doesn't.

You seem to be conflating two different things:

1) The correlation of being Black and voting "yes".  [High]

2) The impact of the entire Black vote on the outcome of Prop 8.  [Low]

[kllindley]

It's kind of funny, but mostly sad, to see this colossal miscommunication just keep rolling on.  

Bob keeps trying to say that he is talking about the most statistically significant variable in determining whether a person voted YES and the impact that degree of variation impacted the overall decision.  It's a mathematical fact that really isn't in question.  It has nothing to do with what may or may not have happened if the Church hadn't been involved.  The Church's involvement was certainly a factor.  So was the year.  What if the vote had been held in 1980?  That would have changed the outcome much more than whether or not the Mormons were involved.  But those aren't factors we discuss when talking about variables that influence a particular vote.  (I remember all the articles trying to make sense of the Trump vote that looked at race, gender, party affiliation, urban/rural, SES, education.  Not what groups advocated what or who put what ads out,)

Rockpond, 

The math in making that determination is a little different.  We don't remove the Black vote entirely.  We compare it to what would have happened if the Black vote had been representative of the whole.  For every vote you take away from the YES you have to add one to the NO.  In no other group would moving the distribution to the general population change the outcome.  

[CA Steve]

14 minutes ago, rockpond said:

Being white was not a statistically significant factor in voting yes.  Being black was a statistically significant factor in voting yes.  But that does not mean that the black vote was the most significant factor in getting Prop 8 passed.  For the Black vote to have been the single most significant factor in getting Prop 8 passed than the removal of the Black vote would have to produce the biggest change in outcome... and it doesn't.

You seem to be conflating two different things:

1) The correlation of being Black and voting "yes".  [High]

2) The impact of the entire Black vote on the outcome of Prop 8.  [Low]

I do not believe Bob is conflating them.

I do believe the intent is that the reader conflate them.

Next up, a discussion on the definition of "is".

Edited January 12, 2018 by CA Steve

[rockpond]

2 minutes ago, kllindley said:

Rockpond, 

The math in making that determination is a little different.  We don't remove the Black vote entirely.  We compare it to what would have happened if the Black vote had been representative of the whole.  For every vote you take away from the YES you have to add one to the NO.  In no other group would moving the distribution to the general population change the outcome.  

But Blacks weren't the entire population of CA.  Again, what you and Bob are describing is the correlation of being Black with voting in favor of Prop 8.

But something having been the single most significant factor in the passing of Prop 8 is a different matter.

[cacheman]

20 minutes ago, rockpond said:

Being white was not a statistically significant factor in voting yes.  Being black was a statistically significant factor in voting yes.  But that does not mean that the black vote was the most significant factor in getting Prop 8 passed.  For the Black vote to have been the single most significant factor in getting Prop 8 passed than the removal of the Black vote would have to produce the biggest change in outcome... and it doesn't.

You seem to be conflating two different things:

1) The correlation of being Black and voting "yes".  [High]

2) The impact of the entire Black vote on the outcome of Prop 8.  [Low]

This is correct.  In his paper, he cited polling data demonstrating your first point and extrapolated from that that the black vote was the most significant factor.  I would like to see him explain how the vote of this group was more significant to the outcome than any other,  such as age groups.  The 65+ age group largely voted in favor and made up a significantly higher percentage of the voters.  

Edited January 12, 2018 by cacheman

[rockpond]

In all of this, I do not want to mis-cast Bob's paper.  This issue of the Black vote is a tangent to the subject of his article.  For those who have not read it, here is his conclusion which I happen to agree with:

Quote

A court in the United States should not use “religious beliefs” to answer the question of whether gay marriage should be lawful. The battle for civil rights should not tilt against religious speech as it did in Perry v. Schwartzenegger. It is one thing to complain about religion’s effects upon politics and quite another thing to strike legislation because it had the backing of religious groups. It makes no sense to strike the legislation on the basis of the identity of the promoter. The courts should embrace civil rights and the rights of speech and religion at the same time. The courts may strike legislation because it imperils one’s civil rights and not because despised religious groups advanced it.

As Justice O’Connor wrote in McCreary County v. American Civil Liberties Union of Kentucky, “[f]ree people are entitled to free and diverse thoughts, which government ought neither to constrain nor to direct.”150 Free people choose freely to associate themselves with religions, unions, trade groups or public interest organizations. Voters and legislators ought to hear all sorts of messages, be they about Baal or Moses. Churchpersons should not be coerced into silence.

 

[kllindley]

7 minutes ago, rockpond said:

Again, what you and Bob are describing is the correlation of being Black with voting in favor of Prop 8.

So, first, please don't assume I'm making any argument one way or the other. I'm just commenting on what I see as people talking past each other. 

 

10 minutes ago, rockpond said:

But Blacks weren't the entire population of CA

I don't understand how this has any relevance. 

 

11 minutes ago, rockpond said:

But something having been the single most significant factor in the passing of Prop 8 is a different matter.

I totally agree with this.  I don't think that's what he's saying. I think he's talking about statistically significant factors that can be quantified. 

I'm not trying to make his argument. I just don't see him claiming to make the argument you attribute to him. 

13 minutes ago, cacheman said:

The 65+ age group largely voted in favor and made up a significantly higher percentage of the voters.  

I don't know the numbers. It is possible that the degree of variance multiplied by the percentage of voters results in a smaller effect. 

[cacheman]

16 minutes ago, kllindley said:

I totally agree with this.  I don't think that's what he's saying. I think he's talking about statistically significant factors that can be quantified. 

I'm not trying to make his argument. I just don't see him claiming to make the argument you attribute to him. 

He keeps referring to his paper where he stated that "the single most significant factor for the success of Proposition 8 was black voter turnout..." 

http://lawandreligion.com/volume-13

[rockpond]

27 minutes ago, kllindley said:

I totally agree with this.  I don't think that's what he's saying. I think he's talking about statistically significant factors that can be quantified. 

I'm not trying to make his argument. I just don't see him claiming to make the argument you attribute to him. 

Bob did claim that the Black vote was the single most significant factor in the passing of Prop 8.  But he is welcome to clarify that if he likes.  I have certainly been known, on occasion, to write things that weren't what I actually meant and I always appreciate the opportunity to correct myself.

[california boy]

5 hours ago, Bob Crockett said:

 "The difference between the “yes” and “no” vote for Proposition 8 was 504,479 votes; the number of black voters who voted in favor of Proposition 8 was 718,997."

Your opinion about the single most important factor did not emerge in the polling data.  Being black was the single most important factor.  There's no indication they were swayed by the Coalition's media campaign. 

But, then again, I ask, what is wrong with the media campaign?  I opposed Prop 8.  I still oppose not extending the right to marry to gays.  And I will forever. But why must you make this point about the media campaign except to suggest there is something wrong with it?  What is your point?

Here is some simple statistical questions.  Would Prop 8 have passed if only black religious voters voted for it?  Did Prop 8 need more than that single group?  How did they get the support of all the other voters?  

Edited January 12, 2018 by california boy

[Bob Crockett]

44 minutes ago, california boy said:

The media campaign is by far the most important part of any political campaign. The final price tag for the 2016 election is in: $6.5 billion for the presidential and congressional elections combined, according to campaign finance watchdog OpenSecrets.org.  Getting donors support is key in getting a person or issue voted for.  I personally think that the cost of political campaigns is the single most corrupting issue in our government.  It is unbelievable that you could possibly hold to the idea that money and manpower donated by Mormons was not important to Prop 8 passing.  If what the church did to pass Prop 8 was not key, then why did they ask members to contribute all that they could and organize the manpower to get out the vote.  

Of course different groups supported Prop 8 more than others.  A high percentage of black churchgoers strongly supported Prop 8.  But without the rest of the population voting for Prop 8 it would not have passed.  

It has now been 9 years since Prop 8.  The Mormon church will always be the face of Prop 8 for very good reasons.  When the Mormon church provided over half of the political contributions and 75% of the manpower, you own the proposition.  Your idea that black churches got Prop 8 passed is such a small part of what passed the proposition.  It took a whole lot of other votes to make Prop 8 law.  And that is why the media campaign is key to any political election.  

Honestly, after 8 years and the legalization of gay marriage, I don't really see the point to discussing Prop 8 or the roll the church played in passing Prop 8.  You aren't going to be able to change history.

Here is some simple statistical questions.  Would Prop 8 have passed if only black religious voters voted for it?  Did Prop 8 need more than that single group?  How did they get the support of all the other voters?  

I am not trying rewrite history.  Remember, I opposed Proposition 8.  

You're a social scientist.  What's not to understand about statistics?

1.  There is no statistic showing the extent of Mormon contributions to Prop 8, as religious affiliation is not a reporting requirement and it would be unconstitutional to require it.  The estimations were made by sources hostile to the Coalition.  But there is no denying that church members contributed, as I can see the contribution list for myself and recognize many names.

2.  There is no statistic measuring the influence the Coalition's ads had on the election results.  I have my opinion, you have yours.  

3.   The Pew poll is what it is.  In terms of statistical significance, being a black voter was the most significant factor to predict a yes vote, and with that statistic, one can estimate over 700,000 black yes votes. That's over 70% of black voters.

4.  The church says there are 771,464 total members of the church in California.  Given that half that number is expected to be children, it is highly unlikely that the Mormon yes vote was more than 100,000.  Things to remember here -- most Mormons are Republicans and thus are discouraged from voting in California, as their votes don't count.  I proudly vote Democratic.

5.  No statistical analysis will support a "what if" scenario.  

My point in all this at least in the thread is to refute the politically correct argument that blacks overwhelmingly support gay rights.  They don't, and there has never been any proof of it unless you accept Daniel's and Gray's and your gut-feel approach to social science.  I think a Mormon is more likely to support gay rights than a black voter.  My gut feel for this is that, based upon my survey of reports, Mormons -- and not blacks -- got the lion's share of the blame for Prop 8.  It is politically easy to dump all over a despised religion, as you and Gray and others here do, rather than the black community.  That then leads to the next question, which I address in my Rutgers' article:  Why do you criticize the church for getting involved with Prop 8?  Why exactly? 

I am the wrong guy for you to be criticizing, as I support gay rights and marriage.  But I laugh out loud and mockingly at how political correctness rules the roost in your neighborhood.  

Edited January 12, 2018 by Bob Crockett