Mmm, I guess so. The Massachusetts teacher was a sex-ed teacher for what it's worth, plus all the references to sex in the ad might stir up some abstinence-only program supporters to move more into the yes column. Maybe. All of Yes on 1's ads have basically been about mobilizing the base to get out, though. Not targeting swing voters/independents like the no side.
It would appear that the Yes on 1 side chose the correct strategy. For a single issue campaign such as this, it is almost always more about GOTV than conversion, at least in the short term. For the long term, the No on 1 side's approach will pay benefits eventually unless the momentum on this issue shifts, which I don't see happening. The No on 1 side also would likely have done better had this been a general election instead of a special election. Given how predictable a petition effort to reverse the legislature on this issue was, same-sex marriage proponents would have been tactically wiser to have waited until the upcoming session to pass the law.
