By 2020 which states will..

[Lunar]

According to Nate Silver's math, every state but South Carolina, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Arkansas, Alabama, and Mississippi would vote down a gay marriage ban by 2020. Doesn't necessarily mean the other states would have gay marriage, but still.

C'mon, Utah & Idaho are still there.  Mathematics don't solve everything, some states are never going to do it until it's federal.

Obviously (to me), the strongly Democratic states will all fold on this issue (NY, CA, MD, IL, HI, NJ) but after that, it's going to be a push and shove and waiting for larger demographic and cultural shifts to win over suburbia on the issue.

Gay marriage will be everywhere in the long-run.  And, of course, there's never anything stopping you from holding a ceremony and declaring that someone is your husband.  NY confers many legal benefits from marriages obtained in other states, which could be a possibility for a number of states which would otherwise not legally confer it themselves. 

[Lunar]

Florida is one of like the two holdouts that prevents gay people from even adopting children, right?

Or did they change that or do I have my facts wrong?

But his map has it legal in Arkansas, so, I mean...I see Florida flipping before that happens.

[Lunar]

Florida is one of like the two holdouts that prevents gay people from even adopting children, right?

Or did they change that or do I have my facts wrong?

But his map has it legal in Arkansas, so, I mean...I see Florida flipping before that happens.

Yeah Arkansas? Lamezorz.

I put Arkansas as red?  I meant it as grey.

Florida, in ten years, will have moved enough to the left to at least possibly legalize it.

Only a third of Florida Democrats favored Same-Sex Marriage in 2009. No way possible in ten years.

Yeah, that's what happens with coalitions.

Question for everyone:  Were there any Democrats that favored gay marriage on the state level, for the 2008 election cycle?  I presume Kucinich did, but really he's enough of a nutcase that I don't even know about that.  I'm pretty sure Obama/Clinton/Biden/Dodd/Richardson didn't support gay marriage on a state level [i.e., if it came up for a vote on a referendum in their state, they'd vote against it, a much more conservative position than opposing it on the federal level]

In NY, there's a really cool group called Fight Back which focuses on blowing up Democrats in liberal districts who oppose gay marriage...but they don't work the issue, they concentrate their money and efforts on wherever said Democrat is most vulnerable, and not on the gay marriage issue in particular.  I've been hugely impressed with their efforts, they bounced Hiram and replaced him with Peralta pretty recently, and they have their targets.  The message is interesting:  Even if your constituents don't care about gay marriage, we still do.  I'd love to see it replicated nationally, by the HRC are a bunch of capitulating establishment wussies.

I've predicted for over a year now that there will never be another Democrat nominated for president who staunchly opposes gay marriage.  

[Lunar]

I wouldn't be surprised if opposition increased since those that favor it the most, white liberals, have the lowest fertility rates.

While minorities who oppose it (even the D's) have higher fertility rates.

It will probably be a double dip, but however much time it takes for Western-style social liberalism to reach non-whites.

Yeah but you're ignoring the age variables, which are probably even more impacting than the race one.  Young blacks and Hispanic liberals aren't the same group as older ones on this issue.