Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Cynthia Nixon

GET UPDATES FROM Cynthia Nixon
 

Fight Back on Election Day

Posted: 11/01/10 09:56 AM ET

Tomorrow should prove a very interesting, and in some cases disturbing, Election Day. Despite the endless barrage of media coverage of some of the country's craziest, most misinformed, hypocritical and hate-spewing candidates, there are some very exciting, ground-breaking things happening to advance a truly progressive agenda and I want to tell you about one of them -- Fight Back New York.

In December 2009, the New York State Senate proved beyond a doubt how outmoded, outdated and out-of-touch they were with their constituents when they voted against my right -- and the rights of hundreds of thousands of other gay New Yorkers -- to marry the person they love. I didn't want to let them get away with that.

The good news was that every single New York State Senator who voted against our rights would be up for reelection this Nov. BINGO!

There were a lot of New Yorkers who were ready to Fight Back. And so in early 2010, Fight Back New York was formed. We are a PAC with one purpose: kicking out of office the most virulent anti-gay senators. I got involved with Fight Back New York, because I was ready to stop letting my elected officials get away with voting against equality and justice.

Last spring, we set our sights on our first homophobe, a gem of a legislator named Hiram Monserrate, who had been kicked out of the Senate by his colleagues after being convicted of assaulting his girlfriend with a broken bottle. You see, a fun coincidence is that most of these anti-equality Senators are often pretty bad on other basic humanitarian issues as well, and there's a wealth of information that their constituents need to know about them.

Monserrate was running in a special election for his former seat, and Fight Back New York came in with a vengeance. We raised, and then spent a considerable amount of money. We sent out more than 95,000 pieces of mail to targeted voters in the district, explaining why Monserrate was the wrong choice. And when we won in a landslide, we sent a strong message to Albany: our famously complacent NY Senators could no longer consider it politically expedient to vote against our basic civil rights. Because when they did so (they learned), there are consequences.

Since that first race back in March, and our subsequent victory in the September primaries when we defeated another proudly anti-equality Senator from Buffalo (perhaps he and Carl Paladino spent time together in the local anti-gay bar), I'm told that we have come within a stone's throw of the votes needed to pass marriage equality in New York.

Now, I'm no insider lobbyist, but in addition to winning "yes" votes by defeating certain senators, I'm willing to bet that a lot of those remaining have gone back to revisit their conscience and their "no" votes on marriage equality and have "changed their mind" on the issue as they watch their fellow senators drop. And we don't bear them a grudge -- we welcome their change of heart (and vote). We have now set our sights on more candidates whose fate will be determined and (we hope) sealed tomorrow.

While I have great hope and confidence in tomorrow's election, our campaign has already changed politics as usual. Our elected officials in Albany know we mean business. And the significant role we've played in the New York Senate races sends a strong message to those running for office across the country. If we can Fight Back in New York, we can Fight Back anywhere. Long gone are the days where politicians took heat for voting in favor of equality. Now the opposite is true. As we've seen in this campaign season alone, anti-gay stances these days are a liability. We're taking names, and we're going after them.

We are well on our way to winning marriage equality in New York State, and beyond. That said, this fight will not be over for a while. For those of you who are like me and are looking for the inspiring and hopeful campaigns amongst the refuse of this election cycle, please go to FightBackPac.com and read about the work we are doing. (And check out our celebrity videos featuring Jesse Tyler Ferguson from Modern Family, Rosie Perez, Alec Baldwin, Whoopi Goldberg, and me!) And if you can, please make a donation. It's not too late to help us push anti-equality senators out of office. We're sending a message to legislators that until they come around on this issue -- their seat is at risk. Join our inspiring efforts. Because it's not just about New York, it's about changing the way elected officials in every state view their gay constituents: you can't vote against our rights and expect to get away with it. At the very least, it's great therapy, and at the most, you'll help shepherd in a new era of civil rights for LGBT New Yorkers, and create a model for winning significant change for the LGBT community in the political sphere. We're fighting back, and the impact will go far beyond New York. Join us. Vote for equality at the ballot box tomorrow. Fight back!

 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 241
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4  Next ›  Last »  (4 total)
11:06 AM on 11/02/2010
Unfortunately this is not the only subject the Pols are out of touch with....
Kind of ironic that Barney Frank is one of the biggest sellouts going....now he is in a real "dog fight" in his congressional district due to his poorly conceived actions.
From the rich in Newton to the blue collar in New Bedford they are waking up to his crooked and deceptive ways....
lastpost
see biography
08:54 AM on 11/02/2010
“elected officials get away with voting against equality and justiceâ€
A recent documentary showed the thirty-plus year battle that has been waged. To halt the disgraceful practice of voting boundary modification, on partisan terms. But this is just one example of how the people are kept distant from the levers of power. Imagine driving an automobile via remote control, while located inside the trunk. Hardly likely to prove an effective means of progression. Similarly, selecting candidates on the basis of their persona, isn’t likely to prove relevant to how they finally decide to vote. If we voted for actual polices, however, we could choose the best and reject the rest. Irrespective of who has thought of those notions. Punishing politicians, currently means waiting until after they have done the unforgivable.
Why, after we have repeatedly been let down, do we continue to gift them that latitude?
BigDaddyWow
This member is licensed to spank
08:05 PM on 11/01/2010
As a conservative and a republican I say Cynthia; marry your mate. This same-sex marriage issue is without a doubt the silliest thing out there. I mean, how does it effect me? It doesn't. How does it effect society? It doesn't. How does it effect gays; well they can get married and enjoy some extra benefits. What I don't understand is why our government must be involved in non-damaging personal contracts between people that affect nothing. Oh, the point - I don't consider this to be a progressive issue Cynthia. Be patient, your day will come.
08:33 PM on 11/01/2010
Agreed. I am a fiscally-conservative independent. But, I tend to lean to the left on social issues like gay rights and abortion.

In other words, I like limited government, but wish we could just legalize gay marriage and move on. As for Don't Ask, Don't Tell, I personally don't see any reason why gay people shouldn't be allowed to serve openly. I am a retired US Army Field Artillery Officer. That said, I do believe that decision should be left up to the military. They know what's best for their soldiers, sailors, and airmen. Civilians shouldn't be forcing that kind of thing on them.

-Paradigm
http://www.belatedtruth.com
07:41 PM on 11/01/2010
The choices in this election could not be more black and white.
On the right we have a party of NO, http://crooksandliars.com/jon-perr/gop-promises-two-more-years-no-compromise , doing everything in their power to push the American people down, while pushing cash at big business and the uber wealthy, even those shipping jobs overseas. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QlBOv8m_Xa8 , I remember!
On the left we have a party that has often tried to stop Obama from achieving the mandate he was elected to achieve. Despite these obstacles he has been wildly successful (even corporate owned media can’t change the FACTS), and has been the most successful legislator in 50 years! www.obamaachievements.org The left also has an element of forward moving, future thinking progressive people, who can make a huge difference. www.gen-we.org .
I keep hearing about voters who are voting republican or not voting because they’re mad that Obama hasn’t done what they wanted fast enough. I hope that everyone out there can get over their personal anger and look at two facts;
1. If Obama can get the support he needs, he will be able to achieve all of his campaign promises.
2. If the republicans gain seats, at BEST, there will be governmental gridlock and at worst, they will continue to work towards destroying your constitutional rights and your economic prosperity.
Bladernr1001
Vote Libertarian
07:49 PM on 11/01/2010
Hopefully...the GOP is the party of NO new unsustainable government programs such as Obamacare which is already turning into a huge fiasco.

Geeze...somebody has to say no.
v2787
Progressive and Proud
09:03 PM on 11/01/2010
Why don't you explain to us just exactly how the new healthcare bill, which is providing insurance coverage for millions of people who didn't have it before, not to mention preventing insurance companies from insidiously dumping people due to "pre-existing conditions," is a huge fiasco. I'm sure that in right-wing world there must be an extremely valid explanation for why this bill is so awful.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
JudgeMoonbox
08:59 PM on 11/01/2010
"On the left we have a party that has often tried to stop Obama from achieving the mandate he was elected to achieve."

I'm perplexed. Are you saying that this 60 vote business is the work of Liberals? That Mitch McConnell and Jim DeMint were perfectly willing to give the Stimulus and Health Care Reform bills a straight up or down vote?
11:59 PM on 11/01/2010
I agree with your analysis with regard to the Stimulus, which passed with 58 D and 3 R votes. But when Health Care Reform came along the Dems had 60 votes. The efforts of Nelson, Conrad, Lieberman, Lincoln, Landrieu, and Baucus in the Senate, and Stupak (among others) in the House can certainly be described as "stopping Obama from achieving the mandate he was elected to achieve."
isadora
Leftie, educator, labor activist, Unitarian Univer
07:26 PM on 11/01/2010
Hello Cynthia. You made a swing through my town two years ago to influence young women to vote. I reminded you about "No on (Proposition) 2." And we stood together at the front of the room while you spoke eloquently against Florida's version of "The Mormon Proposition" (see the film). You now write just as eloquently about major issues in this election. Thank you.
07:06 PM on 11/01/2010
Ms. Nixon, I am a midwestern conservative from the state that gave gays rights. fine with me. but as a politician dont promise to make middle class a priority and then not. if my family lived in new york city or los angeles, ca, we could be considered lower middle income to poor. but since we live out here where land is not that expensive, we do ok. i assume you are a progressive. good for you. a progressive with money, i assume. well let me take care of me and mine and u take care of yours and everyone else take care of theres, then we wont need progressives shoving programs to help the poor down our throats. these programs never take money from the wealthy because the wealthy have lots of tax loopholes. so they come after the middle income, which make us poorer and then we have to ask for help. leave us alone. we can do it on our own
Bladernr1001
Vote Libertarian
07:50 PM on 11/01/2010
Here,,,here...great post
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Bob Kellerman
Let's have more sanity toward each other
08:08 PM on 11/01/2010
The folks that hurt the middle class are the REPUBLICANS that waged those wars to make their friends richer -- thus the deficit and the need to help people out.

Clinton had a surplus --- WAR is not conservative when it is about oil and Texans.
09:19 PM on 11/01/2010
We leaerned to wage war from the Demcrats: Wilson, FDR & LBJ. And ever since, every few years, no matter the president, Democrat or Republican, decides to make war on someone.
I'd still vote Republican these days because the party of DIVIDE wants segments of the US to always remain at each other's throats. Remember the US the first few months after 9/11? We were united. The ACLU didn't dare demand the removal of the cross made of girders at the Twin Towers site. The Left did not dare demand rights for some group and remind everyone how "evil" the US really is. United felt good. Now Cynthia Nixon wants us back at each other's throats, DEMANDING rights, threatening politicians who don't agree with her.
The Roman Republic turned into an Empire and fell due to dissention created by allowing in barbarian tribes which cared nothing about the brilliant culture Rome had spawned, refused to learn Latin, and, instead demanded the right to live within the Empire but refused to be a part of it while still gorging themselves on the many advantages the Empire had to offer - until these tribes decided the Empire was evil and overthrew it. This brought on the Dark Ages, the only light through which was the Catholic Chuch. No doubt the Chuch will have to save civilization in the New Word as it had in the Old World all over again. I hope it does a better job this time.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
jemiltd
Writer,author,thinker,creative
07:02 PM on 11/01/2010
Shock the heck out of the media and take back your own power just by voting tomorrow. No fanfare needed just show up and vote. If you don't vote, don't complain about the outcome. Change has never been created from the sidelines.

http://www.truth-out.org/eight-false-things-public-knows-prior-election-day64486
Bladernr1001
Vote Libertarian
07:51 PM on 11/01/2010
Don;t worry...us conservatives and liberatarians will.

Liberals..please stay home....you have done enough damage.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
FlamingLibrul
100% Snark, Guaranteed!
09:19 PM on 11/01/2010
Wow, that's really rich. If you're not being sarcastic, you've got a whole lot of nerve. When GW stood on that aircraft carrier in his silly little jumpsuit, grinning with that Mission Accomplished banner behind his empty head, he really meant the destruction of the middle class, started by Reagan in 1980.
09:24 PM on 11/01/2010
Amen and amen, Blade
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Gary Strawley
06:46 PM on 11/01/2010
Why is no one taking about the fact that a vote for the gop or the tea is a vote to help WALL ST., THE BANKS THE INSURANCE COMPANYS THE OIL COMPANYS AND ALL BIG BUSINESS AND
THE RICH ONLY- for they will raise prices on everything. They have no plans to help the middle class or the poor, ASK THEM?? So your best bet is to vote against your family!!! After all BIG BUSINESS needs money more then YOU do or your FAMILY!! Help the RICH only screw your family vote for the gop or the tea!!!
06:52 PM on 11/01/2010
You're right. That's for a different blog.
Why not try to locate it.
Bladernr1001
Vote Libertarian
07:53 PM on 11/01/2010
How does this "help" you talk about materialize?...where does the help come from?....from other citizens....the money to finance the help is forcibly taken from one who earned it and given to one that did not....is that how you see the role of government?
v2787
Progressive and Proud
09:07 PM on 11/01/2010
The reason people "have not" is because they aren't working. Why aren't they working? Because there are no jobs. Why are there no jobs? Because the Bush administration and his cronies got laws passed enabling corporations to line their own pockets by outsourcing the jobs to India, China, and other foreign nations, where they can get cheap labor instead of paying a living wage to American workers. Yeah, let's vote for the Republicans so they can re-institute those same failed, anti-American policies that have destroyed the middle class in this country. Right.
photo
Skunkman
old & decrepit
06:29 PM on 11/01/2010
This Supreme Court decision will increase heavily the campaign spending. From now on only very wealthy people and those supported by rich party can rule for a good political job. The Tea Party movement and those who wanted to be independent are going to suffer the consequences.

Mike
photo
LMPE
I connect the most dissimilar things
05:40 PM on 11/01/2010
You go, Cynthia!
05:36 PM on 11/01/2010
PresidentRobertBooth,

Tax benefits and marriage licenses are the entire issue. The fact that you refuse to answer my questions as they relate to single persons simply shows your hypocrisy.

Gay marriage is not about love. It is about money! I say, remove the economic and legal incentives to marriage and return it to the pure realm of the heart and church. Then, not only will it be what it was meant to be, but single persons will also not be discriminated against!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
TheIndependenceParty
Cranky yankee and a rehabilitated ex-Republican
06:06 PM on 11/01/2010
The "pure realm of the heart and church" is rife with emotional and sexual abuse and in every sect I have ever attended or known. Church has NO place in sanctifying what it can not sanctify in itself.

Your views are yours, and you have every right to do so, but even as a faithful follower of Christ, I will not allow you to hold out that our fellow citizens of other faiths and other orientations owes the church or you or me ANYTHING.

What have you ever done in support of those "others" in the world?

Gay marriage is solely about love, in my opinion. This society and our nation has hounded and badgered, and other nations far worse, ... and yet our sisters and brothers fall in love nonetheless and face prejudice and intolerance.

And even if it IS about economic concerns, it is clear in the Constitution that the citizens of this land are to be treated equally under the law, ... and that is the most essential legal concern of all, now that you raised it! For economics is about money, and money is the province of government and the law. Religion has no place there, my fellow Christian. A better Man than I gave you graphic evidence in the Book we say we love to read, but pay no heed to.

You would deny others what you enjoy yourself? Tell that to the Boss!
06:16 PM on 11/01/2010
What are you talking about?

My entire premise is that state sanctioned marriage is in and of itself unjust and unequal. Marriage by the state is inherentely unequal as single people do not enjoy the same economic or legal rights as those who are married.

When di dI sayn that anyone "owed" the Church anything?!??? As I said in an earlier post regarding religion, if you can't find a church that grants gay marriage, then start one!
09:38 PM on 11/01/2010
"it is clear in the Constitution that the citizens of this land are to be treated equally under the law," you say, TheIndependence. Mind showing me the article and clause which states this?

You folks are very big about the Constitution and love it so much you invent things for it that, wisely, it does not have.

Not to worry, the Constitution is something the Obamarama can make sure to get rid of so he can give us a new one which he makes up as he goes along.

Not a whole lot differently than he is doing now.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
manray05
07:19 PM on 11/01/2010
Just because your marriage is a financial arrangement it doesn't mean everyone elses is. I know many married gay people. They definitely did it for love.
05:05 PM on 11/02/2010
Fab! But would they then be willing to give up the advantages? I highly doubt it.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
DJE12857
RAGING LIBERAL,ANIMAL LOVER&RECOVERING CATHOLIC!
05:34 PM on 11/01/2010
Thank you for your hard work and passion Cynthia! I hope it is rewarded soon.
photo
ChaCubed
Republicans: the Antichrist
05:17 PM on 11/01/2010
Yeeee haw! The heterosexual supremacists are out today!

Separate but equal isn't.
05:13 PM on 11/01/2010
PresidentRobertBooth, so, based on your answers to my questions, you have agreed that gay marriage isnot about love but rather about money.
05:18 PM on 11/01/2010
***PresidentR­obertBooth­, so, based on your answers to my questions, you have agreed that gay marriage isnot about love but rather about money.***

No, I would say based on your inability to comprehend my answers to your questions, I would agree that this discussion is way over your head.
05:21 PM on 11/01/2010
How is allowing state sanctioned marriage to stand an act for justice? Why should those who are not married be denied benefits or pay higher tax rates that those who are married. Why should marriage be granted by the state when something of equal economic value is not availabel to single persons?

Eliminate the economic advantages of marriage.
photo
Ed Baker
Militant Moderate
05:19 PM on 11/01/2010
It's about a legal problem - it's a legal issue. We already love each other. The problem is we are legal strangers to each other. Gay people love each other, have built lives with each other etc......

Banning gay marriage doesn't make gay people disolve. It just gives them a hard time.

Enjoy it while it lasts.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
TheIndependenceParty
Cranky yankee and a rehabilitated ex-Republican
06:53 PM on 11/01/2010
I believe there will soon come a day when equal treatment under the law will become the issue. A corporation can donate to a cause, but you can not share your estate, or even your privacy?

The undoing of prejudice is its irrationality,, ... and the value of the law, in the end, is its reason. The scales of justice tilt, and that is their value. Patience is the key, and the emergence of social abuses and inequality bring about interpretations of law that shift the practices of our social structure, ... taxes, privacy, and property, ... but most of all rights of social access and justice, which give every American the same standing on proven and testable values and norms.

Gay marriage is at the door of the very people who believe it is their greatest enemy. Some of the rights they are fighting to defend, the Phelps Clan to name one, before the Supreme Court itself, ... will become the path stones to giving GLBT Americans the opportunity to equal treatment under the law, not state by state, ... but across the nation.

They stare at the tops of their shoes and see righteousness written in the dusty roads of Topeka, ... Pathetic!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jophoenix
04:34 PM on 11/01/2010
It's not about gay marriage that the government haw its problem. What it is about is Social Security.
We have put so many programs under it that its in financial question. SS was formed to help families
if for example one person stays home its more benefits that get payed out as it stands now a working women's go in the general fund because one must pick the hightest paying you can not get both!!!!
Don't you fine that odd and if this is changed they would have to take all the wonderful extra disability folks who could work while people who have true disabilities get far to little this is the truth
Most people do not want nor need to be in anyone Elyse's marriage its about benefit's nothing more and you are better off financially but not spiritual I hope this helps because love and respect is indeed marriage.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
TheIndependenceParty
Cranky yankee and a rehabilitated ex-Republican
05:55 PM on 11/01/2010
There is another side to marriage, which is darker and burdensome. I have had several friends and relatives who, when faced with the indigency that can arise of being married to their spouse with chronic mental health issues, or dementia, are forced by the economic blow of those, to divorce the only person they ever loved. Their ex-spouse will live out their years without even the legal connection, because that comes with an obligation to support them, even to bankruptcy in old age.

As we correct one injustice, we need to begin to consider others as well. Social Security should be based upon work and need. My work should provide for myself, and the needs of those I love.

Issues are resolved with open hearts. There is no other way.
06:23 PM on 11/01/2010
"For better or for worse...For richer or for poorer...In sickness and in health" - we may not all use those words, but the cut to the heart of what marriage is supposed to be about. I could care less what the gender of each party is - to each his own and I'll support to right of any citizen to marry another. However, I'm very disheartened by your comment regarding friends/relatives who've divorced rather than face an "economic blow" related to their spouse.

I'm in no way saying the system is fair and that "economic blows" don't exist - but that's part of marriage, being prepared to stand beside your partner no matter what. Anyone who is willing to take that plunge, I say more power to them.