BY MATT WICKENHEISER

Portland Press Herald

The big question Tuesday night was which way the same-sex marriage vote would go.

One thing was clear, however: Possible outcomes could be explained in a variety of ways. As results slowly came in and remained in a virtual dead heat late into the night, experts speculated on what various results could signal.

A close vote, no matter which way it breaks, would continue the struggle between the two sides, suggested John Greene, distinguished professor of political science at the University of Akron and a national expert on same-sex marriage.

"Each side is going to say 'we just have to work harder, we could prevail if we just put a little more effort into it,'" Greene said.

A more decisive victory, one way or the other, could lead the losing camp, on a national scale, to change its tactics, he said.

"Oftentimes it's the side that is perceived to have lost that does the most innovating," Greene said. "If the results are very, very close, they don't sit back and say 'we have to change our strategy.' They say 'we just didn't get it done.'"

However the vote comes down may reflect religious shades as well.

The veto effort was primarily supported by the Catholic Church and a network of Christian congregations throughout the state, through funding, effort and organization.

Although opponents of same-sex marriage raised a number of arguments to support their case -- including charges that the law would lead to gay marriage being taught in schools -- the underlying opposition was religious in nature.

If that doesn't resonate, it would be more likely that the No on 1 camp would win, suggested Michael Franz, associate professor of government at Bowdoin College, and may reflect a more liberal streak among Maine's Catholics and Christians.

Franz said the No on 1 camp ran a campaign centered around a relatively simple argument of equality, while Stand For Marriage Maine's arguments centered around schools, the question of what marriage is about and other somewhat philosophical points.

The final vote, simply put, will reflect which arguments worked for Mainers.

And the vote may also speak to different stratas in society.

Maine isn't the first state to approve same-sex marriage. That distinction is held by Massachusetts, which legalized gay marriage in 2004 after a court decision. Vermont, New Hampshire, Iowa and Connecticut all allow same-sex marriage.

But Maine is the first state to have legalized same-sex marriage through the legislative process and to have it before voters in a general vote.

Courts and legislatures have largely been more supportive of changing marriage laws.

If a law passed by Maine's Legislature is upheld by voters -- the general population -- then the legislative process reflected a reality in Maine, said Katherine Franke, professor of law at Columbia Law School in New York and director of the school's Center for Gender and Sexuality Law.

"The activists, the legislators, others have done their work to educate their population that this is not going to be the end of civilization, that this is a fundamental civil right whose time has come," Franke said.

If, on the other hand, the law is vetoed, the national campaign for same-sex marriage has more work to do, she said.

"These political movements are always dialectic in nature -- one step forward, one or more steps backward," said Franke. "That's the nature of the beast; it's not a bad thing."

The latest vote "could potentially signal a public opinion shift more broadly outside of Maine," said Franz, of Bowdoin College.

Lawmakers and governors in other states who are on the fence over gay marriage were watching Maine's election, Franke said.

"They're watching to see whether the majority in a state like Maine -- hardly understood to be radical -- can live with this," she said. "It may affect where people are willing to go in terms of taking risks."

New Jersey is expected to vote on a gay-marriage bill in the next session, and the New York governor anticipates a similar bill to come to his desk for approval in coming weeks. Washington, D.C., is also eyeing a gay-marriage law.

Brian Brown, executive director for the National Organization for Marriage, and Joe Solomnese, president of the Human Rights Campaign, downplayed the actual impact of the Maine vote on other states -- whichever way the vote goes. Both groups are on opposing sides of the issue. The National Organization for Marriage contributed roughly $1.8 million to Stand for Marriage Maine, while the Human Rights Campaign gave about $200,000 to No on 1.

While the legalization of same-sex marriage in Massachusetts had a huge impact as the first state, Solomnese said, virtually no one noticed New Hampshire's law change this year. The concept of legal same-sex marriage is becoming more commonplace, more accepted, he suggested.

"Mundane, non-seismic reaction is good for us," he said.

Because Maine is part of a region that has moved toward same-sex marriage, the vote here had less impact, said Brown.

"New England is its own entity, in a way," he said.

And regardless what happens in Maine, there's still going to be a push for same-sex marriage in New Jersey and New York, where NOM has spent roughly $250,000 and $500,000, respectively, on ads.

"There's a lot that has less to do with Maine and more to do with the political dynamics in New Jersey and New York," Brown said.

Franke said she wasn't surprised that the vote was close late into the night. The issue of same-sex marriage, she suggested, is perched on the "fulcrum of change."

"It's a little hard to predict in advance where we are -- are we almost there, or just on the other side?" Franke said.