That’s pretty much what some people are saying: that he only is fudging on the issue because he’s afraid that gay-hating Obama-lovers will flee rightward.
Me, I think Obama is genuinely uncomfortable with equal rights for gays (pretty ironic, since his own parents’ marriage was illegal in many states), but of course he is a damn sight better than Romney. Do you think that any slight Obama move gayward-ho would throw the election to the Republicans?
Probably not, but I could envision circumstances in which it would. If the election goes down to the wire, and he is dependent on close wins in socially conservative states like North Carolina, then maybe.
Hard to say. Black and latino voters tend to be opposed to gay rights.
That said I doubt they will vote against all their other interests and vote for Romney solely because of pro-gay rights stance by Obama.
I think that this is the exact reason that Biden is throwing out that trial balloon. In any event, on January 21, 2013, Obama’s “evolving” position will have finished evolving.
The technical answer is no. The reality is that the election will come down to a number of swing states, which are by definition going to be close. Any and all of a mix of a gazillion issues will move that last few percent toward one or the other candidate, or make them stay home. I doubt that even a good after the fact regression analysis will ever to be able to tease out which factors were important to what degree.
Overall, polls indicate that as many people today are comfortable with gay marriage as aren’t. That’s of lesser meaning than it appears. The people who aren’t comfortable are older, and older people vote in higher percentages. And the ones who are opposed are super OMG teh ghey! opposed. Obama was never likely to get a huge percentage of those voters in the first place, but he doesn’t want that number to drop any either.
That’s what elections are about these days. People who are not party-aligned vote against unless there’s a spectacular reason to vote for. That gives any wedge issue disproportionate weight. Nobody could ever be sure that a stand on gay marriage would be the deciding negative factor, but the campaign is looking to minimize all negative factors just because.
Look, Obama should come out and support gay marriage just as Romney should come out and denounce people in his audience who declare Obama to be a traitor. It’s not going to happen during the campaign. Wedge issues by definition aren’t subject to reason or logic. The best course is to avoid them, even at the cost of disappointment to the base. That’s how the two candidates wound up as the two candidates and they’re not about to change strategies now.
I realize this answer is both ugly and mealymouthed. The only bright side is that I got to use mealymouthed in a sentence.
Right. Obama has the pro-gay marriage vote in the bag anyways. Why piss off an independent who otherwise is going along with him?
Is there a block of pro-SSM voters who are planning on voting for Romney but for Obama coming out in support of SSM? If not, then it’s just a risk not work taking.
Yep. There are so many non-liberal types coming out in favor of SSM (Dick Cheney!) that I think it’s time to stop giving Obama the benefit of the doubt. He’s for it, but doesn’t want to say so for fear of the political repercussions.
All the creationists will get see a great example of what evolutionary biologists call “punctuated equilibrium” sometime during Obama’s 2nd term. His position will abruptly “evolve” into support for SSM once he’s on the other side of the election and safely in the WH for another term.
If I were a politician I would (I hope) tell the truth and offend everbody: “Yeah, I’m all for same-sex marriage because I see no good reason whatsoever not to be, but I don’t consider it a high priority, when we have so many pressing dollars-and-cents issues to wrestle with. My priorities are all about social classes and distribution of wealth. I’m sure same-sex couples will be allowed to marry eventually anyway, in every state of the Union, once the G.I Generation dies off.”
The fact remains that voters have rejected gay marriage in nearly every jurisdiction where it has come to a referendum, so it wouldn’t surprise me if Axelrod is telling Obama not to let the election become a referendum on gay marriage.
Exapno is of course correct that any number of factors inform voters’ decisions, but Obama is presumably concluding that the marginal tipping effect among voters in swing states from a pro-SSM announcement would go against him. Florida is the big one, but he may also be thinking of Virginia and North Carolina.
Like the 2004 election was, very nearly.
Interesting subject… especially since some on the left and most on the right will try to pin him down on the issue over the next six months.
We’ll have to see what the fair and balanced news-drivers do, for how long and how hard.
Plays right into his whispers to the Russian leader a while back about how he’ll do things differently after he is re-elected. I’m looking forward to some good political commercials that will include that scene.
You would cease to be a politician of any standing, then. You’d have both sides pissed off with you again. Damned if you do, damned if you don’t.
Will yours?
Obama will be interviewed by Robin Roberts on ABC today .
I wonder who she voted for last time? Of course it would be tough to find anyone on ABC or any other major network that didn’t.
I have little evidence to support this other than my gut feeling there is a political opportunity here, but I suspect Obama will use this interview to publically support gay marriage; his evolution ends today.
It’s a guess, I agree, but after looking at some insider scuttlebutt on the web, nationwide polling on gay marriage–particularly support for it among independents and young voters–and the chance to own the news cycle for the next week or so (Romney will be immediately asked the same question, and I doubt he has an answer that will appease his base), I think Obama has weighed the calculus and decided the votes this will cost him in swing states are worth it. I respect Exapno’s political analysis, but I still think Obama has good reasons to make this move.
I can’t find out when this interview is being aired. Was it on today’s show, or to be shown sometime in the future?
If Obama was going to do something like this, he should have done in back in 2009. Yes, he would have taken a lot of heat over it but that would have faded with time. Doing it now would make it a fresh issue right before an election.
In addition, having waited three years shows Obama isn’t really all that concerned about gay marriage. If he was, he would have done something about it before now. If he had made it a major issue right at the start, his opponents might have disagreed with his stance but he would have at least gotten some credit for making a principled stand.
I guess we’re going to find out, since today he told ABC News that same-sex marriage should be legal.
Tomorrow, with segments being aired tonight (presumably on tonight’s newscast).
Here’s a sneak peak of the sneak peak: Link.