Is Obama about to complete his evolution on gay marriage?

[Inuca]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/post/is-obama-about-to-complete-his-evolution-on-gay-marriage/2012/05/09/gIQAB1MGDU_blog.html

White House press secretary Jay Carney has hinted in recent days that Obama has more to say on the topic. “I’m sure it is the case that he will be asked again at some point when he gives interviews or press conferences about this issue, and I’ll leave it to him to describe his personal views,” Carney said yesterday.

Adding to the mystery, Carney abruptly canceled today’s White House press briefing, which generally happens when big news is about to be made. Obama’s advisers have gone quiet this morning on the issue; at least three I contacted refused any comment.

Tweeter is quite lively on this topic now.

[bigtree]

1. he should do it now

. . . that the stage is set. It would be high time.

And it would light me up like a rocket!

[Inuca]

2. More on teh same from the NYT

Gay Marriage Issue Looming, Obama Sits for an Interview http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/05/09/obama-likely-to-speak-about-same-sex-marriage-in-interview/

The sudden booking suggests an interest on the part of the White House to get Mr. Obama in front of cameras, albeit in a carefully controlled interview setting, as soon as possible.

ABC secured the interview with Mr. Obama on Tuesday afternoon, according to two people involved in the planning. It will take place at the White House. The interview was so hastily arranged, in fact, that Ms. Roberts was still in New York on Wednesday morning to co-host “Good Morning America”– and was planning on returning to New York right after the interview, because her mother is visiting and the two have dinner plans on Wednesday evening.

[AngryAmish]

3. This whole "evolution" bullshit is fucking insulting.

How stupid do they think we are?

[Inuca]

4. As is, If I may say, your comment n/t

[TriMera]

5. Do you not see

how LGBTQ folks and our allies might be insulted by the fact that the POTUS needs to "evolve" on the issue of marriage equality? Really?

[Inuca]

8. Two points

1. my comment was mainly about the form of the message I was replying to, somewhat less about the content
2. Yes, I can see how people may find it insulting. But I also understand that it may happen. I have no iea whether his "evolution" is for real, meaning personal, or it is strictly for political reasons. I tend to believe it's a combination of both. But the bottom line is that I do not automatically find somebody's opinions that happen to be different from mine to be insulting, as long as said opinions seem sincere and make sense in some context or another. Few things are purely black & white, though I perfectly understand that an LGBT person is likely to be less tolerant on this issue than I am (and I am perfectly fine with that).

[nadinbrzezinski]

6. Add msnbc to this.

And the term s insulting, but hey...I'll take it if he goes there.

[boxman15]

7. Politically, he has very little to lose.

He may briefly alienate some blue-collar voters in huge states like Ohio or North Carolina, but they'll forget about this (should he actually "evolve&quot by November. The people who are against gay marriage and will remember weren't going to vote for him anyway.

Meanwhile, LGBT supporters and donors of the president's will likely rally behind him and be energized, as will young voters. They will remember by November, though obviously the economy will be the number one issue.

In terms of how this will impact legislation, I don't see how anything will change. It'll be nice to have the president fully on board, but the pressure needs to be on Congress, and even more pressure needs to be on the states. That's where the change on this issue will happen. Obama can't do much by himself.

[hughee99]

9. Just in case anyone wasn't already aware that it's an election year.. n/t

[Inuca]

10. Meaning....??

Because if you mean that coming out in support of gay marriage (assuming he does) gives him a clear cut electoral advatage, you are wrong.

[hughee99]

11. I mean that this was the right thing to do since he took office.

The fact that he's changing his position on this is ONLY because this is an election year. He will both gain and lose supporters with this announcement, and I'm betting they have some people who have calculated what the net will be for him before this was done, or at the least, how to get the anti-gay marriage people back into the fold with some other issue down the road.

I'm saying that it IS political, and while you and I may not see this as clear-cut, I'm sure president has people who think it is. I don't believe its a change of heart at all, its a political strategy.

[Inuca]

12. You may very well be correct n/t

[bigtree]

13. it would still be a pretty big deal

. . . it would have much more of an effect and impact than just 'political strategy'. Such an announcement would transform the debate in much the same way that Johnson did in '68 on civil rights for black Americans. Of course, the question would then be, what executive moves does he plan on implementing to advance his position?

I also tend to believe that it's much more politically chancy for the President to come out with such a switch in positions in an election year; not less risky for him politically, so I don't understand the argument that he'd be doing this for political reasons. I thought the consensus was that he's afraid to make such a stand because of the upcoming elections and the political ramifications.

[dmkinsey]

14. I hope he comes out but

Last edited Wed May 9, 2012, 03:18 PM - Edit history (1)

he's been quite timid on this issue.
I think he'll use this interview to further "clarify" his evolving position.
Nothing new, nothing courageous.

OMG! I'm wrong and I couldn't be happier to be wrong.
It's great that our President has declared his support for marriage equality.
Beautiful