May speak to Romney's ability to woo the Independent

[dayman]

This is what Romney needs to say about all the social canards brought up by the dems and the MSM: "I'm not going to get embroiled in those minor, not presently pertinent or non-issues. The focus has to be on getting this country back on the road to prosperity. So quit asking "gotcha" questions and talk about fixing this economy that is ready to collapse unless there is a drastic change in direction".

 

Agreed he should quote Sarah Palin as much as possible.

[WorldTraveller]

This is what Romney needs to say about all the social canards brought up by the dems and the MSM: "I'm not going to get embroiled in those minor, not presently pertinent or non-issues. The focus has to be on getting this country back on the road to prosperity. So quit asking "gotcha" questions and talk about fixing this economy that is ready to collapse unless there is a drastic change in direction".

That would come off as insensitive.

[John Adams]

Looks like Romney isn't alone in this whole homosexual problem.

 

Biden says gay marriage is fine. WH walks it back. Gay community now plenty pissed at WH.

 

Obama and Romney have similar enough stances that it's not an election year issue.

 

Both are pussies. Romney believes in civil unions but won't say it any more. Obama believes in gay marriage but won't say it--he's "evolving."

Edited May 7, 2012 by John Adams

[jjamie12]

I still feel Obama could be that guy if the GOP was less hostile.

 

That is the definition of the Presidency.It's his JOB to work with the other side.

 

It's stunning that you think it's somehow different when a Republican is President. Not to mention the fact that the Democrats had control of 1) The White House; 2) The Senate and 3) The Congress for 2 full years of this administration. But it's GOP hostility that's holding President Obama back from creating jobs for everyone.

 

Good Lord.

[IDBillzFan]

Obama and Romney have similar enough stances that it's not an election year issue.

 

Both are pussies. Romney believes in civil unions but won't say it any more. Obama believes in gay marriage but won't say it--he's "evolving."

Wait a minute: Romney has a gay problem with a staff member and it "may speak to Romney's ability to woo independents," but Obama has a gay problem with a staff member and "it's not an election year issue?"

 

Ooookay.

[3rdnlng]

Agreed he should quote Sarah Palin as much as possible.

 

I can only assume that you are relating "gotcha" to Sarah Palin quotes. I guess when you have nothing to say, you say it anyway.

[John Adams]

Wait a minute: Romney has a gay problem with a staff member and it "may speak to Romney's ability to woo independents," but Obama has a gay problem with a staff member and "it's not an election year issue?"

 

Ooookay.

 

 

This thread was about Romney's ability to woo independents based on his willingness to cave to his extreme. It's not about his position on this specific issue. Gay marriage won't be a hot issue in this cycle unless someone dramatically changes their stance....[uPDATE: Maybe it will be a hotter issue as Obama's education secretary just came out in favor...sounds like camp Obama is putting pressure on the top dog to change his position.)

Edited May 7, 2012 by John Adams

[B-Man]

Its funny how the "media" insists that Romney needs to "backtrack" from the "extremists, but frets that Mr. Obama might be "backing away" from the left.

 

Its almost as if they have decided one side is right and one is wrong......lol

 

 

NBC: Romney Must 'Backtrack' From the Right, But Obama Will Suffer 'Damage' If He Steps Back From the Left

 

 

Talking to Meet the Press host David Gregory on Monday's NBC Today, co-host Ann Curry pushed for Mitt Romney to move away from conservatives: "...does he have to work really hard now to backtrack off of some of his positions in the past, as he was trying to win the primary...?"

 

 

 

In a stunning double standard, in her very next question, Curry fretted about President Obama distancing himself from Vice President Biden's support of gay marriage: "There's been some backtracking, it seems, by the White House. Is it possible that the White House could cause itself some damage in backtracking too much off of this?"

 

 

NewsBusters

[John Adams]

Its funny how the "media" insists that Romney needs to "backtrack" from the "extremists, but frets that Mr. Obama might be "backing away" from the left.

 

Its almost as if they have decided one side is right and one is wrong......lol

 

NewsBusters

 

 

I don't understand how this falls into the media bias issue. Curry seems to be saying that it works to Mitt's advantage to woo the middle and independents by distancing himself from the far right, and it would hurt Obama to abandon the far left.

 

I disagree with her premise because I think the looney left votes for Obama no matter what, but how is this left-wing media conspiracy related?

[OCinBuffalo]

I don't understand how this falls into the media bias issue. Curry seems to be saying that it works to Mitt's advantage to woo the middle and independents by distancing himself from the far right, and it would hurt Obama to abandon the far left.

 

I disagree with her premise because I think the looney left votes for Obama no matter what, but how is this left-wing media conspiracy related?

Because the same premise you disagree with is what is used by the MSM every day.

 

To wit: The far right is evil and wrong, the far left is rational and right, but just a little bit too passionate.

 

If you start every day with that delusion firmly in place, then it's not hard to see how Curry arrives at her ridiculous conclusion.

 

In other words, if you are gravitating towards 20% of the country, alienating 40%, and enraging the other 40%....that means you lose. Curry is an idiot, but it all starts with the delusion.

[John Adams]

So Obama is for gay marriage and civil unions. Why does it matter?

 

Because now Mitt comes out having to talk about the issue and reinforcing his opposition to it, which makes him look like a buttnugget to a whole helluva lot of independent voters. Every time he reaffirms not only his commitment against gay marriage but his opposition to civil unions, he comes across like either (a) a bigot or (b) a panderer to his base. I suspect it's a combination since he once expressed some support for civil unions.

 

Will this issue get a ton of election play? It will now, since now their stances are different. And independent voters support gay marriage to the tune of almost 60% in some polls.

 

It may cut against Obama with certain populations, but I applaud him for finally having the balls to say what he clearly believed, despite the political risk. I still won't vote for him but at least he has one thing I can unequivocally agree with him on.

 

Be interesting to see if Romney, needing to now make some play for Independents and more moderates, changes his own "evolving" stance on immigration.

[OCinBuffalo]

So Obama is for gay marriage and civil unions. Why does it matter?

 

Because now Mitt comes out having to talk about the issue and reinforcing his opposition to it, which makes him look like a buttnugget to a whole helluva lot of independent voters. Every time he reaffirms not only his commitment against gay marriage but his opposition to civil unions, he comes across like either (a) a bigot or (b) a panderer to his base. I suspect it's a combination since he once expressed some support for civil unions.

 

Will this issue get a ton of election play? It will now, since now their stances are different. And independent voters support gay marriage to the tune of almost 60% in some polls.

 

It may cut against Obama with certain populations, but I applaud him for finally having the balls to say what he clearly believed, despite the political risk. I still won't vote for him but at least he has one thing I can unequivocally agree with him on.

 

Be interesting to see if Romney, needing to now make some play for Independents and more moderates, changes his own "evolving" stance on immigration.

Your conclusions, (a) and (b) may be right by themselves, but are wrong in terms of them being exclusive of all others, because they assume that the election of Romney is happening in a vacuum.

 

I guarantee that the takeaway for most people isn't "Obama showing balls". Not with all this obfuscation, not with all this non-denial denial.

 

Some may remember something about this in November, but really? The only people who will are people who think its a big deal, like you.

 

How is it that they aren't more likely to remember "( c)" Romney has said what he believed and stood by it, while Obama was playing GITMO again? As I said, this election isn't happening in a vacuum, and the chance that people are going to remember/care about a NC state amendment in November....when they are facing continued economic woe? Well, no chance, really. Election play? No, not really. That's wishful thinking at best, delusions of grandeur otherwise.

Edited May 10, 2012 by OCinBuffalo

[Doc]

So Obama is for gay marriage and civil unions. Why does it matter?

 

Because now Mitt comes out having to talk about the issue and reinforcing his opposition to it, which makes him look like a buttnugget to a whole helluva lot of independent voters. Every time he reaffirms not only his commitment against gay marriage but his opposition to civil unions, he comes across like either (a) a bigot or (b) a panderer to his base. I suspect it's a combination since he once expressed some support for civil unions.

 

Will this issue get a ton of election play? It will now, since now their stances are different. And independent voters support gay marriage to the tune of almost 60% in some polls.

 

It may cut against Obama with certain populations, but I applaud him for finally having the balls to say what he clearly believed, despite the political risk. I still won't vote for him but at least he has one thing I can unequivocally agree with him on.

 

Be interesting to see if Romney, needing to now make some play for Independents and more moderates, changes his own "evolving" stance on immigration.

How is Romney pandering to his base if he's been against SSM/CU from the start? And if I'm not mistaken, he believes it should be left up to the states. Which is what is happening now.

[Magox]

This falls way down the list of priorities for independents. While the mental midgets obsess on this issue, the vast majority of the swing voter independents will vote on the economy,jobs, debt and energy policy.

[Doc]

This falls way down the list of priorities for independents. While the mental midgets obsess on this issue, the vast majority of the swing voter independents will vote on the economy,jobs, debt and energy policy.

Yep.

[IDBillzFan]

This falls way down the list of priorities for independents. While the mental midgets obsess on this issue, the vast majority of the swing voter independents will vote on the economy,jobs, debt and energy policy.

Bingo. Plus, we've seen enough of Obama to know what's really going on. Does he really believe in gay marriage, or are his campaign coffers a little dry?

 

Gay donors finally pay up.

 

Left-wing blogger Greg Sargent reported on Monday that “leading gay and progressive donors” were angry with Obama over his increasingly convoluted position on gay rights and same-sex marriage, and were refusing to donate any more money to Priorities USA, the pro-Obama Super PAC. Sargent cited Paul Yandura, a political adviser to prominent Democratic donor Jonathan Lewis, who emailed that:

 

A number of gay and progressive donors, unsolicited, have indicated to us that they aren’t considering requests to donate to the Obama SuperPac because of the president’s refusal to the sign the order. And those are high-dollar asks, some in the seven digits. We have heard from at least half a dozen major gay and progressive donors that they stand united with us.

 

The Washington Post noted on Tuesday that roughly 20 percent of Obama top campaign bundlers—who are responsible for arranging $500,000 and up—“publicly identified themselves as gay.”

 

Obama’s announcement fits a pattern of changing positions on major issues for what appear to be financially motivated reasons.