DC Tom Posted April 15, 2015 Share Posted April 15, 2015 The one caveat is that it matters a lot in California, but Rubio wouldn't win California if he were the Grand Marshall of a Cuban gay pride parade, so it's a moot point. The Democratic candidate automatically starts the campaign with California and New York (and DC). That's 87 electoral votes - a third of the way to the White House, right out of the gate. The Democrats could run a tree stump as a candidate and make it a contest. In fact, they have, in '04. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted April 15, 2015 Share Posted April 15, 2015 I disagree. He can win the general without evolving. The only thing most Americans care about LESS than gay marriage is global warming. This is true -- because the vast majority of Americans believe the issue has been settled. The moment Rubio gets asked about this issue and folks see he is still on the wrong side of things, they'll care a great deal. If you define "care" as the amount of media attention it will generate. My point was more that it stops being a useful way to divide potential candidates when it gets distilled down to "Would your force a baker to make a cake for a gay wedding?" Which from damn near any standard is a completely asinine distillation of the issue. And I'll guarantee someone's going to play "gotcha" with just that sort of idiotic question at some point in the upcoming debates, and portray even a reasonable answer of "You have to balance the rights of people to express their religious beliefs against the rights of people to express their love for each other" as raging homophobia. The larger point, I think, is that "dividing" candidates is asinine in itself. And already done for us - they're called "political parties." There's no "litmus test" that's at all useful, since they all simply define the party platforms. That's fair. No arguments. I think that you are really falling into the media trap here GT, While the Gay Marriage Issue plays importantly in the media narrative, every poll shows that it barely causes a blip in the "problems facing America" of today. Very few will make it "unelectable" cause. . I might be, I won't deny it. We'll find out when the election campaigns ramp up fully. But like I said in LA's post above, I think the only reason it's not a "hot" issue is because we're not in the election cycle yet and most Americans considered this issue settled. The moment that it becomes a political issue again on the campaign, that will change. And please, can you not at least have one complete post that is well-reasoned and doesn't contain any mistruths? :lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted April 15, 2015 Share Posted April 15, 2015 A few years ago the pulse of the country was entirely different on this issue. The difference between our positions is I believe the country's mood on this issue has changed so quickly, so completely, that it really isn't as ridiculous as it may sound. Rubio's position on the issue hasn't changed or evolved, Obama's did. That's why it worked. I'm no fan of Obama, but his politically calculated flip flop was precisely that: calculated. If Rubio were to come out in support of gay marriage, he'd have a shot. But he can't, because that would put him to the left of Jeb and doom him in the primary. The culture war is over, social conservatives lost on this issue in a very big way. Any candidate still clinging to the concept of "traditional" marriage as a key plank on their platform is woefully out of touch with the majority of this country. Being anti-gay marriage to the point where Rubio was (willing to throw out his immigration reform if any rights were granted to gay couples through the legislation) isn't a tenable position to hold while trying to run for office. He'll be hit over the head with it repeatedly, and it'll cost him. And trying to spin it back on the others by calling them intolerant is idiotic on top of being disingenuous. I do have to say that while I understand your point, I think you may be seriously biased by the very environment you live in. It's likely that you're projecting "the pulse" of California on to the country as a whole. If anything, the reaction to Indiana's RFRA (specifically, the almost $1M that one bakery got in donations for what could only be called "persecution for a thought crime") demonstrates the country's mood hasn't changed quickly, and is at most only in the middle of changing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted April 15, 2015 Share Posted April 15, 2015 I do have to say that while I understand your point, I think you may be seriously biased by the very environment you live in. It's likely that you're projecting "the pulse" of California on to the country as a whole. If anything, the reaction to Indiana's RFRA (specifically, the almost $1M that one bakery got in donations for what could only be called "persecution for a thought crime") demonstrates the country's mood hasn't changed quickly, and is at most only in the middle of changing. If Greg is from California, then that is exactly what he is doing. I can relate as that most of my friends pretty much everywhere I lived, be it Miami, Bolivia or California are uber liberals. It's easy to believe that society is reflective of your surrounding environment. Reality is that if you are a pro traditional marriage candidate, as long as you don't come out overtly offensive and propose restrictions that are seeing as hostile you can thread the needle. Don't get me wrong, most voting electorates are pretty ignorant and vapid and usually go with style over substance, but we aren't THAT vapid to make a determination of who is to be our president on that particular single issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted April 15, 2015 Share Posted April 15, 2015 This is true -- because the vast majority of Americans believe the issue has been settled. You're smarter than this. The reason Americans don't care about gay marriage isn't because they think the issue is settled. It's because they actually don't give one snotschitt about the issue. It doesn't affect their income, their family, their lives. It just doesn't. It'll actually be a great day when all Americans actually DO care about gay marriage because that will indicate that virtually everything else in the entire universe has been fixed...except for global warming, and the EBT equivalent of Love and Dignity Cards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted April 15, 2015 Share Posted April 15, 2015 You're smarter than this. The reason Americans don't care about gay marriage isn't because they think the issue is settled. It's because they actually don't give one snotschitt about the issue. It doesn't affect their income, their family, their lives. It just doesn't. It'll actually be a great day when all Americans actually DO care about gay marriage because that will indicate that virtually everything else in the entire universe has been fixed...except for global warming, and the EBT equivalent of Love and Dignity Cards. Unless you're gay of course. I do have to say that while I understand your point, I think you may be seriously biased by the very environment you live in. It's likely that you're projecting "the pulse" of California on to the country as a whole. If anything, the reaction to Indiana's RFRA (specifically, the almost $1M that one bakery got in donations for what could only be called "persecution for a thought crime") demonstrates the country's mood hasn't changed quickly, and is at most only in the middle of changing. That's fair. I can't claim otherwise even if I don't fully believe that's the cause. If Greg is from California, then that is exactly what he is doing. I can relate as that most of my friends pretty much everywhere I lived, be it Miami, Bolivia or California are uber liberals. It's easy to believe that society is reflective of your surrounding environment. Reality is that if you are a pro traditional marriage candidate, as long as you don't come out overtly offensive and propose restrictions that are seeing as hostile you can thread the needle. Don't get me wrong, most voting electorates are pretty ignorant and vapid and usually go with style over substance, but we aren't THAT vapid to make a determination of who is to be our president on that particular single issue. I don't disagree with the bolded statement. I also don't think Rubio fits that definition -- or hasn't yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted April 15, 2015 Share Posted April 15, 2015 Even Google is worried about Rubio. Go ahead. Google "Marco Rubio." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted April 15, 2015 Share Posted April 15, 2015 Even Google is worried about Rubio. Go ahead. Google "Marco Rubio." Well now we know where the true resident conservative Baskin, gets his news. GAWKER Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted April 15, 2015 Share Posted April 15, 2015 Well now we know where the true resident conservative Baskin, gets his news. GAWKER No way Gawker paid for that placement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted April 15, 2015 Share Posted April 15, 2015 I disagree. He can win the general without evolving. The only thing most Americans care about LESS than gay marriage is global warming. Agree, on the top 10 list of important issues to be tackled by a President, gay marriage is number 11. Although, the media will make it a front and center issue as it helps their gal or guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted April 16, 2015 Share Posted April 16, 2015 Unless you're gay of course. That's fair. I can't claim otherwise even if I don't fully believe that's the cause. I don't disagree with the bolded statement. I also don't think Rubio fits that definition -- or hasn't yet. Marco Rubio says he would attend the wedding of a same-sex couple, even though the Republican Florida senator and newly minted presidential candidate has said he believes marriage should only be between a man and a woman. Fusion host Jorge Ramos pressed Rubio on Wednesday about whether he would go to the same-sex ceremony of someone in his family or someone on his staff who happens to be gay. “If there’s somebody that I love that’s in my life, I don’t necessarily have to agree with their decisions or the decisions they’ve made to continue to love them and participate in important events,” he told Ramos. What say you, GreggyT? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted April 16, 2015 Share Posted April 16, 2015 What say you, GreggyT? That he's about six months away from completely reversing his position on same sex marriage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted April 16, 2015 Share Posted April 16, 2015 That he's about six months away from completely reversing his position on same sex marriage. Too bad he's not a Democrat. Then he could say his position is "evolving," and everyone would praise him for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted April 16, 2015 Share Posted April 16, 2015 That he's about six months away from completely reversing his position on same sex marriage. A GOP candidate or even president for that matter is about 12-20 years away from that happening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted April 16, 2015 Share Posted April 16, 2015 A GOP candidate or even president for that matter is about 12-20 years away from that happening. It'll be much sooner than that -- at least if the party knew what was best for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TH3 Posted April 17, 2015 Share Posted April 17, 2015 (edited) Well now we know where the true resident conservative Baskin, gets his news. GAWKER I do read Gawker once in a while - only because its linked with my favorite site - Jalopnik. I don't need/use websites to affirm my positions. If you are so "up" on me you should know - I don't want HRC in office - voted DEM once in 30 years and would prefer a GOP candidate to win. Sorry of I am old enough at this point to not buy anything anybody says - including GOP promises of "lower taxes" and MR's low level foreign policy statements. AFA me being conservative - I would say I have conservative fiscal ideas - not dreamy political fiscal concepts - there is nothing worse than fooling yourself. I would say my social views are "conservative" too - in that people should do whatever they want as long as it doesn't bother anyone - and religion should be out of all politics. Edited April 17, 2015 by baskin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted April 18, 2015 Share Posted April 18, 2015 I do read Gawker once in a while - only because its linked with my favorite site - Jalopnik. Ah, a fellow car nut. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted April 18, 2015 Share Posted April 18, 2015 For whatever reason labels are important to you guys. So be it. Not sure how old you are but do yourself a favor and do a little research on James Baker - a true "conservative". Look at the breadth of his accomplishments in tax reform, middle eastern and russian diplomacy. Look at the depth and width of how he did things and compare that to the puny thoughts of these GOP candidates - Rubio, Cruz, Huckabee.....these are small small men. We need better. Yes, where are the Scoop Jacksons, Daniel Patrick Moynihans, and Joe Liebermans in the Democrat tent these days? Didn't say it wasn't true. Said it was dumb. For many reasons, most of which boil down to "people get apeshit stupid when arguing about gay marriage." Man, you've got that right. I'm not even sure how much it matters because the only reason Obama changed on gay marriage was to get the money. Period. He was against it to get the church money. Once he had the church money, he changed it to get the gay money. Barry can't even say the words "gay old time" without flying to CA for donations. Does anyone honestly think that if Rubio changed his stance on gay marriage that he'd suddenly win over enough people to make a difference? No. When it comes to Republicans and the Hispanic community, there will always be more money at the church than their will ever be from the LBGT groups because LBGT groups are notoriously left wingers. And those who bang the drum are banging a very small drum in the grand scheme of things. OMG! They're so horny they're banging band instruments now? Who knew? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted April 20, 2015 Share Posted April 20, 2015 Yes, where are the Scoop Jacksons, Daniel Patrick Moynihans, and Joe Liebermans in the Democrat tent these days? Man, you've got that right. OMG! They're so horny they're banging band instruments now? Who knew? Better than phone sax. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts