Moonlight Graham Posted August 30, 2012 Report Share Posted August 30, 2012 Saw this scroll across the bottom of theTV screen on CNN while watching the Republican Convention. Somehow I missed this: Ed Gillespie, senior adviser to Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign, told Chuck Todd on MSNBC’s Daily Rundown that the campaign would make President Obama’s support for marriage equality an issue this November and that Romney will actively push for a constitutional amendment to take away the right of states to voluntarily extend marriage equality to same-sex couples.... Gillespie is no stranger to using same-sex couples as a wedge issue; he served as President George W. Bush’s Republican National Committee Chairman during the 2004 campaign. During that campaign, Republicans pushed for anti-LGBT state constitutional amendments to get out the conservative vote. They also wrote the following into the Party’s official platform: “We strongly support President Bush’s call for a Constitutional amendment that fully protects marriage, and we believe that neither federal nor state judges nor bureaucrats should force states to recognize other living arrangements as equivalent to marriage.” link Wow, just wow. Good luck getting this one through Mitt! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j44 Posted August 30, 2012 Report Share Posted August 30, 2012 (edited) Saw this scroll across the bottom of theTV screen on CNN while watching the Republican Convention. Somehow I missed this: link Wow, just wow. Good luck getting this one through Mitt! I'm more worried that this will actually get their base come out and along with the Ryan pick get the hardcore conservatives excited more about Romney. Edit: At the same time it could get Obama's base more excited too. Edited August 30, 2012 by j44 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonlight Graham Posted August 30, 2012 Author Report Share Posted August 30, 2012 I'm more worried that this will actually get their base come out and along with the Ryan pick get the hardcore conservatives excited more about Romney. Edit: At the same time it could get Obama's base more excited too. I'd think moderates/swing voters might be turned off of Romney from it. I think it's kind of ridiculous this whole phenomenon of "firing up the base". Weird how apparently these people who aren't "fired up" are just content to sit at home on election day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j44 Posted August 30, 2012 Report Share Posted August 30, 2012 I'd think moderates/swing voters might be turned off of Romney from it. I think it's kind of ridiculous this whole phenomenon of "firing up the base". Weird how apparently these people who aren't "fired up" are just content to sit at home on election day. I don't think moderates/swing voters will care that much about the issue. They'll vote on jobs, the economy, etc. Getting your supporters out and volunteering and giving money is always a big issue. I'm sure Obama supporters last time around won't all come out this time. Sometimes it is just a matter of getting them out. They won't vote for the other guy if they do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted August 30, 2012 Report Share Posted August 30, 2012 I'm more worried that this will actually get their base come out and along with the Ryan pick get the hardcore conservatives excited more about Romney. Edit: At the same time it could get Obama's base more excited too. You seem to be assuming that Conservatives are all against gay marriage, which is not the case, or that all conservatives feel that this is a federal issues, which is also not the case. On Tuesday Senator Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), Mitt Romney’s most prominent Mormon supporter in the U.S. Senate, broke with the presidential candidate on amending the Constitution to ban gay marriage, saying that even though he doesn't agree with marriage equality, "I'm a believer that the states should make their own determination” and “have a right to do it.” link Cheney also felt it was a state issue, not a federal issue. Personally, I feel that it has to be a federal issue, but I don't think this is going to fire up any more people than their abortion stand has - and I think it will turn moderates/independents off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j44 Posted August 30, 2012 Report Share Posted August 30, 2012 You seem to be assuming that Conservatives are all against gay marriage, which is not the case, or that all conservatives feel that this is a federal issues, which is also not the case. On Tuesday Senator Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), Mitt Romney’s most prominent Mormon supporter in the U.S. Senate, broke with the presidential candidate on amending the Constitution to ban gay marriage, saying that even though he doesn't agree with marriage equality, "I'm a believer that the states should make their own determination” and “have a right to do it.” link Cheney also felt it was a state issue, not a federal issue. Personally, I feel that it has to be a federal issue, but I don't think this is going to fire up any more people than their abortion stand has - and I think it will turn moderates/independents off. Not all, but I am assuming a good chunk of their base are against it. Good point though with the Fed v states comment. I do think it is possible that it could help show some uncertain conservatives (uncertain about Romney I mean) that is he conservative. Even if they do think it should be a state issue. And it could turn off some moderates and independents but I don't think it will do that much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted August 30, 2012 Report Share Posted August 30, 2012 Not all, but I am assuming a good chunk of their base are against it. Good point though with the Fed v states comment. I do think it is possible that it could help show some uncertain conservatives (uncertain about Romney I mean) that is he conservative. Even if they do think it should be a state issue. And it could turn off some moderates and independents but I don't think it will do that much. I was considering voting for Romney until he picked Ryan as his running mate, so these things do make a difference to some. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j44 Posted August 30, 2012 Report Share Posted August 30, 2012 I was considering voting for Romney until he picked Ryan as his running mate, so these things do make a difference to some. did you decide against him because of Ryan's views on abortion and/or gay marriage or his economic solutions? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted August 30, 2012 Report Share Posted August 30, 2012 did you decide against him because of Ryan's views on abortion and/or gay marriage or his economic solutions? Abortion and gay marriage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j44 Posted August 30, 2012 Report Share Posted August 30, 2012 Abortion and gay marriage. Interesting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted August 30, 2012 Report Share Posted August 30, 2012 Interesting. Social issues and people's rights are very important to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j44 Posted August 30, 2012 Report Share Posted August 30, 2012 Abortion and gay marriage. How strongly do you feel about them? on a scale of 1-10 and compared to other issues. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted August 30, 2012 Report Share Posted August 30, 2012 How strongly do you feel about them? on a scale of 1-10 and compared to other issues. People's rights are probably the strongest issues to me, so a 10. I happen to feel that Obama is stepping on people's rights with his health care bill, which is why I considered voting for Romney (who I consider on the moderate side), but Ryan makes that impossible for me. I also think that too many social programs infringe on working people's rights, so that might sway me to vote for a moderate Republican, but when one is speaking of amending the Constitution regarding the denial of an entire group of people's rights, that's something I can't support. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted August 30, 2012 Report Share Posted August 30, 2012 Social issues and people's rights are very important to me. perhaps you should read summaries of the Republican Party platform... or do you subscribe to a naive belief that Romney wouldn't be held to abide with/to his party's platform, particularly from the influential Conservative Right of the party... or the Tea Party driving the GOP Congress? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted August 30, 2012 Report Share Posted August 30, 2012 I happen to feel that Obama is stepping on people's rights with his health care bill... ya, attempts toward universal health care for Americans... that's some brutal, imposed Obama 'stepping', hey? You self-proclaim as 'progressive', right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted August 30, 2012 Report Share Posted August 30, 2012 ahh we can only hope Romney wins and then the USA can invade canada to save us from the tyranny of our universal healthcare... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuckistani Posted August 30, 2012 Report Share Posted August 30, 2012 ya, attempts toward universal health care for Americans... that's some brutal, imposed Obama 'stepping', hey? You self-proclaim as 'progressive', right? Just as both rich and poor people have the right to sleep under a bridge, so should rich and poor people have the right not to have medical insurance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Squid Posted August 30, 2012 Report Share Posted August 30, 2012 Just as both rich and poor people have the right to sleep under a bridge, so should rich and poor people have the right not to have medical insurance. Wow. Talk about looking at the issue ass-backwards. How about instead we say that everyone should have a right to healthcare despite their lack of wealth. One should not go broke due to an illness. Or not get preventative care because they can't afford to see a doctor. Or have an insurance company decide their fate, rather than them in consultation with their doctors. We still have a ways to go in Canada on this issue, but we have a good start with universal healthcare. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bleeding heart Posted August 30, 2012 Report Share Posted August 30, 2012 Wow. Talk about looking at the issue ass-backwards. How about instead we say that everyone should have a right to healthcare despite their lack of wealth. One should not go broke due to an illness. Or not get preventative care because they can't afford to see a doctor. Or have an insurance company decide their fate, rather than them in consultation with their doctors. We still have a ways to go in Canada on this issue, but we have a good start with universal healthcare. I do too; but I think a lot of the issues that people (even otherwise sympathetic to Obama) are having with the US system are a lot different than that Canadian fringe minority who want to do away with universal health care. Two very different issues, is what I'm saying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted August 30, 2012 Report Share Posted August 30, 2012 People's rights are probably the strongest issues to me, so a 10. I happen to feel that Obama is stepping on people's rights with his health care bill, which is why I considered voting for Romney (who I consider on the moderate side), but Ryan makes that impossible for me. I also think that too many social programs infringe on working people's rights, so that might sway me to vote for a moderate Republican, but when one is speaking of amending the Constitution regarding the denial of an entire group of people's rights, that's something I can't support. If human rights were an issue for you, supporting the individual states to have their own policy on gay marriage would be the way to go. A federal mandate would not work to the benefit of the people overall. Also I don't think it would be constitutional to have a federal mandate on gay marriage. But what the hell, anther E.O. or other amendment to marginalize the constitution can't hurt it right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted August 30, 2012 Report Share Posted August 30, 2012 Just as both rich and poor people have the right to sleep under a bridge, so should rich and poor people have the right not to have medical insurance. In case you're truly unaware of it, most Americans already have the right to buy medical insurance, from insurance companies, at the prices the insurance companies set; and the poor already get health care at the expense of the government. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted August 30, 2012 Report Share Posted August 30, 2012 The affection some Americans seem to have for their horribly expensive, grossly inefficient system always boggles my mind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted August 30, 2012 Report Share Posted August 30, 2012 (edited) The affection some Americans seem to have for their horribly expensive, grossly inefficient system always boggles my mind. And the ignorance you seem to have regarding Obama's health care bill and why so many Americans don't support it totally boggles my mind. Edited August 30, 2012 by American Woman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted August 30, 2012 Report Share Posted August 30, 2012 In case you're truly unaware of it, most Americans already have the right to buy medical insurance, from insurance companies, at the prices the insurance companies set; and the poor already get health care at the expense of the government. wow! So... no problem after all, hey? Prior to the Obama Affordable Health Act, one can surely be boggled at those figures regularly tossed around. You know, the U.S. Census Bureau numbers that spoke to ~50 million uninsured... with some studies even pegging the number closer to between 80-90 million uninsured. Go figure! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted August 30, 2012 Report Share Posted August 30, 2012 And the ignorance you seem to have on this issue totally boggles my mind. Care to elaborate? What am I ignorant of, exactly? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.