• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Where will Obama's SSM Declaration hurt him electorally?

Where did President Obama's Reelection Campaign just get a bit harder?

  • Total voters
    19
Nick2253 said:
A plurality of people in Iowa are against gay marriage. Though you are probably right. If there is an effect, it won't be nearly as significant in Iowa as NC or Penn.
Click to expand...

That's true, but I think a plurality of people in nearly every state, including the more liberal, don't want gay marriage. But civil rights issues aren't supposed to be left up to popular vote or we'd never make any progress.
 
kerussll said:
That's true, but I think a plurality of people in nearly every state, including the more liberal, don't want gay marriage. But civil rights issues aren't supposed to be left up to popular vote or we'd never make any progress.
Click to expand...

Actually, the majority of people in most liberal states support gay marriage. Nationally, a majority of people support gay marriage. And I agree that civil rights shouldn't be left up to popular vote. But since this thread is about electoral implications for Obama in 2012 because of this announcement, I don't know that that is entirely relevant.
 
I don't think any OH!bama declarations hurt him. If anything it diverts attention away from the key issue that will determine if he gets re elected which is: has he done a good enough job on the economy, but I can't focus on that cause of all these declarations: obama compromises with catholics, he supports ssm, he feels women are sexy when they breast feed, he loves bingo, he....he.....he etc etc etc...maybe some other shills can chime in here so I don't have to focus on the real issues...
 
cpwill said:
I have listed the swing states from this site] I'm thinking Indiana is long gone (they don't even list it as a swing state, despite it going for Obama in 2008), and North Carolina and Virginia are gone; but that SSM isn't what seals the deal, but rather makes it a bit more so. Florida, I'm thinking, is a harder battle for him now, as well as Nevada, where there is a large Mormon population and Iowa, where there is alot of evangelicals. New Hampshire this might help him. Colorado, Ohio, and Pa... :shrug: I think no real result.
Click to expand...


In a race this tight every negative no matter how slight hurts...there is no positives for obama in this...only negatives and they are MINOR negatives.
If im incorrect then why didnt obama come out and State he was for SSM with alot of fanfare before Biden the village tard made another of us Clarabell Bloopers.
Honesty is the best policy...Obama knew the best way to play the SSm thing is to stay "EVOLVING" because he stands to lose more votes being for it...than being against it or non committal. Aside from that im hoping that even President Obama realizes that SSM is way down the list of whats important to the entire country right now...like it or not theres more people out of work than gay and theres more poor people homeless and hungry than gay...and theres much bigger problems for us all.
 
Redress said:
Not surprisingly, the correct option is not in your poll. The correct answer is nowhere, the people who might actually vote on the issue are not going to be swayed by what he said. If they are against SSM enough to vote on that issue, they where already not going to vote for Obama, and vice versa.
Click to expand...

I disagree..there are independents still on the ropes...there are many people paying attention that can still go either way...this is a dead heat...and this does not help Obama...it helps Romny more no matter how much anyone wants that not to be so.
 
Nick2253 said:
Actually, the majority of people in most liberal states support gay marriage. Nationally, a majority of people support gay marriage. And I agree that civil rights shouldn't be left up to popular vote. But since this thread is about electoral implications for Obama in 2012 because of this announcement, I don't know that that is entirely relevant.
Click to expand...

Not that I disagree, but do you have any link to show popular opinion in different states? I think of California as being one of the most liberal states around, but they keep voting down gay marriage. But maybe they are the exception.
 
kerussll said:
Not that I disagree, but do you have any link to show popular opinion in different states? I think of California as being one of the most liberal states around, but they keep voting down gay marriage. But maybe they are the exception.
Click to expand...

30 out of 52 states have approved gay marriage bans....polls are made to be skewed...and not just for gay marriage...polls are skewed for everything...you can read 5 polls and they all will be different
 
kerussll said:
Not that I disagree, but do you have any link to show popular opinion in different states? I think of California as being one of the most liberal states around, but they keep voting down gay marriage. But maybe they are the exception.
Click to expand...

Most of the states have articles on Wikipedia, such as:

Same-sex marriage in New York - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Recognition of same-sex unions in North Carolina - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

These generally have a section that links back to public polls taken in that state that show support for or against SSM.

Also, one caveat about this is that SSM support may suffer from a form of Bradley Effect (Bradley effect - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia).
 
Nick2253 said:
Most of the states have articles on Wikipedia, such as:

Same-sex marriage in New York - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Recognition of same-sex unions in North Carolina - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

These generally have a section that links back to public polls taken in that state that show support for or against SSM.

Also, one caveat about this is that SSM support may suffer from a form of Bradley Effect (Bradley effect - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia).
Click to expand...


Thats always been the case...its the same syndrome as hiding behind a computer screen...the saftey gives some false courage to say things they would never say in real life or face to face.....many people are gun shy to tell the truth on telephone polls etc...<bradley effect>
 
Redress said:
Not surprisingly, the correct option is not in your poll. The correct answer is nowhere, the people who might actually vote on the issue are not going to be swayed by what he said. If they are against SSM enough to vote on that issue, they where already not going to vote for Obama, and vice versa.
Click to expand...
It won't have much of any real negative effect other than some swing voters who may feel he is pandering and does not truly support it, or if in the past he always felt that way and originally said he didn't support it for votes. One thing it does do though by his "evolving" opinion is to take away some of the ammo that dems can use against Romney for any of his "evolving" opinions.
 
It's interesting that the righties find integrity and honesty offensive.
 
00timh said:
It won't have much of any real negative effect other than some swing voters who may feel he is pandering and does not truly support it, or if in the past he always felt that way and originally said he didn't support it for votes. One thing it does do though by his "evolving" opinion is to take away some of the ammo that dems can use against Romney for any of his "evolving" opinions.
Click to expand...

I think most people knew he was for SSM long ago. He weighed the political damage and knew at this moment in time it would not hurt substantially. Biden jumped on board first prior to NC. Obama waited and wisely so. He let NC's vote create a stir there were and are a lot of angry voters out there because of that. Obama drew all of them in. There were some among them who may well have voted Romney but when Obama book ended the NC vote with his announcement he sealed them to his side.
If more right wing religious votes come out to vote they are in states he has no chance of winning anyway so it doesn't hurt his electoral vote count at all. Even if 10% of the black vote doesn't turn out to vote Obama still has the lions share because they usually don't vote Republican. The Hispanic voters are looking toward immigration and I don't think they will pay much attention to Obama's SSM position. If anything I think this announcement helps Obama a good deal and will bring out a block of voters who may have seen no reason to go to the polls. This makes a clear distinction on what is seen as a major issue between him and Romney. Now there is a clear choice and not some indistinct lines in the sand.
Those who were in the middle and are for or don't care about the issue of SSM may swing Obama's way because they might see this a civil rights and equality issue.
 
katiegrrl0 said:
I think most people knew he was for SSM long ago. He weighed the political damage and knew at this moment in time it would not hurt substantially. Biden jumped on board first prior to NC. Obama waited and wisely so. He let NC's vote create a stir there were and are a lot of angry voters out there because of that. Obama drew all of them in. There were some among them who may well have voted Romney but when Obama book ended the NC vote with his announcement he sealed them to his side.
If more right wing religious votes come out to vote they are in states he has no chance of winning anyway so it doesn't hurt his electoral vote count at all. Even if 10% of the black vote doesn't turn out to vote Obama still has the lions share because they usually don't vote Republican. The Hispanic voters are looking toward immigration and I don't think they will pay much attention to Obama's SSM position. If anything I think this announcement helps Obama a good deal and will bring out a block of voters who may have seen no reason to go to the polls. This makes a clear distinction on what is seen as a major issue between him and Romney. Now there is a clear choice and not some indistinct lines in the sand.
Those who were in the middle and are for or don't care about the issue of SSM may swing Obama's way because they might see this a civil rights and equality issue.
Click to expand...
Well, like I had stated, he is not going to do much for anyone who was for or against SSM. red states are still going to be red and blue states will still be blue.

The two areas which may hurt him are for those who are not passionate either way about the issue but have issues with honesty. You said it yourself (perhaps wishful thinking) but that he was always for it and waited for a political climate to make a political gain from it. Some people really detest that type of pandering. Others who believe as you do, that he was always for it, or even those who feel he is ONLY attempting political gain from it will lose confidence in his honesty. Now, because he has stated something, they will have less confidence in what he states as a belief, or his sincerity of any issue. (does he really care and will he really follow through) And, as I had also stated, the hypocrisy of allowing Obama to have evolving opinions while attacking Romney for evolving and changing opinions will hurt him if he should attempt to attack Romney for any change. In effect, Obama lessened the effect of some of his best ammo against Romney.
 
lpast said:
I disagree..there are independents still on the ropes...there are many people paying attention that can still go either way...this is a dead heat...and this does not help Obama...it helps Romny more no matter how much anyone wants that not to be so.
Click to expand...

The independents on the ropes aren't likely to vote soley on this issue. For the most part, the people for whom this is a major issue already knew who they were voting for. Those who were so against SSM that they were going to vote on it weren't going to vote for Obama, and the converse is true of those who are similarly for it.

I don't think this makes a difference one way or the other, except with one or two social conservatives who were thinking about voting for him.
 
I don't think it will make much of a difference. The bigots that are against gay marriage already hate Obama and wouldn't vote for him anyway....it might rally a few people who were not going to vote into voting, but it is probably counter balanced on the other side. I think it could help with Independents which are in large margin in favor of gay marriage, but I don't think its a huge issue for them...certainly not something that is going to change their votes. All in all....I think its a wash.
 
disneydude said:
I don't think it will make much of a difference. The bigots that are against gay marriage already hate Obama and wouldn't vote for him anyway....it might rally a few people who were not going to vote into voting, but it is probably counter balanced on the other side. I think it could help with Independents which are in large margin in favor of gay marriage, but I don't think its a huge issue for them...certainly not something that is going to change their votes. All in all....I think its a wash.
Click to expand...
Its a wash in terms of those who favor or do not favor SSM, but the backlash may come from the swing voters who are not passionate about the issue either way but detest the pandering and lack of conviction. KG feels that Obama has always been for it, and she may be correct. That would then make Obama to have been lying about his conviction in order to win the presidency. That could be an issue as people will feel less confident in what he says, or, that the attacks against Romney for changing opinions will be hypocritical, and if the dems are smart enough to realize not to go the hypocritical route, they have taken away some of their best ammo against Romney. It does have negative consequences, just not based on a pure up or down conviction of SSM.
 
00timh said:
Its a wash in terms of those who favor or do not favor SSM, but the backlash may come from the swing voters who are not passionate about the issue either way but detest the pandering and lack of conviction. KG feels that Obama has always been for it, and she may be correct. That would then make Obama to have been lying about his conviction in order to win the presidency. That could be an issue as people will feel less confident in what he says, or, that the attacks against Romney for changing opinions will be hypocritical, and if the dems are smart enough to realize not to go the hypocritical route, they have taken away some of their best ammo against Romney. It does have negative consequences, just not based on a pure up or down conviction of SSM.
Click to expand...

I think you are overstating it....Obama changing his position on gay marriage is HARDLY hypocritical compared to the numerous flip-flops that Romney has engaged in. Romney makes John Kerry look like a rod of stability. As for swing voters, polling shows that they in large amounts favor gay marriage, so it probably won't hurt him with those voters. As far as Obama lying....no one other than himself and perhaps Michelle truly know. I suspect that its a little of both. I'm sure that he wasn't always for gay marriage, but has probably been in favor of it for quite some time. I doubt that most people are going to punish him for not stating it earlier.
 
kerussll said:
Not that I disagree, but do you have any link to show popular opinion in different states? I think of California as being one of the most liberal states around, but they keep voting down gay marriage. But maybe they are the exception.
Click to expand...

The problem with Calfornia is that the anti-gay proponents, financed in large part by the Mormon church poured huge amounts of money into the largest deceitful campaign in the history of California. It was absolutely disgusting the level of lies that they engaged in during the prop 8 campaign. If it were on the ballot today...I think a lot of people who voted in favor of Prop 8 recognize that they were duped.
 
00timh said:
Well, like I had stated, he is not going to do much for anyone who was for or against SSM. red states are still going to be red and blue states will still be blue.

The two areas which may hurt him are for those who are not passionate either way about the issue but have issues with honesty. You said it yourself (perhaps wishful thinking) but that he was always for it and waited for a political climate to make a political gain from it. Some people really detest that type of pandering. Others who believe as you do, that he was always for it, or even those who feel he is ONLY attempting political gain from it will lose confidence in his honesty. Now, because he has stated something, they will have less confidence in what he states as a belief, or his sincerity of any issue. (does he really care and will he really follow through) And, as I had also stated, the hypocrisy of allowing Obama to have evolving opinions while attacking Romney for evolving and changing opinions will hurt him if he should attempt to attack Romney for any change. In effect, Obama lessened the effect of some of his best ammo against Romney.
Click to expand...

In the US and any other nation where elections are held a candidate and not just Obama has to introduce something when the time is right. I had always thought he would stand on the side of supports of SSM in his second term. It makes good sense. He has now made the statement and he can't take it back. He will wait to make any sort of push toward the SCOTUS to do something about it. This way people see he took a stand and later they can see an action. Whatever happens will fall solely on his Presidency and not the entire party. If this comes out and he wins he might be in the position to be the light in history where this happens. If he loses some may say it is due to this announcement. The battle over SSM will become even more heated now and the courts will have to weigh in at some time. The courts will be flooded with suits now and that number will grow. SCOTUS will eventually have to take a stand. I see that Obama made a clear choice between him and Romney. This comes down to an equality issue. Constitutional equality and how people see that. Are the points of the Constitution all that important to those who stand against SSM? What does the Constitution say that would have the courts rule one way or the other? There are many questions to be asked. The one clear choice now is either Obama or Romney. They are very different and no longer just in subtleties. The fence sitters will have to make a choice and Obama made that clear.
 
KG, I would be willing to bet that an even higher percentage of fence sitters are hetero then the general population because a huge majority of gay people have been democrats for quite a while now. Those who aren't, the Log cabin Republicans won't be changing their vote for this issue. That leaves the fence sitters, almost all who are hetero and this issue will not be strong enough for them to make a decision to vote for Obama. If you feel that Obama is doing this based on conviction and is willing to die on the sword for what he feels is right, and his timing is based solely for effectiveness, you must be in the tingly leg crowd of Obama supporters. Obama already left himself and out on this claiming states rights so when NC or another state votes against SSM, he will not be attacking the decision other than his concluding blah blah blah about it SSM being ok for his own sake. its all just pandering. I will at least give the gay community the props to have finally found a president who will take it a step up and say it is ok... but that was only after 7 states made SSM legal, the repeal of DADT, and open gay service, along with the VP stating his acceptance of SSM. Obama stepped out on a well tested limb.
 
disneydude said:
The problem with Calfornia is that the anti-gay proponents, financed in large part by the Mormon church poured huge amounts of money into the largest deceitful campaign in the history of California. It was absolutely disgusting the level of lies that they engaged in during the prop 8 campaign. If it were on the ballot today...I think a lot of people who voted in favor of Prop 8 recognize that they were duped.
Click to expand...

Also, it was the last minute push in the Baptist and Catholic churches that hurt the vote. -- I remember the black L.A. minister talking about 5000 years of tradition.

However, after yesterday, prop 8 would never pass.

Thank you President Obama for leading us from the darkness.

Though it seems that just less than 50% of the country is content to be intolerant. Hopefully, after yesterday, more will see the light and become free from their own insecurities and fears.
 
I don't believe it hurts him in FL... I think that's entirely why he's doing this...

This election largely hinges on FL, and Obama knows that there's a huge gay community in FL...

But as someone pointed out on another thread about Romney's view on a life begins at conception ammendment, most pro-life, and pro-gay marriage people already are voting Democrat... so this isn't going to gain him any votes...

What it does it cost him some votes in other crucial swing states, with a more traditional anti-gay marriage population... such as NC, VA, OH, PA, MI, IA, AZ...

What it also does is exposes him as someone who changes positions regularly... and while he's trying to label Romney as the flip-flopper... we now have yet another of the many issues which he has changed from 2008... so, Romney's positions are consistent from 2008 to now, and Obama's positions are constantly changing... or appearing as different when campaigning, and when acting in office...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom