taichiliberal
Rookie
- Aug 11, 2010
- 3,517
- 239
- 0
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #121
One of my brothers had an interesting take on President Obama's "evolving" to endorse gay marriage: making this announcement goes to prevent a third party candidate from forming, as the issue essentially sets up a "for or against" wedge with no middle ground. So you already have Romney's "against" and Obama's "for".....and that puts Ron Paul between a rock and a hard place as a potential "king maker" in the GOP (releasing his delegates to Romney at the upcoming GOP Caucus), as the "against" crowd would depend upon State government to alter their Constitutions to prevent gay marriage, and the "for" crowd would depend upon the Federal government to override individual State rulings.
But I note that the kicker is the President's statement means little, being that any pro-gay marriage bills would stall in either the House or the Senate, and the Democrats are NOT united on this issue. Since there is no bill to date on Capitol Hill that would ban gay marriage in America, Obama has nothing to veto.
At most, Obama may solidify enough votes to off set the 30 states that have passed anti-gay marriage laws on this issue.....and I seriously doubt that he's going to lose significant voting numbers because of this. Time will tell....and indeed we are witnessing interesting times!
So you think that he evolved to support gay marriage because he wanted to empower Ron Paul in the Republican primary rather than see Ron Paul become a third party candidate?
Nope. Didn't say or imply that. Obviously, you don't understand what you are reading. Read it again, and notice the word PREVENT.
You do realize that Romney has the delegates without Ron Paul's to get the nomination, right? I would certainly welcome him supporting Romney (Though im not sure he ever would) but even if he did, he wouldnt be a Kingmaker. Romney already has the needed delegates and the primaries arent over. He will pick up more.
You do realize that we're talking about acutal voting support for the run for Presidency. And Paul essentially stuck out the primary to the bitter end with a sizeable amount of delegate endorsements, right? Once Romney is nominated, he's going to need all the help he can get, right? So saying "he will pick up more" and then saying he doesn't need Paul voters is a bit absurd.
And isnt the big theory that Ron Paul going third party hurts Romney? Are you suggesting that Obama worries about it more?
Yes and possibly.