Democratic gay-marriage pool update: Jon Tester announces he supports same-sex marriage at 3 p.m. ET

posted at 4:01 pm on March 26, 2013 by Allahpundit

To be precise, assuming the Facebook timestamp is accurate, it was 3:03 p.m. Did anyone have that in the pool in the Huckabee thread? I had 2 p.m. ET. If you beat that, send me the link to your comment in that thread and I’ll credit you in an update.

“Montanans believe in the right to make a good life for their families. How they define a family should be their business and their business alone. I’m proud to support marriage equality because no one should be able to tell a Montanan or any American who they can love and who they can marry.” -JT

On Twitter, Ace’s co-blogger Slublog flags this article from last May, shortly after Obama announced his “evolution” on gay marriage:

Sens. Jon Tester (Mont.) and Claire McCaskill (Mo.), the two most vulnerable Democratic senators, have declined to endorse Obama’s call for the legalization of gay marriage…

“Jon believes in civil unions for committed same-sex couples but in Montana a marriage is defined as between a man and a woman,” said Andrea Helling, Tester’s spokeswoman.

Montana is one of 30 states with constitutional amendments defining marriage as between one man and one woman, according to Human Rights Campaign, a group that promotes gay rights.

Like McCaskill, he went on to win reelection last year (unlike McCaskill, it was by just four points). And, like McCaskill, now that he doesn’t have to face his state’s red-leaning voters again until 2018, he’s suddenly had a miraculous awakening about gay marriage. I wonder whether he’s expecting (1) that he’ll retire after his current term, (2) that the Supreme Court will legalize gay marriage before he’s up for re-election, rendering his new stance moot, or (3) that gay marriage will become so mainstream nationwide among voters by 2018 that even Montana will have reversed course. Number three seems unlikely and if number one was in the offing he probably wouldn’t feel compelled to say anything right now, so I assume he’s betting heavily on number two. Six years is a long time. Not a bad bet.

Speaking of which, now that Tester’s reset the clock, it’s time to update the Democratic Senate gay-marriage pool. According to Time mag, there are just six Dem senators left who are “evolving” on SSM. (Manchin, Pryor, Heitkamp, and Johnson told Time recently that they’re still firmly opposed, so I’m not including them here.) I want a name and a time: Among Bob Casey, Bill Nelson, Tom Carper, Kay Hagan, Mary Landrieu, and Joe Donnelly, who’s the next to “evolve” and when? I’ll take Carper at 4:47 p.m. ET.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

This has become a farce. I actually laughed out loud at this.

makattak on March 26, 2013 at 4:02 PM

“Testes for Gay Marriage.”

Archivarix on March 26, 2013 at 4:02 PM

The Gay Lobby is powerful.

portlandon on March 26, 2013 at 4:03 PM

Bing.. Somebody said Tester would be coming out so to speak in the next 24 hours.. We taking bets on the first GOPer to come out?

melle1228 on March 26, 2013 at 4:03 PM

My first Bishop! Woo!

makattak on March 26, 2013 at 4:03 PM

And yes, I’m not treating the comments on this article seriously because that’s exactly how this whole propaganda campaign should be treated.

makattak on March 26, 2013 at 4:04 PM

Joe Donnelly at 5:05 pm ET.

amazingmets on March 26, 2013 at 4:04 PM

Okay, I have a plan.

Let’s get some rich Republican to commission some polls and pay to make sure the outcome shows that the majority of people favor something repugnant, like Human-Farm Animal Marriage. (Obviously, we have to pick something else now, because this post would give away the trick.)

When the Democrats (and a few Republicans) inevitably voice their support for Human-Farm Animal Marriage, then they’ll lose their next elections.

Genius, no?

The Rogue Tomato on March 26, 2013 at 4:04 PM

no one should be able to tell a Montanan or any American who they can love and who they can marry.

No one is preventing them from loving anyone they want to.

No one is preventing them from “marrying” anyone they want to.

The only thing same-sex couples miss out on is certain tax treatments designed to promote procreation.

steebo77 on March 26, 2013 at 4:05 PM

Does Jon Tester support creating jobs? Does any Democrat Senator want to discuss something the American people actually give a sh-t about?

Doughboy on March 26, 2013 at 4:05 PM

The Gay Lobby is powerful.

portlandon on March 26, 2013 at 4:03 PM

Powerful, yet limp-wristed.

steebo77 on March 26, 2013 at 4:06 PM

Bill Nelson. 7:20 PM.

And the parade of Dems who lied to their constituents continues apace…

changer1701 on March 26, 2013 at 4:06 PM

Joe Donnelly – Tommorow @ 10:27 AM.

Fezzik on March 26, 2013 at 4:07 PM

I broke the dam.

Good Lt on March 26, 2013 at 4:07 PM

Bing.. Somebody said Tester would be coming out so to speak in the next 24 hours.. We taking bets on the first GOPer to come out?

melle1228 on March 26, 2013 at 4:03 PM

My money is on Rob Portman, last week.

Bitter Clinger on March 26, 2013 at 4:07 PM

I’m proud to support marriage equality because no one should be able to tell a Montanan or any American who they can love and who they can marry.” -JT

Does that include marrying their horse- John?

The irony is that should SCOTUS decide this is a federal matter, they just told Montanans what to do.

Marcus Traianus on March 26, 2013 at 4:08 PM

I want a name and a time: Among Bob Casey, Bill Nelson, Tom Carper, Kay Hagan, Mary Landrieu, and Joe Donnelly, who’s the next to “evolve” and when? I’ll take Carper at 4:47 p.m. ET.

What if Collins, Murkowski, or Kirk beat them to it?

steebo77 on March 26, 2013 at 4:08 PM

What if Collins, Murkowski, or Kirk beat them to it?

steebo77 on March 26, 2013 at 4:08 PM

I’m going Collins or Murkowski.. Murkowski esp. since what’s his name in Alaska came out today…

melle1228 on March 26, 2013 at 4:09 PM

Meh…

Seven Percent Solution on March 26, 2013 at 4:10 PM

Landreiu at 6:05pm

cmsinaz on March 26, 2013 at 4:11 PM

When the Democrats (and a few Republicans) inevitably voice their support for Human-Farm Animal Marriage, then they’ll lose their next elections.

Genius, no?

Nah, some leftist geniuses out there, especially in PETA, will be all for it, after all you should be able to marry whom or what you love, no limits barring what that may be, that would be bigoted and judgemental.

They’ve already got too many pet owners humanizing animals by calling themselves “Pet Parents”.

hawkeye54 on March 26, 2013 at 4:14 PM

It’s amusing that people think gay marriage will make or break Tester or Landrieu when voting for ObamaCare when their states overwhelmingly were against it did not.

Tester out and out lied saying before he was first elected he would oppose it and then voted for it and was reelected.

People don’t care, you Mike Huckabees.

Marcus on March 26, 2013 at 4:14 PM

Does Jon Tester support creating jobs? Does any Democrat Senator want to discuss something the American people actually give a sh-t about?

Doughboy on March 26, 2013 at 4:05 PM

Doughboy’s hidden pun.

Rovin on March 26, 2013 at 4:15 PM

What a crock. No one is telling anyone to not love or marry anyone. Gay marriage is legal in all 50 states in the same sense that anything else is legal. Bar mitzvahs aren’t recognized, does that mean that there is a h8r bar mitzvah bigot ban?

Moreover, if reproduction not an issue in recognized marriages, then there is also a constitutional right to polygamy. In fact polygamy bans could easily be construed as religious persecution against Islam.

xuyee on March 26, 2013 at 4:15 PM

Is it gay if you want to marry yourself…?

Seven Percent Solution on March 26, 2013 at 4:15 PM

Montanans believe in the right to make a good life for their families. How they define a family should be their business and their business alone.

Then why do they need the government to recognize and license their “marriage”?

Why do they need to call it “marriage” which already had a definition?

To be consistent with his wording here, it is safe to conclude that Tester also supports polygamy and incestuous marriage, right?

Daemonocracy on March 26, 2013 at 4:17 PM

7% I’ll be you MOH
:)

cmsinaz on March 26, 2013 at 4:17 PM

As usual, the left has reduced a complex issue to mindless singsong

“no one should be able to tell a Montanan or any American who they can love”

Straw Man Of The Year. I’ve heard a variation on this theme ad infinitum.

jangle12 on March 26, 2013 at 4:19 PM

Is it gay if you want to marry yourself…?

Seven Percent Solution on March 26, 2013 at 4:15 PM

Equal rights for same person marriage now!

Doughboy on March 26, 2013 at 4:20 PM

They are trying to do just what they did before SCOTUS voted for Obamacare! Trying to intimidate the court into the Democrat will! I suppose it will work–Justice Roberts is likely already quaking!!!

AnnaS on March 26, 2013 at 4:20 PM

Out of the closet and into the street!

This is getting hilarious.

katy the mean old lady on March 26, 2013 at 4:21 PM

Why does he only support it at 3pm? Doesn’t he also support it at other times? Or are you only guilty of a misplaced modifier? Of course, if that is the only grammatical sin you have committed today, you are doing darned well.

Suggestion: At 3pm, Jon Tester announced …

Besides that, boy do the political hacks sway in the wind. Heck, we don’t need NOAA. Just watch your nearest Republican.

Old Country Boy on March 26, 2013 at 4:21 PM

LOL, libs are so pathetically predictable and cravenly opportunistic. Zero principles.

Midas on March 26, 2013 at 4:22 PM

It’s amusing that people think gay marriage will make or break Tester or Landrieu when voting for ObamaCare when their states overwhelmingly were against it did not.

Tester out and out lied saying before he was first elected he would oppose it and then voted for it and was reelected.

People don’t care, you Mike Huckabees.

Marcus on March 26, 2013 at 4:14 PM

Landrieu, from Louisiana, has not faced reelection since her Obamacare vote. This will matter for her.

steebo77 on March 26, 2013 at 4:24 PM

Nah, some leftist geniuses out there, especially in PETA, will be all for it, after all you should be able to marry whom or what you love, no limits barring what that may be, that would be bigoted and judgemental.

They’ve already got too many pet owners humanizing animals by calling themselves “Pet Parents”.

hawkeye54 on March 26, 2013 at 4:14 PM

Screw dusty Christian dogmas – I would marry both my guinea pigs in a NYC second if the feds allow me to claim them as dependents on my tax refund form.

Archivarix on March 26, 2013 at 4:25 PM

Montanans believe in the right to make a good life for their families. How they define a family should be their business and their business alone.

So … Tester is all-in with polygamy, commune marriages and every conceivable sort of combination of species with humans. People who want to marry their dogs should be allowed to “define a family”. I know more than a few people who truly consider their cats to be “part of the family”. I guess those pets will need social security cards and the like, now. Forget the marriage part, if someone wants to adopt his dog or cat and make it truly “part of the family” then Tester thinks he is free to “define [his] family” as he wishes.

Great stuff from the deep thinkers …

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on March 26, 2013 at 4:27 PM

steebo77 on March 26, 2013 at 4:24 PM

Landrieu is more of a lock for reelection than Claire McCaskill was. You won’t get rid of either until they quit.

Marcus on March 26, 2013 at 4:29 PM

Bill Nelson, sometime late on Friday, say 6:30 pm

Landrieu, late Monday after the news so she gets one more Easter in

DanMan on March 26, 2013 at 4:30 PM

If you support gay marriage, you support polygamy and polyamory.

If the first is imposed, the other two will as well.

If being free to “love” another of the same sex is the only requirement (as the gays and their pandering pols repeat ad nauseam), there’s no end to the nonsense.

With man/woman marriage, there is a clear distinction of what it is.

Civil unions? Fine. I have no issue with gays entering into civil unions.

One more thing- anyone notice that each state is free to set its laws regarding divorce? So shouldn’t that example of federalism be applied to those entering into the institution of marriage?

Anti-Statist on March 26, 2013 at 4:30 PM

Equal rights for same person marriage now!

Doughboy on March 26, 2013 at 4:20 PM

If you get divorced, can you get alimony?

BobMbx on March 26, 2013 at 4:32 PM

To be precise, assuming the Facebook timestamp is accurate, it was 3:03 p.m. Did anyone have that in the pool in the Huckabee thread? I had 2 p.m. ET.

Don’t feel bad. Maybe he forgot to set his clock forward this spring, and still thought it was 2?

There Goes The Neighborhood on March 26, 2013 at 4:33 PM

Archivarix on March 26, 2013 at 4:25 PM

Unintended consequences.

“Dependents claimed on Line 8 above: 4,011″

Why did you claim so many dependents? ‘I married every object in my house….how soon can I expect my $132,436 refund?’

BobMbx on March 26, 2013 at 4:35 PM

Democratic gay-marriage pool update: Jon Tester announces he supports same-sex marriage at 3 p.m. ET

And at 6 pm ET Mary Landreiu states she’s for “Lipstick Lesbians”

ToddPA on March 26, 2013 at 4:36 PM

I would marry both my guinea pigs in a NYC second if the feds allow me to claim them as dependents on my tax refund form.

Hmm, I may have to rethink my opposition them. We have two cats that would make ideal candidates for being considered dependents if it means an additional tax deduction. :)

hawkeye54 on March 26, 2013 at 4:37 PM

Jon Tester has big moobs.

DanMan on March 26, 2013 at 4:39 PM

Hmm, I may have to rethink my opposition them. We have two cats that would make ideal candidates for being considered dependents if it means an additional tax deduction. :)

hawkeye54 on March 26, 2013 at 4:37 PM

Maybe I could get SSI for my alcoholic feline?

katy the mean old lady on March 26, 2013 at 4:42 PM

Dem stick together and act as a Hive.
Repubs throw poop at each and divide loyalties.

Mimzey on March 26, 2013 at 4:42 PM

THE LITMUS TEST MARCHES ON…

WHATCHA GONNA DO WHEN THEY COME FOR YOU???

Marcola on March 26, 2013 at 4:44 PM

So THIS is what Democrats mean when they say they believe in evolution.

madmonkphotog on March 26, 2013 at 4:47 PM

1) If so ordered by the Party or the president, there is not a Democrat in Congress or in many state offices who would not publicly endorse and vote for Gay Marriage as a constitutional mandate. You take the Democrats’ support, you do as you are told.

2)

Moreover, if reproduction not an issue in recognized marriages, then there is also a constitutional right to polygamy. In fact polygamy bans could easily be construed as religious persecution against Islam.

xuyee on March 26, 2013 at 4:15 PM

This is the next frontier. Muslims must be able to import their marital and sexual customs in the name of diversity and freedom of religion. The only problem will be how they will phrase it so that if the fringe Mormons demand the right to polygamy, it will be hateful, oppressive, and evil. Because ….”H8trs!”

Given the local approach to male and female pedophilia that hundreds of thousands of our troops have witnessed in Iraq and Afghanistan; you can be sure that the sexual customs imported will include these, along with female genital mutilation. And if anyone opposes it, it will be called part of the “Right Wing war on women”.

Subotai Bahadur on March 26, 2013 at 4:47 PM

If the deal is –

no one should be able to tell … any American who they can love and who they can marry. -JT

Then why is there the slightest problem if I marry my widowed father, brother, sister, my first cousin, my two best girlfriends, or my two best guyfriends, huh??? Since I love them so completely and sincerely, how can I be told I can’t marry them? It’s just not “fair” if I can’t.

There’s no end to this, and I haven’t even begun with the much beloved pets and farm animals. This statement above is truly, right smack dab on its face, farcical.

marybel on March 26, 2013 at 4:47 PM

Dem stick together and act as a Hive.
Repubs throw poop at each and divide loyalties.
Mimzey on March 26, 2013 at 4:42 PM

Well you’ve solved the mystery of (political) life.

Marcus on March 26, 2013 at 4:49 PM

My first Bishop! Woo!

makattak on March 26, 2013 at 4:03 PM

Enjoy your remaining minutes on Earth.

Bishop on March 26, 2013 at 4:51 PM

Equal rights for same person marriage now!

Doughboy on March 26, 2013 at 4:20 PM

I could never marry myself because I fart in bed pretty much all the time.

Bishop on March 26, 2013 at 4:53 PM

Tester: “I’m all about Brokeback Mountain.”

BuckeyeSam on March 26, 2013 at 4:55 PM

The song and dance of “conservative” Democrats continues to go on and on.

There is no such thing – any elected Democrat will do what the left wing of the party tells them to do.

Speaking of which, did Tester’s opponent point this out?

18-1 on March 26, 2013 at 4:56 PM

And the ranks of the golden calf polishers swells.

Dr. Carlo Lombardi on March 26, 2013 at 4:56 PM

I’m all for gay marriage and sharia law. That way I can beat my many wives if they displease me. No more feminism for me.

Old Country Boy on March 26, 2013 at 4:58 PM

Hey Montanans, good job believing the ‘rat was telling the truth during his last campaign. How many times do you need to be kicked in the teeth before you figure out that the dude doing the kicking maybe doesn’t like you.

Bishop on March 26, 2013 at 5:00 PM

I could never marry myself because I fart in bed pretty much all the time.

Bishop on March 26, 2013 at 4:53 PM

I don’t know.. If you go gay, a man might put up with that and you can take turns dutch ovening each other. Told my husband early on if he did that to me again, I would pour toilet water on him while he was sleeping.

melle1228 on March 26, 2013 at 5:08 PM

I’m proud to support marriage equality private medical insurance because no one should be able to tell a Montanan or any American who they can love and who they can marry. what kind of healthcare they have to purchase”

If only he could see the logic.

BobMbx on March 26, 2013 at 5:22 PM

YAWN

TX-96 on March 26, 2013 at 5:28 PM

Told my husband early on if he did that to me again, I would pour toilet water on him while he was sleeping.

melle1228 on March 26, 2013 at 5:08 PM

Whoa there, girl. I promise to never p!ss you off, on these threads.

platypus on March 26, 2013 at 5:35 PM

Democratic gay-marriage pool update: Jon Tester announces he supports same-sex marriage at 3 p.m.

Well, it is clear. You cannot be a Democrat without swearing your allegience to sodomite relationships as being equal to the norm that has been around for about 2,000 years. Huzza or something.

My only surprise was Mark Warner, but not really. He’s up for re-election in 2014 and in a state like VA you would think that would alienate him from a good portion of the state. It does. But he’s setting up a strawman to attack any GOP opponent. Mark Warner is for sodomites and that yet to be determined Republican hates you. Plays well in Northern VA (aka Southern NJ) and the Tidewater.

Happy Nomad on March 26, 2013 at 5:36 PM

I’m glad to see all these people for marriage all of a sudden…

So…

When do we make divorce illegal? After all… It’s for the children…

Skywise on March 26, 2013 at 5:39 PM

That is, after all, a (D) behind his name isn’t it?

Pardonme on March 26, 2013 at 5:44 PM

Democrats for mutual masturbation.

Paul-Cincy on March 26, 2013 at 5:46 PM

“Montanans believe in the right to make a good life for their families. How they define a family should be their business and their business alone. I’m proud to support marriage equality because no one should be able to tell a Montanan or any American who they can love and who they can marry.” -JT

Theirs’ to define huh? Then whatever a person wants to define as marriage is marriage and no one can or should get in the way. What is the next group of marriages going to look like? Anybody’s guess if we go by what Tester says!

Pardonme on March 26, 2013 at 5:48 PM

What is the next group of marriages going to look like? Anybody’s guess if we go by what Tester says!

Pardonme on March 26, 2013 at 5:48 PM

My cars just got married. To each other.

BobMbx on March 26, 2013 at 5:52 PM

Landrieu is up for reelection in 2014. She can turn but will probably kiss her career goodbye.

Erich66 on March 26, 2013 at 6:02 PM

Bill Nelson at 3:30 on Thursday. He was just reelected so he won’t worry.

Barred on March 26, 2013 at 6:03 PM

His there a tally sheet out there keeping track of how many of these entrails in Washington have evolved on the gay marriage issue?

RdLake on March 26, 2013 at 6:08 PM

Nelson – 11:47 AM EST on Weds

stldave on March 26, 2013 at 6:20 PM

As far as I can tell, all these politicians who are “coming out” are telling the voters of California that they don’t care if they do or don’t want their definition of marriage changed, these elitists will shove it down their throats anyway.

Socratease on March 26, 2013 at 6:32 PM

Less than 1% of the population controlling 99% of the discussion.

Tell me the Big Media doesn’t control the reality of America.

The squirrel is the most powerful of animals.

FlaMurph on March 26, 2013 at 6:45 PM

We taking bets on the first GOPer to come out?

melle1228 on March 26, 2013 at 4:03 PM

A little late for that.

Jaibones on March 26, 2013 at 7:04 PM

A’Pundit, you forget that Bob Casey has just been re-elected, too. He surely will be the next one. Democrat courage, you know.

WannabeAnglican on March 26, 2013 at 8:05 PM

Does that include marrying their horse- John?

Marcus Traianus on March 26, 2013 at 4:08 PM

Well here’s the problem with convincing people with that argument….There’s no segment of the population that can be seen to have any legitimate reason to marry their horse or their dog, or their mother or father, or their son or daughter, or their sister or brother. But there is a segment of the population that is perceived by many to have a legitimate reason to marry a person of the same sex.

Now we can argue whether or not the gay population is 10% or 5% or less (my guess is that it’s around 2.5%). But even if it’s only 1%, that’s still a lot of people in a country of over 300 million.

So out of compassion and pity for this relatively small percentage of the population, more and more people are willing to give their approval to a law that would make it legal for heterosexuals to marry members of the same sex. The presence of a gay population is totally blinding them to fact that this is what they’re actually agreeing to.

The “should it be legal to marry your pet/sibling/parent/child” argument is a completely valid analogy to the same sex marriage argument. But it doesn’t resonate, because it’s not being framed properly.

A heterosexual man marrying another man is every bit as obscene and bizarre as someone marrying their dog, and neither should be legal. But too many people don’t see the two as being equivalent, because they want to be nice to gay people, and there’s no ‘community” of people who want to marry their dogs who they feel pressured to be nice to as well.

ardenenoch on March 26, 2013 at 8:41 PM

Tester’s a tool. As a Montanan, I find it impossible to take anything he says or does seriously.

jix on March 26, 2013 at 8:52 PM

Tester’s a tool. As a Montanan, I find it impossible to take anything he says or does seriously.

jix on March 26, 2013 at 8:52 PM

He’s a fraud and a liar. So why did they elect him twice?

Jaibones on March 26, 2013 at 11:54 PM