Republicans who don’t oppose gay marriage will pay politically
The second repercussion of New York’s gay-marriage vote is that the prominent media attention it drew is firing up the GOP base, and it will affect the presidential nominating process, starting with the Iowa caucuses. Nearly every prominent GOP presidential candidate now supports a federal marriage amendment.
Let me make one prediction: Herman Cain’s failure to do so in the first New Hampshire debate is going to help stall out his campaign in Iowa and harm his chances of emerging as a serious contender. As the original sponsor of the Minnesota Marriage Amendment, passed by the legislature this spring, Michele Bachmann will benefit.
Third, the New York vote will hurt the New York Republican Party. Gov. Cuomo, along with a handful of Republican donors and a sympathetic media, managed to give Republicans a very inaccurate impression about the consequences of voting for gay marriage. What happened last week in New York is simple politically: Republicans enabled the passage of a bill that will help the governor please the Democratic base in his state and nationally. It simultaneously alienated a significant portion of the Republican base.
Memo to Empire State Republicans: Abandoning your core values to get elected is wrong. Abandoning your core values to help the Democrats get elected is just plain dumb.
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
Gaybaiting in a deep blue state sure sounds like good political strategy to me.
Pablo Honey on June 30, 2011 at 10:12 AM
This.
Even 0bama won’t jump on that electoral suicide train, that some republicans are so weak minded to allow progressive propaganda to make them vote for it – is simply amazing.
Conservatives have a lot more work to do to clean up the GOP.
Rebar on June 30, 2011 at 10:14 AM
Memo to Empire State Republicans: Abandoning your core values to get elected is wrong. Abandoning your core values to help the Democrats get elected is just plain dumb.
….
Anyone else notice that this has to be said time and again?
artist on June 30, 2011 at 10:16 AM
Marriage used to be something that government just recorded, basically to make a child’s parentage official. Now marriage has become an invention of government. They’re no longer just recording the biological fact. They’re overriding the biological facts and creating new facts.
RBMN on June 30, 2011 at 10:17 AM
Well, they certainly won’t be rewarded by the gay community, that’s for damn sure. Liberals first, gay people second. They’ll be all to happy to vote them out next election.
You don’t win the votes of liberal minority groups by pandering to them. You win their votes by turning them on to conservatism.
KingGold on June 30, 2011 at 10:19 AM
“Of all the dispositions and habits, which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.” (George Washington, Farwell Address, Writings of Washington, Vol. 35, p. 229.)
Akzed on June 30, 2011 at 10:20 AM
This could explain why Rudy Giuliani isn’t officiating his friends gay wedding.
http://www.bluecollarphilosophy.com/2011/06/rudy-giuliani-wisely-not-marrying-gay-friend-in-new-york.html
Political suicide for any Republican with Presidential hopes.
Blue Collar Todd on June 30, 2011 at 10:22 AM
There are a lot of traditional Catholics in New York. You’d be surprised. Probably more than are still in Ireland and Italy. The New York Catholics haven’t gotten the memo from the Old Country that Catholicism is dead.
RBMN on June 30, 2011 at 10:23 AM
The NY GOP will lose the their Senate… but that would have happened regardless of whether they let the vote happened or not…
ninjapirate on June 30, 2011 at 10:24 AM
So THIS is an acceptable “purity test” issue, is that it ?
When you primary Republicans from, say, New York, you know what you get ? Democrats elected to office.
I really don’t know why it has to be re-iterated again and again – gay marriage in this country is a 50-50 proposition. Going hardcore either FOR or AGAINST is a losing proposition, unless you represent a small constituency with overwhelming majority opinions one way or another (see, also, San Francisco).
You are absolutely fooling yourself if you think the average resident of the state of New York agrees that gay marriage is the penultimate social issue upon which to judge a politician. Especially in today’s economic climate.
People would be far better off to recognize that Maggie Gallagher only HAS 2 issues and they are both MASSIVE losers at the national level. You want to see Democrats back in charge of Congress and ensure Obama gets a second term ? Try and push gay marriage as a central issue in any election in the next 18 months.
I think the gay “marriage” movement is complete BS. But opposing it is not a winning argument nationally and certainly not in New York.
deadrody on June 30, 2011 at 10:27 AM
It needn’t be the central issue to be an issue. It is an issue, and to treat it as some kind of third rail is silly.
Akzed on June 30, 2011 at 10:31 AM
In that case, best to just do the right thing. Every time government tries to “fix” marriage, as with no-fault divorce, it just destroys it a little more. The definition of “dog” or “cat” or “marriage” doesn’t need changing.
RBMN on June 30, 2011 at 10:37 AM
Oh please with this nonsense. If someone’s big issue is paranoia over gay marriage there is no reasoning with them.
Dash on June 30, 2011 at 10:38 AM
Is Maggie Gallagher married to this man?
http://christwire.org/2011/06/when-it-comes-to-the-phish-music-censorship-is-not-enough/
It’s impossible to parody these wack jobs.
Zetterson on June 30, 2011 at 10:41 AM
Government didn’t invent “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” and it didn’t invent marriage. In these cases, government is there to protect what already exists. Let government be the author of more and more natural human institutions, and see where that gets you. Where is gets you is children that are not yours by biology. They’re only yours by current statute, and only by politically-correct statute at that.
RBMN on June 30, 2011 at 10:53 AM
Sigh. If it were up to me we would stick to economic and national security issues. That’s wishful thinking I gather.
juliesa on June 30, 2011 at 11:03 AM
More government in peoples personal lives is certainly not a “core value”, Maggie. Unless you like big government or something.
mythicknight on June 30, 2011 at 11:06 AM
Here’s a better idea:
Everybody can register a domestic partnership with the state, so the state has an in for enforcing orders wrt divorce and probate, and to allow for any tax deductions needed.
Marriage becomes something you can get a friendly congregation to perform for you, much like baptism. You can’t sue a church to baptize your baby, and you can’t sue a church that won’t marry you.
Sekhmet on June 30, 2011 at 11:16 AM
This is the only issue where I apparently break with the GOP platform I guess. Gay “marriage” doesn’t hurt anyone (like, say, abortion) so if the majority of people in a state decide to allow it, then why is there a problem? The people of NY backed the measure, it was carried out by the legislature, and now gay marriage is ok there. Isn’t this how government is supposed to work?
Waaay more important issues right now.
XWing5 on June 30, 2011 at 11:23 AM
Dick Cheney is in so much trouble…
And me too, I guess.
beatcanvas on June 30, 2011 at 11:29 AM
Please. Will it matter in Iowa, with their
infestationdisproportionate number of social-conservatives? Possibly. I doubt it will matter much elsewhere. To repeat a cliche (that is still accurate, no matter if it IS a cliche): it’s the economy, stupid. Gay marriage isn’t going to be a hot-button issue in 2012 upon which Republicans’ fortunes will rise or fall.Well, that’s the real issue, isn’t it. Not everyone who leans to the right thinks that opposing gay marriage is a “core value” of conservatism, or should be, and a growing number of young conservatives and right-leaning independents are in fact concluding that opposition to gay marriage / gay equality in general is NOT a “value” they wish to maintain.
Vyce on June 30, 2011 at 11:30 AM
Which is why, in the 38 states that put it on the ballot, about half voted for same-sex marriage.
Oh, wait….
Let the Democrats take on the same-sex marriage argument. It is NOT a winner for the public.
Honestly, there’s a reason that even Obama and Hillary try to distance themselves from the subject.
tom on June 30, 2011 at 11:37 AM
Small government doesn’t decide it needs to redefine a pre-existing and worldwide social institution.
tom on June 30, 2011 at 11:39 AM
The fact that it pre-existed current law really doesn’t matter. Legal definitions can and do change at the will of the people voting through their elected representatives. Civil law is a wholly artificial construct that does not provide unchanging foundations or definitions for any institution. – much less marriage.
Any private or religious definition of marriage you may have is a different creature. A new definition of what constitutes civil marriage should have no impact on those and should not constitute a wholesale redefinition.
dieudonne on June 30, 2011 at 11:51 AM
The Maggie Gallagher strategy worked really well last election when uberSocialcon Bill Brady ran against and lost to Pat Quinn here in Illinois, despite the whole Blago trial
Brady was the real deal….creationist, anti-abortion even in cases of rape and incest, anti gay marriage.
Better a “true conservative TM” go down in flames, than a RINO win.
Pablo Honey on June 30, 2011 at 12:10 PM