same-sex marriage?

[pa2011]

Will the Democrats ever have a nominee again who does not support same sex marriage? And in what cycle will the GOP have a nominee who supports same-sex marriage.

I'm thinking the answer to the first question is no.  As for the second, think it could depend just how the Supreme Court ultimately rules on the matter.  Depending on the precise decision, could see GOP base either quickly accepting same-sex marriage or hardening in opposition.

[sg0508]

Yes, but it will come across as "not being a campaign issue".  Thus, similar to the way that Mitt tried to avoid the social stance issues, the democratic candidate may do the same to keep spreading the electoral map.

[Ronnie]

The GOP will eventually soften on the issue of gay marriage; it's just a matter of time.

[Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck]

No, it's part of the platform.  Obama actually tended to mention his support for gay marriage in his stump speeches.  I would venture to guess that the Dems see it as a plus at this point. 

[Lief 🗽]

Gays provided Obama his national margin of victory (he was tied with Romney among straights). Democrats would be insane to nominate someone who would be a step backward on the issue.

[afleitch]

Gays provided Obama his national margin of victory (he was tied with Romney among straights). Democrats would be insane to nominate someone who would be a step backward on the issue.

This. They also form potentially 7-10% of the electorate in urban areas in the swing states (Denver for example) If the Dems can keep winning them 3-1 then it's a great help for them in the future.

[TNF]

There will never again be another Democratic nominee or Vice Presidential nominee opposed to civil rights for gays and lesbians.

[DC Al Fine]

Gays provided Obama his national margin of victory (he was tied with Romney among straights). Democrats would be insane to nominate someone who would be a step backward on the issue.

This. They also form potentially 7-10% of the electorate in urban areas in the swing states (Denver for example) If the Dems can keep winning them 3-1 then it's a great help for them in the future.

I always thought homosexuals vote Democrat like blacks did...

[Orion0]

Gays provided Obama his national margin of victory (he was tied with Romney among straights). Democrats would be insane to nominate someone who would be a step backward on the issue.

This. They also form potentially 7-10% of the electorate in urban areas in the swing states (Denver for example) If the Dems can keep winning them 3-1 then it's a great help for them in the future.

I always thought homosexuals vote Democrat like blacks did...

No. It's a high %, but not 98. More in the 70s.

[morgieb]

No.

When it gets legalised most likely.

[Small Business Owner of Any Repute]

A Democrat simply wouldn't be able to win the nomination while being opposed to gay marriage.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

The Moderate Hero position previous Democratic nominees took in basically saying they are opposed to gay marriage but also opposing literally anything to prevent it and was held by basically no one except Democratic politicians is essentially obsolete now. There's no reason to have it anymore now that it's not a losing issue. The bridge has been crossed on this issue.

[Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon]

My Party may tolerate a "states rights" position on the issue in the near future, but will not be able to support gay marriage at least until Millennials (and younger) are the plurality in the GOP primaries.  At that point, you'll probably see a pretty immediate shift.