Hillary Clinton's gay rights evolution

[Ogre Mage]

Amy Chozick at the NYT looks at Hillary's relationship with the LGBT political community.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/31/fashion/hillary-clinton-gay-rights-evolution.html?_r=0

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Amy Chozick at the NYT looks at Hillary's relationship with the LGBT political community.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/31/fashion/hillary-clinton-gay-rights-evolution.html?_r=0

This is totally another issue where the left seems determined to cut off its nose to spite its face.

[Liberalrocks]

Amy Chozick at the NYT looks at Hillary's relationship with the LGBT political community.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/31/fashion/hillary-clinton-gay-rights-evolution.html?_r=0

This is totally another issue where the left seems determined to cut off its nose to spite its face.

Yes and as a gay man supporting her I could not agree with you more. I respect her record on LGBT issues and her speech in Geneva about international LGBT rights as secretary of state.

[Free Bird]

Romney changes stance: Flip flop!
Clinton changes: SHE HAS EVOLVED

[Never]

Why exactly was this article in the fashion and style section? After reading the article, I really felt it should have been placed somewhere else within the Times.

[Rockefeller GOP]

Romney changes stance: Flip flop!
Clinton changes: SHE HAS EVOLVED

Nevermind the fact that (while I personally support gay marriage) Republicans who currently hold her old stance are deemed anti-LGBT while she (or Obama for that matter) certainly never were.  And a common defense is "it wasn't politically viable yet!" ... Well, accepting that argument would certainly jive with the other Hillary worshiping on this board.

[Likely Voter]

While being pro-SSM is a must-have for any potential Dem candidate in 2016 (just like being pro-choice), I don't see how exactly when you became pro-SSM being an issue. How many national politicians were pro-SSM in the 90s or the 2000s? Even Obama didn't 'evolve' until 2012.

That being said, the LGBT vote is vital to the dems both as a big fundraising group and as voters. They were 5% of the vote in 2012, which is a bigger voting block than Asians or Jews. And exit polls showed that Romeny and Obama tied with the straight vote, so it could be argued that Obama's entire margin of victory was due to winning the LGBT vote 3 to 1.

[Free Bird]

Romney changes stance: Flip flop!
Clinton changes: SHE HAS EVOLVED

Nevermind the fact that (while I personally support gay marriage) Republicans who currently hold her old stance are deemed anti-LGBT while she (or Obama for that matter) certainly never were.  And a common defense is "it wasn't politically viable yet!" ... Well, accepting that argument would certainly jive with the other Hillary worshiping on this board.

And by that he means whole forum

[Dixie Reborn]

Romney changes stance: Flip flop!
Clinton changes: SHE HAS EVOLVED

Nevermind the fact that (while I personally support gay marriage) Republicans who currently hold her old stance are deemed anti-LGBT while she (or Obama for that matter) certainly never were.  And a common defense is "it wasn't politically viable yet!" ... Well, accepting that argument would certainly jive with the other Hillary worshiping on this board.

She also says she only voted for the Iraq War because it "politically viable then". Hillary only votes and says things out of self-interest.

[SWE]

Romney changes stance: Flip flop!
Clinton changes: SHE HAS EVOLVED

Nevermind the fact that (while I personally support gay marriage) Republicans who currently hold her old stance are deemed anti-LGBT while she (or Obama for that matter) certainly never were.  And a common defense is "it wasn't politically viable yet!" ... Well, accepting that argument would certainly jive with the other Hillary worshiping on this board.

And by that he means whole forum

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=186888.0

[IceSpear]

This article is one of the biggest loads of crap I've ever read. Hillary won LGBT voters in the 2008 Dem primary and the LGBT community overwhelmingly supports her now. What is the author's evidence that counters this obvious fact? The comments of some random lobbyist, Andrew Sullivan (LOL), and the Terry Gross interview which nobody outside the Beltway pundit echo chamber cared about.

[7,052,770]

Romney changes stance: Flip flop!
Clinton changes: SHE HAS EVOLVED

Nevermind the fact that (while I personally support gay marriage) Republicans who currently hold her old stance are deemed anti-LGBT while she (or Obama for that matter) certainly never were.  And a common defense is "it wasn't politically viable yet!" ... Well, accepting that argument would certainly jive with the other Hillary worshiping on this board.

It's not like the typical Republican supports most gay equality but just doesn't quite go so far as marriage equality, like Obama and Hillary used to pretend to.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Romney changes stance: Flip flop!
Clinton changes: SHE HAS EVOLVED

You're really comparing Romney's overt position reversals to Clinton's shifts, that generally reflect where the political mainstream was?

And you call us hacks.

[HAnnA MArin County]

Romney changes stance: Flip flop!
Clinton changes: SHE HAS EVOLVED

You're really comparing Romney's overt position reversals to Clinton's shifts, that generally reflect where the political mainstream was?

And you call us hacks.

If it walks like a hack and quacks like a hack...

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Romney changes stance: Flip flop!
Clinton changes: SHE HAS EVOLVED

I'm no Clintocrat, but these are entirely different kettles of fish.

Romney abruptly reversed his directions on his various issues. Cap-and-trade, healthcare, gun control etc. I don't blame him, considering the state he was in, but it does make him look a person without ideology (except pursuit of power).

Clinton just put gay marriage on the backburner until she thought it was feasible to say "I've evolved blah blah blah". True, a politically coward and craven thing to do; but I think even the most ardent Clinron hack would agree she is primarily a politician; and politicians by default are amoral cowards.

[Cobbler]

Romney changes stance: Flip flop!
Clinton changes: SHE HAS EVOLVED

I'm no Clintocrat, but these are entirely different kettles of fish.

Romney abruptly reversed his directions on his various issues. Cap-and-trade, healthcare, gun control etc. I don't blame him, considering the state he was in, but it does make him look a person without ideology (except pursuit of power).

Clinton just put gay marriage on the backburner until she thought it was feasible to say "I've evolved blah blah blah". True, a politically coward and craven thing to do; but I think even the most ardent Clinron hack would agree she is primarily a politician; and politicians by default are amoral cowards.

People could say the same for Romney, yet he gets hit harder for his "evolutions." I think both are cynical tactics, but I think its obvious that Romney (or even Rand Paul as of late) get more negative responses for position changes compared to Clinton.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

Romney changes stance: Flip flop!
Clinton changes: SHE HAS EVOLVED

I'm no Clintocrat, but these are entirely different kettles of fish.

Romney abruptly reversed his directions on his various issues. Cap-and-trade, healthcare, gun control etc. I don't blame him, considering the state he was in, but it does make him look a person without ideology (except pursuit of power).

Clinton just put gay marriage on the backburner until she thought it was feasible to say "I've evolved blah blah blah". True, a politically coward and craven thing to do; but I think even the most ardent Clinron hack would agree she is primarily a politician; and politicians by default are amoral cowards.

People could say the same for Romney, yet he gets hit harder for his "evolutions." I think both are cynical tactics, but I think its obvious that Romney (or even Rand Paul as of late) get more negative responses for position changes compared to Clinton.

Well yeah. Romney is a Republican.

I still appreciate Clinton's stance on marriage equality more than his though, but I expect when Romney evolves and sees the light, he'll be branded more of an opportunist than Hilldog ever was.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

If only she'd evolve on about 100 other issues.

[Free Bird]

Romney changes stance: Flip flop!
Clinton changes: SHE HAS EVOLVED

I'm no Clintocrat, but these are entirely different kettles of fish.

Romney abruptly reversed his directions on his various issues. Cap-and-trade, healthcare, gun control etc. I don't blame him, considering the state he was in, but it does make him look a person without ideology (except pursuit of power).

Clinton just put gay marriage on the backburner until she thought it was feasible to say "I've evolved blah blah blah". True, a politically coward and craven thing to do; but I think even the most ardent Clinron hack would agree she is primarily a politician; and politicians by default are amoral cowards.

People could say the same for Romney, yet he gets hit harder for his "evolutions." I think both are cynical tactics, but I think its obvious that Romney (or even Rand Paul as of late) get more negative responses for position changes compared to Clinton.

Well yeah. Romney is a Republican.

I still appreciate Clinton's stance on marriage equality more than his though, but I expect when Romney evolves and sees the light, he'll be branded more of an opportunist than Hilldog ever was.

[CapoteMonster]

The thing with Romney is that he completely changed his ideology just to compete in Republican primaries rather than shifting on a few issues.

[pbrower2a]

Romney changes stance: Flip flop!
Clinton changes: SHE HAS EVOLVED

It is an evolution when one repudiates what one stood for before. Thus the late George C. Wallace repudiated his old segregationism, and people accepted his change as genuine.

Flip-flopping implies saying what happens to be convenient at the time and place. Thus if a politician says one thing in Amarillo, its diametric opposite in San Francisco, and exactly what he said in Amarillo in Phoenix, then his flip-flop is either a lie or foolishness.

When the core reality changes -- of course one may need to make a drastic change of position.   

[SteveRogers]

Romney changes stance: Flip flop!
Clinton changes: SHE HAS EVOLVED

The difference is of course whether or not the public perception is that a politician's change in stance was the result of a genuine transition from one view to another as a result of careful reflection and new information as opposed to blatant political posturing. With democrats coming out in favor of gay marriage over the last couple of years, there is a perception that they are transitioning away from their previous politically convenient position and towards the belief they genuinely held all along. The public is understandably much more forgiving of such changes than the ones that work in the opposite direction. Again, that is the spin that democrats put on it, not necessarily the reality in all cases.

[Mister Mets]

Nate Silver had an interesting take on this, comparing Hillary Clinton to other women who fit her profile: upper-class Democratic middle-aged non-evangelical female Protestant.

He determined that she was behind the curve.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/most-women-like-hillary-clinton-evolved-on-gay-marriage-years-ago/

[Mr. Smith]

For all you people getting on Clinton's case and comparing it to Romney,and claiming such is hypocritical, I have a question...

Where do you factor John Kerry in '04  to this?

[New_Conservative]

Romney changes stance: Flip flop!
Clinton changes: SHE HAS EVOLVED