Skip to main content

View Diary: Marriage equality in front of Supreme Court for second day (63 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  That's a very clever observation. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Rieux

    I didn't think of the general applicability of the "no take-backs" rule in case the 9th Circuit's decision is affirmed.

    Seek not that the things which happen should happen as you wish; but wish the things which happen to be as they are, and you will have a tranquil flow of life.

    by Montreal Progressive on Wed Mar 27, 2013 at 10:41:54 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Take backs in those states are not going to happen (0+ / 0-)

      regardless of the court's decision. That's a political reality.

      •  I don't think (0+ / 0-)

        that that's self-evident at all. In Iowa, especially, it's not hard to imagine something like an anti-gay constitutional amendment passing, presumably in an off-year election. Those Huckabee and Santorum voters have not ceased to exist.

      •  Note, for example, (0+ / 0-)

        Nate Silver's projections on level of support for gay marriage in ballot amendments over time.

        He's projecting that 46.5% of Iowans would have voted in favor of marriage equality in 2012, and 52.8% in 2016. That's not exactly rock-solid "political reality" support that we can all rely on, especially in an off-year election like 2014.

        In short, the demographic evidence paints a picture that's somewhat contrary to your smug confidence.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (153)
  • Community (68)
  • Elections (34)
  • Media (33)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (31)
  • Law (30)
  • Environment (30)
  • Civil Rights (29)
  • Culture (29)
  • 2016 (29)
  • Science (25)
  • Barack Obama (25)
  • Hillary Clinton (24)
  • Labor (23)
  • Republicans (23)
  • Climate Change (23)
  • Economy (21)
  • Josh Duggar (19)
  • Marriage Equality (19)
  • Jeb Bush (18)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site