Show of HandsShow of Hands

veritas1 April 9th, 2016 1:14am

In 2008, Hillary Clinton opposed gay marriage in favor of civil unions. By 2011, she was privately lobbying the Obama administration to support gay marriage and expressed frustration in her emails at their hesitance to do so. What changed her mind?

3 Liked

Comments: Add Comment

CMD1973 Oxford iowa
04/12/16 2:59 pm

She like many open minded people are willing to change their mind. She came from a religious background and may have been influenced by it, but as she came to know the LBGT community she saw the error of her thinking. Over 50% of Americans have changed their views on this over the last 40 years.

JustBob Your anger fascinates me
04/09/16 9:16 am

The movement became popular and it would appease more voters to support it. It has never been about a politician's beliefs but about appearance. "Vote for me and all your dreams will come true"

Phillyusmc Philadelphia PA
04/09/16 8:23 am

Politics , she knew she would be running for president

PartyJustin R.O.C.K. in the R.O.C.
04/09/16 7:25 am

I think it's obvious and I don't understand why people think it's a negative. She was already for gay marriage but realized at the time that a lot of Americans still weren't convinced. That's how she's a pragmatist, she smart enough to realize what has a better chance of getting accomplished and works to get that done.

RoDe Latinus wordsus
04/09/16 10:21 am

"I believe that marriage is not just a bond but a sacred bond between a man and a woman. I have had occasion in my life to defend marriage, to stand up for marriage, to believe in the hard work and challenge of marriage. So I take umbrage at anyone who might suggest that those of us who worry about amending the Constitution are less committed to the sanctity of marriage, or to the fundamental bedrock principle that exists between a man and a woman, going back into the mists of history as one of the founding, foundational institutions of history and humanity and civilization, and that its primary, principal role during those millennia has been the raising and socializing of children for the society into which they are to become adults."

RoDe Latinus wordsus
04/09/16 10:22 am

If she was already for gay marriage when she made that statement on the floor of the Senate, well I don't know about you, but that doesn't bode well for her authenticity.

IamPriscilla Idaho, USA
04/09/16 5:47 am

The only difference between "civil unions" and "gay marriage" is the name. One doesn't offer more rights to gay couples then the other, it's merely a title. Hillary probably just found the other title to be more politically advantageous.

DawnDanes New Jersey
04/09/16 5:29 am

Knowledge, age, wisdom and point of view. Everyone's view changes as they get to know more about subjects and people good and bad.

Malekithe Resist
04/09/16 4:52 am

She wants to divorce Bill and marry a woman

simplyjoyful Texas
04/09/16 4:52 am

It became more politically advantageous to support it by that time

ZaQ777 Pittsburgh
04/09/16 4:22 am

Playing the game.

FacePalm That Trick Never Works
04/08/16 11:40 pm

her public support of civil unions was political expedience. She has always supported the gay community

kermie gaytopia
04/08/16 11:14 pm

Same for both of them. I'm sure they always supported it--why would they care? They just waited until it wasn't politically damaging to say so.

TheCameron UCF
04/08/16 11:11 pm

Running for prez? But who knows why she doesn't support right to work, because even dems overwhelmingly support that.

veritas1 Panda
04/08/16 11:25 pm

Dems support Right to Work laws? Since when? Right to work laws are a GOP wet dream. They are anti-Union. Democrats have always been pro-Union.

04/08/16 11:04 pm

Like with most things popular opinion sways her vote

CDUBS Dallas, Tx
04/08/16 10:18 pm

Future votes. She is always posturing and pandering.

veritas1 Panda
04/08/16 11:26 pm

How could she be pandering if no one publicly knew she supported gay marriage?

KatG Liberal in Ohio
04/08/16 8:27 pm

I'm not a Hillary supporter, but things change. My husband, a Republican, was not ok with it a few years back and now he is. We had conversations about it and he changed his mind. It happens. People change and grow, times change, etc.

Diogenes FreeMeBe
04/08/16 7:32 pm

Wet finger (how we are left to speculate) in the air.

pdxchory Portland
04/08/16 6:28 pm

Polling data. She's never had her own opinion on anything.

veritas1 Panda
04/08/16 6:36 pm

Could you explain further?

That seems to imply she changed her position to pander to voters. But she didn't change her position publicly. If she was looking at public trends, it would have helped her tremendously to publicly support and would fit with your theory.

But she was privately trying to promote gay marriage and lobbying senators to vote in favor of marriage equality. No one knew or ever would have known for a while if this whole email thing didn't come out. Why would she support gay marriage if no one would know she did if she was guided by polls?

Doopy Remedial Americanism
04/08/16 6:25 pm

Same as Bernie. A wind shift.

queenb2000 Auburn Township, OH
04/08/16 6:24 pm

Political expediency.

LibArtie SW Connecticut
04/08/16 6:19 pm

Who cares, times change.

veritas1 Panda
04/08/16 6:20 pm

Her own votes? She had just lost the nomination? And if she was more concerned about her own votes, why didn't she publicly support it?

Obama's votes? That makes a lot of sense. She obviously a professional and would never publicly contradict or embarrass the president by going public like that (she publicly came out in favor a few weeks after she left the Administration), but maybe she was concerned with his 2012 reelection?

stammtheman Mamou
04/08/16 6:23 pm

First job: get elected. She knew she would eventually need all the votes possible.

veritas1 Panda
04/08/16 6:27 pm

Coming out in favor of gay marriage, which apparently she believed but didn't say publicly, would have gotten her more votes than staying silent for 2+ years did.

Why did she defer to Obama to her own political detriment?

stammtheman Mamou
04/08/16 6:34 pm

I'm betting that she's been eyeballing 2016 a LONG time... (like since Obama became legit in 06 or 07?) maybe she's been playing a "long con".... For sure she has solid reason.

veritas1 Panda
04/08/16 6:37 pm

lol. I'm pretty sure she was eyeing 2008 in 2007. Probably why she ran.