Best Gift Ever to the GOP

The Supreme Court has made gay marriage legal everywhere in the United States, thus giving the Republican Party a huge gift. The truth is that opinion on this issue has been breaking in favor of gay marriage for the past decade, and it’s only accelerating. The political fight over this issue risked losing an entire generation to the Democratic Party, since a lot of millennials are single issue voters when it comes to this issue. The Supreme Court certainly has not put this issue to rest, because we’re still going to argue over cakes, but for the most part it’s now off the table politically. I feel this will soon become a settled issue.

Pennsylvania was not a state that had legislatively enacted gay marriage, and it was not going to as long as the GOP controls the legislature. The GOP now controls the legislature at historic levels. I don’t think Kathleen Kane is endearing herself to many people these days. Things look good for the GOP in Pennsylvania for the time being, despite the loss of the governorship. I thought the gay marriage issue was likely the biggest threat to the GOP majority in the long term, and now that’s off the table. While I’m sure Rep. Daryl Metcalfe won’t be thanking Justice Kennedy any time soon, he probably should. The GOP was in a Catch 22. It couldn’t mellow much on gay marriage without risking the loss of evangelicals, but it also couldn’t keep being obstinate on the issue and expect young people not to close their minds to whatever else the GOP might have to say.

I have long been in favor of legalizing gay marriage (I supported it before Obama and Hillary), but preferred that it be accomplished legislatively rather than through the courts. But I’d much rather be pissed at the GOP because they are stupid, venal, and ineffective rather than because they are taking the ship down over this long-term losing issue.

23 Responses to “Best Gift Ever to the GOP”

  1. Dannytheman says:

    I , like you, have always felt that love should be rewarded. With so much hate in the world, why shouldn’t two people being able to marry. Of course, they will now have all the misery we have with marriage too.

    Just kiddin, in case Bitter reads this.

  2. Ian Argent says:

    The past two days of decisions have been a gift. The PPACA challenge means the GOP leadership is not on the spot to come up with a workable plan to rebuild the rubble while the clock is running. They can continue to have their internal fights over direction behind closed doors; and don’t have to then take that plan and get it past a president whose basic political strategies include cutting off his allies noses to spite his enemies. Just as the republicans would never vote for mild reforms of the ACA, the president would never sign off on any changes. Nuking it all to rubble might be satisfying in the abstract, but without a plan or ability to rebuild (or even to back out gracefully to status quo ante), it’s self-defeating.

    The ACA decision left the issue in play for 2016.

    • Sebastian says:

      The Republicans are not going to repeal the ACA. At best, very best, they will repeal the ACA, and replace it with something that looks an awful lot like the ACA.

      • aerodawg says:

        Should replace it with something worse so we can go ahead and kill the health care system as quickly as possible instead of dragging it out. Quick and easy deaths are always preferable to long drawn out affairs…

      • harp1034 says:

        Obamacare is here to stay. the Republicans will huff and puff. Congress will tinker with it as the Britts do in the U.K.
        Maybe there will be an underground medical industry. Some doctors are willing to see people for 1/2 price if they will pay cash and don’t have insurance. I look for more doctors who will treat off the books for cash.
        We can look for ways to monkey wrench.

        • thomas says:

          Argentina has a lot of that. And I know of one person that tried to pay with cash and was refused, but he was/is on Medicare.

      • Ian Argent says:

        No, but they’re going to pretend they will, and as long as they can pretend, they can cover up the civil war in the party, at least until the hard break.

    • Archer says:

      I read an article saying this earlier.

      Basically, the decision on tax subsidies for health plans is a gift to Republicans, because now Hillary (and other Democrats) cannot hang the lost of 8 million Americans’ health care coverage around the GOP’s neck going into 2016. The GOP can still repeal or amend it (not that they will), but that would have been one hell of a stumbling block to overcome.

    • Alpheus says:

      I’m actually more inclined to think that the Republicans would have won, if the Supreme Court had gone the other way, for some weird value of win: it would have forced the Republicans to actually propose something, even if it was temporary…and it would have forced Obama to squirm as well. If Obama refused to play ball, it would have been clear that he’s the obstructionist.

      As it is, I’m not sure if Republicans could win at anything. It wouldn’t be too hard to emphasize the harms that ObamaCare is causing us, yet they squirm about the harm that will allegedly be caused by repealing ObamaCare; Republicans should also be on the forefront advocating the free market in health care, yet they aren’t…

      If anything, all this decision does is maintain the status quo, which is rather lousy. It’s really more of a lose-lose…and it probably would have been, even if the Supreme Court had ruled the other way, regardless…

  3. Dave says:

    Having not read the decision, I am relieved that this discussion is finally over. I have repeatedly asked Republicans under what authority does the State dictate who the People may or may not marry? Once you cede that decision to the government, you essentially give the government authority to tell you anything about how you can live your life.

    Of course… that’s not to say the Republicans are done trying to control this aspect of our lives. In fact, we might as well start the countdown to the first republican to propose a Constitutional amendment defining marriage to mean one woman married to one man. I give it a few hours…


  4. tigger says:

    Yep. It’s now safe for them to remain anti-gay — they can rail against it to try to win over that wing of the party, without fear of ever having to actually face doing anything about it politically. Now it’ll all be about activist judges and posturing.

    • JC_VA says:

      In essence, something similar to how they treat gun owners on occasion. Only we have the sense to realize it and call them on it (I hope).

  5. Ian Argent says:

    Interesting analysis of reactions from the Republican field.

  6. I don’t think the Democrat party was gonna lose any votes over this issue, cause when it comes down to it, Democrats will always vote Democrat for the simple fact that it’s not Republicans getting a vote.

    I’m glad this issue is settled, cause if more and more ‘social’ issues, which Democrats exclusively run on, get settled, Democrats won’t have a leg to stand on. Not that the Republicans are any better mind you…..

  7. Brewerbob says:

    I don’t think it’s settled at all. Just read in the local rag that the next target is employment and housing bias. The SJW will dream up anything to continue the division process in this country.

    • SDN says:

      The next target is every church in the country. Guaranteed.

      • Chase says:

        Why would LGBT+ people want to attack anti-gay churches that are protected by the First Amendment, and that they don’t attend anyway?

        No, a more likely target is their own bosses, who they actually do have to work for, and who they fear may fire them only for being queer.

  8. RAH says:

    Canada has had gay marriage for ten years. Preachers have been charged with hate crimes for sermons in churches. The right to choose who a one person business owner will do business with is gone. So now anyone who believes homosexuality is a sin is shamed, persecuted and loses their business reputation( because he is now a bigot) His fortune and home like the poor person in Washington State.

    From a logical point if it right to marry because of love. Why is it a crime to indulge in bestiality, polygamy polyandry?

    No, this is not a gift to the GOP.

    The court took away from Americans the ability to discuss, debate and make their own decision in their states. Fairly quickly states had approved based on referendum which provides legitimacy to the idea. From an order by 9 men that legitimacy is now gone.
    No, not a gift

    • Sebastian says:

      Canada does not have a First Amendment. Kennedy signaled in his opinion that when it comes to religious freedom, he’ll side with the First Amendment. Gay marriage was a lost cause if you looked at the polling on it, and how fast and hard public opinion is changing.

      I agree I would have preferred a legislative solution, but that was going to mean Republicans losing an entire generation, and then eventually their majorities in the state legislatures. For a lot of millennials, this is a single issue. They won’t vote for someone against gay marriage.

    • Ian Argent says:

      Not only does Canada not have a First Amendment, they have many laws and customs that are repugnant to the concept of freedom of conscience and expression that have no equivalent in US laws and customs. You can’t use a Canadian parade of violations of first amendment concepts to suggest that the US stands on the brink of anything.

    • Sebastian says:

      I’m also not suggesting the left won’t try, it will. But on this culture war issue, polling shows the GOP can stand to gain by standing on the side of religious freedom. They are on much safer grounds here, and evangelicals will stay in the camp because they are scared to death of where the left wants to ride this issue, and really, they should be.