That would more than make up for a totally expected loss in NC in my mind.

like andrew sullivan i am bracing for dissapointment

That would be awesome, especially coming on the heels of the NC vote and the Colorado GOP sabotaging the legislative session in the name of preventing civil unions here. But we'll see what happens.

You know, I usually stood behind Obama with his "my personal view on the semantics of marriage vs. civil unions shouldn't actually matter because I have always opposed DOMA since Day One and want it struck down as unconstitutional (which it is)". It fit with his Professor In Chief legal background, and I felt gays concentrated WAY too much on this weird sense of having the POTUS be the Gay Personal Validator In Chief.

However, the fact is the message is so muddied and confused now with that cheesy "evolve" comment a few months back, plus Romney camp's efforts to say "Obama and Romney have the same view on SSM" (which is a laugh since Romney in on record as wanted to amend the US Constitution to define marriage as 1 man/1 woman). Add to that Biden's interview and we don't have the luxury of a nuanced lecture on the US Constitution and DOMA: these state ballots are still trafficing in misinformation. Amendment One proved that. A clear, concise statement today of all days would be more appropriate and needed moreso than any time before or after Election Day.

It's marriage EQUALITY, dammit. Only you and Sullivan get it right; the other three links fall into the "special right for gays" trap.

I refuse to jinx it by predicting, but certainly I am tearing up at the prospect. This delicious suspense is such a joy to a drama queen like me.

Even if he does change/clarify his position today, it seems to me that this would be the very definition of "leading from behind". Presumably his endorsement wouldn't have changed yesterday's NC outcome materially, but the fact that he may be endorsing marriage equality the day after a major vote failed shows anything but leadership. Obama will now reap approval points for capitalizing on NC's loss.

Miscegenation was struck down in the Supreme Court by declaring state laws against it invalid.

How will it be different for marriage equality at the Federal level this time?

And just think, the interview was set to begin taping at 1:30 pm Eastern. Whatever he's saying, he's saying it right now.

@9

That is a fantastic thing to point out. I'm so excited!

Give it 10 years and you might catch up to Canada back in the 80s.

If he does endorse marriage equality, any excitement would be marred by worry that this could cost him swing states in the general election. I want Florida, North Carolina, Indiana, etc to still be attainable in November, and I would guess that this announcement would make those states more difficult to save.

OMG

I'm not going to get my hopes up, because I don't want ANYTHING to damage his chances in November...
And such a definite declaration given today would, I'm afraid, sufficiently stir up the mouth-breathing tea-baggy Repug. base that Rmoney would get a HUGE bump...

... is my fear .... :(

kcrobinson, great minds think alike!

@7 - "Leading from behind" is Obama's M.O. and isn't necessarily a bad thing. As FDR said: "I agree with you, I want to do it, now make me do it."

Obama responding to the NC loss with a pro-equality stance would be good politics and good fundraising. He's avoided the mostly-inevitable NC loss being pinned on him as evidence of weakness.

Endorsing gay marriage may actually win him the election at this point. Romney is against even civil unions. If this becomes a social issues election, Obama wins handily.

Sweet...if we could only put Obama in a tight campaign race for the next 4 years, we might be able to get him to do all the things he said he would in '08 when he ran and I voted for him.

I like this Obama, but I fear, even if he follows through, that this version of Obama will be fleeting (even though all these things he's doing will more than likely be so well received by the people such that he will win an election he is currently on track to lose).

I mean, why follow the will of the people when no one's rights are damaged (and, in fact, a segment of the population will see the rights they should have had long ago)? That's just silly...

@15 - yeah, I suppose. But the POTUS has the potential to be a *moral leader*, and to an extent that's an end in itself. Obama's foreign policy, and to an extent his domestic policy dealing with terrorism and civil liberties, has been less than stellar. He really could use a moment of good old-fashioned don't-give-a-damn progressive advocacy to make people like - well, me - feel good about him again and consider knocking on doors and giving $ to his campaign.

here is the GOP platform on this issue...

Call me a cynic, but I can't be disappointed if I don't get my hopes up in the first place. Call me when it's over.

Is it airing yet!?! I can't find any links to the interview and it started almost an hour ago. Please please please be awesome!

My best is that the fierce urgency of whenever will prevail, Obama will make some mealy-mouthed equivocation that he hopes will placate conservatives, but which will a) enrage/continue to disappoint his base and b) won't make a single person who was not going to vote for him change his mind and vote for him.

@16 - Yeah, on second thought, I should amend my prior statement to say that this isn't even "leading from behind". In order lead (even if it is from behind), presumably he would have had to at least take some sort of action to direct or guide the issue toward his goal. Perhaps I'm wrong, but I've seen no evidence that his strategy is anything other than to let it play out on its own and only dip a toe in when it's politically safe or beneficial.

I know that us crazy liberals projected way too many of our views onto his 2008 campaign promises, but I do not recall him bragging about his hands-off management style. I do remember things like "we are the change that we seek". He's clarifying his position on something that his party has been in favor of for years? Wow! What change! What leadership!

As for the argument that we need to "make" him do things, how exactly are we supposed to do that? It's such an ill-defined statement that it's meaningless. Public opinion on the wars, marriage equality, pot legalization, continued support for the banks, etc. are all against Obama's current policies. What more does he need?

It would be great if he did, but I'm not holding my breath.

@23 - Well, it's that b) that's the nub, idnit? Believe it or not (and I have trouble believing it myself), there actually exists this strange, secretive species known as the Undecided Voter. Studies have confirmed it. It's this odd population that's to blame for a lot of Obama's (and other politicians') equivocations and half-positions. Romney is a master at courting this group, by the way.

Don't get me wrong, I still think that BHO should man up and back SS marriage. But I do understand what fuels his hesitancy.

He has an opportunity today to make history. I hope he does the right thing. And I think it actually would help him win the election, by firing up the voters like me, who are getting tired of our rights being played with, and who are hesitant to support any candidate who isn't fully on our side.

Strong support for marriage equality from the president could be the thing that gets 18-to-30-year-olds (used to be 18-24, but it's taking longer to get launched in life right now) motivated to go to the polls when they're otherwise "meh" about so many things they feel powerless to influence. That group favors equality by a much higher percentage (65% or more in many areas), and because many have grown up now with out gay friends, it's personal for them.

Obama doing this now could have a big effect on many primaries, in addition to the November election.

And he's done it!

http://www.towleroad.com/2012/05/preside…

He decided not to wait till after the election to do the right thing, but to make history as the first President - and also the first presidential candidate - to endorse marriage equality. Now we need to get behind him and make sure he wins.

Well, he did it: http://gma.yahoo.com/blogs/abc-blogs/pre…

President Obama declared for the first time on Wednesday that he supports same-sex marriage, putting the moral power of his presidency behind a social issue that continues to divide the country.

“At a certain point,” Mr. Obama said in an interview in the Cabinet Room at the White House with ABC’s Robin Roberts, “I’ve just concluded that for me personally, it is important for me to go ahead and affirm that I think same sex couples should be able to get married.” [NYT]

I'm all in...let's get to work re-electing this guy.

Fucking finally!