“For the money” is the only reason for Obama’s recent flip on gay marriage. In a financial sense, apparently it’s paying off:

A Democratic source told CNN Friday the Obama campaign raised $2 million dollars in donations in the 24 hours following the president’s announcement he personally supports same-sex marriage.

And of course Obama’s haul from the usual band of Hollywood hypocrites went through the roof as a result too.

However, file this under “fools and their money are soon parted,” because the White House has no intention of including gay marriage in the party platform.

Notice how it’s usually reported that Obama “personally” supports same sex marriage — as if he’s separating himself privately from the office he holds publicly (i.e. “the President isn’t officially in favor of SSM, but Barack Obama is”). There’s his weak “out” (if you’ll pardon the expression) for not demanding SSM be included in the party’s official platform.

That financial windfall comes at a price for Team Obama though, because 23% of independents are now less likely to vote for him in November. Regardless of any of this news, I remain 100% less likely to vote for him in November.

Comments

17 Responses to “Obama Gets $2 Million in Donations Within 24 Hours After Expressing Support for Same Sex Marriage”

  1. SignPainterGuy on May 12th, 2012 2:51 pm

    When you try to stand for everything your supporters want, you really don`t stand for anything.

    Since I didn`t vote for the Panderer-in-Chief before, I plan on not voting for him twice as much next time ! Isn`t the expression, "Vote early and often" ? Doesn`t that mean I can vote once FOR my candidates and once AGAINST theirs !?

  2. jeffythequick on May 12th, 2012 3:27 pm

    …in a related note, the President noted there are a lot of non-gay people in the country, and will call a news conference and state,
    "I am in full support of heterosexual marriage. The donation line forms over there!"

    There's something else he got… More solidarity from those that don't like him as wellL http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/po

  3. SignPainterGuy on May 12th, 2012 3:43 pm

    Yeah, I`ve now seen several stories of past supporters who are having difficulty supporting him now / don`t know if they`ll vote for him in Nov.

    Come on folks, this is who he is and always was; how can you possibly even consider voting for him, much less donating hard earned money ? (I know, "hard earned" is a subjective term)

  4. SignPainterGuy on May 12th, 2012 4:02 pm

    Zero`s "coming out" may have garnered him extra / renewed support among the usual suspects, but he is fast loosing it among foreigners who tend to take a dim view of the gay agenda !

  5. clu seatoe on May 12th, 2012 4:37 pm

    In campaign speak amounts of monies raised are always rounded up to the next seven digit number. However, in commercial ad speak seven digits only get you seconds of air time twice a day for less than a week. Ain’t no biggie. It was a mega looser for Zero all around because those who gave would have voted for him anyway.

    Clinton was right, this guy really is an amateur with no political sense at all and we’re watching him self destruct and throw it all away. In a way he reminds me of my dog; I can say the same words with different voice inflections and he will respond to the inflection rather than the word(s). That is how Zero responds but with Zero its lack of volume control on the voices and the self-check: “is the red light on can they see me, can they hear me?”

  6. Pasadena Phil on May 12th, 2012 6:04 pm

    So in the interest of capturing a handful of big donations from wealthy gay supporters, he blows off countless votes that were in the bag. Will $2 million be enough to replace those votes? It speaks volumes for how weak a candidate Romney truly is that he can't attract 60% of the vote running against this guy. It's like Meg Whitman running against Jerry Brown all over again..

  7. Marshall_Will on May 12th, 2012 8:58 pm

    Right, and because GM has been such a "hot button" issue for so many of us lately? Reminds more of when you bombed an entire class and were already on Mom's SL ( but manage to come up with some incredibly 'compassionate' act ) intended to deflect her ire.

    How very 'big' of you? Speaking, ADVANCE Mum's Day to all the Powerette Moms out there..! We can all share stories about how we're glad they decided to KEEP us..!

  8. clu seatoe on May 12th, 2012 9:48 pm

    Remember, it depends on the poll. The way the questions are worded, who is called, what part of the country is polled, time of day, number of those polled, attitude of the one doing the polling and even voice inflections.

    Poll the right people the right way and you can get whatever percentage you want. They can even stop the polling when they reach the percentages they want.

  9. Pasadena Phil on May 12th, 2012 10:48 pm

    You need to explain that to Juan Williams. Last Wednesday on Hannity. Michelle Malkin pointed out that 32 states have voted on gay marriage and 32 states have voted against it. Williams' counterargument was that it doesn't reflect how Americans feel because polls always show that more Americans (not a majority, a plurality) support gay marriage than are against it.

    Unfortunately for Williams, who doesn't seem to grasp how democracy works in America, it's voting that counts, not polling.

  10. jeffythequick on May 12th, 2012 11:03 pm

    There are many things that Juan Williams needs explained, and I think that one is pretty far down the list.

    Explaining the voting thing would be like explaining quantum physics to a goldfish.

  11. clu seatoe on May 13th, 2012 1:26 am

    For Williams and the rest of the left, if they say it LOUD ENOUGH and repeat it OFTEN ENOUGH, for them, it becomes TRUTH

  12. jeffythequick on May 13th, 2012 4:02 am

    The progs I talk with usually only do it once. Here are the rules I play by:

    1. If you say it, back it up.
    2. Telling me to look it up is not good enough. I won't do your work for you.
    3. The Constitution is living document in the way that it is alive as long as we follow it. It isn't a ball of Play-Doh you can make into anything you wish.
    4. He who calls names first loses.

    #4 usually hangs them.

  13. SignPainterGuy on May 13th, 2012 2:12 pm

    The libs here don`t "hang" up on the name-calling thing, so I ask them, "Is that all you got ?", "Is that the best you can do ?" or, "Can you try that again with facts you can prove ?"

  14. jeffythequick on May 13th, 2012 2:26 pm

    I just copy/paste what they put, and say, "you lose"

    usually it's followed by an eloquent "neener neener neener"

  15. SignPainterGuy on May 13th, 2012 3:35 pm

    It morphs into a "source bash" here. I only believe sources with a history of NOT insulting my intelligence, but those seem to be the very ones that offend the lefties the most and "must" be all lies. Their sources I wouldn`t believe if they said that water is wet !

  16. ChapBix on May 13th, 2012 8:37 pm

    "Regardless of any of this news, I remain 100% less likely to vote for him in November."

    That and Betty White's endorsement.

  17. Kwill on May 14th, 2012 2:21 pm

    He had better be really careful with this, because if people start to catch how he's going to betray that cause he'll find himself in the position that the Kommen foundation put themselves in a few months back with Planned Parenthood (hated by *both* sides of the issue).

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.