2012 Election | Barack Obama | Kelly Clarkson | Mitt Romney | News

Kelly Clarkson Voting Obama Because of Romney's Anti-Gay, Anti-Women Policies: VIDEO

Kelly Clarkson, who faced a firestorm of Twitter backlash last December after declaring her "love" for Ron Paul, won't be voting Republican this year, she told The Daily Star.

K_clarksonKelly, 30, closes her tour at London’s Wembley Arena on Saturday ahead of releasing her Greatest Hits – Chapter 1 album next month. But she can’t wait to get back to the States to move into her new home and catch up on the looming US presidental election.

Kelly added:

“I’ve been reading online about the debates and I’m probably going to vote for Obama again, even though I’m a Republican at heart. I can’t support Romney’s policies as I have a lot of gay friends and I don’t think it’s fair they can’t get married. I’m not a hardcore feminist but we can’t be going back to the 50s. Obama is a great guy. I’ve met him and I’m a fan of Michelle too. She has been busy promoting better education and healthy diets, which is something we could all use a dose of reality on.”

Clarkson released the lyric video for her new single "Catch My Breath" last week.

Catch it, AFTER THE JUMP...

Feed This post's comment feed


  1. What is Obama going to do about gay marriage? Nothing as far as I'm concerned. Obama has done nothing and will do nothing, mark my words.

    Obama is one of these guys who says symbolic things to get you to vote for him. Once he's in power, he does virtually nothing. Nothing, nothing, nothing.

    Posted by: jason | Oct 22, 2012 9:24:06 AM

  2. (ignoring Jason) So why is Kelly Clarkson still a "Republican at heart" if she doesn't like Romney's position on same-sex marriage? She's probably going to have to wait a while for a Republican presidential candidate who DOES support it. Sounds like an ill-informed voter to me.

    Posted by: ZENO | Oct 22, 2012 9:36:09 AM

  3. Jason, once again: and your alternative is what??? Romney, who wants to ban gay marriage nationwide?

    OBAMA/BIDEN 2012!!!

    Otherwise we're screwed.

    Posted by: Peter M. | Oct 22, 2012 9:38:10 AM

  4. Love Kelly but she seems a little confused.
    "I’ve been reading online about the debates and I’m probably going to vote for Obama again, even though I’m a Republican at heart."
    Pro-gay marriage.
    Pro-women's rights.
    Pro-education and healthcare.
    Taking all those things into account, which bits of Republicanism are left in that heart of hers?
    I wonder how many people feel the same way Kelly does, but for whatever reason, still identify as Republicans.
    I'm guessing Kelly's world-view represents the true majority.

    Posted by: Gareth | Oct 22, 2012 9:40:09 AM

  5. Good for her.

    Posted by: dattexas | Oct 22, 2012 9:40:57 AM

  6. Jason, he's publicly voiced support for gay marriage, and while it may not seem like much, he IS the first president to have done so. Many people are not ready to embrace it yet, so it's going to take baby steps for now, but at least the steps are being taken.

    As for ms. Clarkson, once again this points out the idiocy of the two party system. Here in the Netherlands I have the option of voting for a socially progressive but economically conservative party (VVD, they had a massive victory in the recent elections, their policies favor the wealthy and businessowners, but in the early 2000's they were among the parties that helped push through gay marriage, abortion rights, voluntary euthanasia and the semi-legalization of soft drugs),

    In a system with many parties they can be arranged on more lines than just Left vs Right, they can be religious vs secular, socialist vs capitalist, ecological vs industrious, it really makes the system much fairer and more interesting.

    Although I must admit forming a ruling coalition after elections can take forever, fail and sometimes lead to unfortunate compromises. However these compromises are still better than two parties having a tug-of-war, alternating every 4-8 years trying to undo everything the other parties last guy did.

    Posted by: Snownova | Oct 22, 2012 9:46:55 AM

  7. For those of you responding to Jason, you should know that he's not a real person. It's a fake persona created by a disturbed individual to cause havoc within blog message boards.

    Posted by: endo | Oct 22, 2012 9:56:11 AM

  8. Kelly Clarkson, the voice of reason? A pleasant surprise.

    Posted by: Jack M | Oct 22, 2012 10:11:19 AM

  9. Jason asks, "What is Obama going to do about gay marriage?"

    A) Should an equality bill reach his desk, Obama will not veto it, unlike Romney.

    B) Should a position on the Supreme Court open up, Obama will most likely seek to replace that judge with someone more favorable to equality issues than someone Romney would pick.

    Posted by: Dastius Krazitauc | Oct 22, 2012 10:14:45 AM

  10. I'm just asking myself what she means with 'I'm not a hardcore feminist'? That's as if black people would say 'I'm not a hardcore civil rights movement activist'. That's the same as saying 'Let's get back to the plantation and pick cotton again'. Feminism is about women's equality to men and not their superiority. Why do so many people, and especially women, still don't understand this? That woman is, I'm sorry to say, an idiot. The difference from other idiots is, that she is an idiot who surprisingly makes the right choice for once.

    Posted by: Bernadette | Oct 22, 2012 10:27:53 AM

  11. I admire Ms. Clarkson for having the guts to vote with her conscience, and not be swayed by the Party she belongs, and was more than probably, raised in.

    It is hard for a Republican, a TRUE REPUBLICAN, to find a voice these days, let alone to be fairly represented. A True Republican is not a homophobic, misogynist bigot. A True Republican does not lie in the name of a god to suit a Grover Norquist pledge, or to make sure that the greedy richest in this country make even more money, while the Middle Class becomes nothing but a fading memory.

    Like many Mormons, Catholics, heck, even Xenu-ists, who leave their faith because of religious organizations picking and choosing book passages to suit their financial and power purposes, these "defectors" still practice their faith with integrity outside of the gullible sheep majority. Ms. Clarkson still believes in her heart to being a Republican, but refuses to vote for the Party that besmirches said name.

    Posted by: Maguita | Oct 22, 2012 10:47:58 AM

  12. Glad to see some readers like Snowmova and Maguita see the nuances that others don't. Yes, it IS possible to still be a "true" Republican and vote Obama. It is sad that our national politics has been so divisive that people don't get there are people in the middle.

    Posted by: Josh | Oct 22, 2012 11:05:26 AM

  13. "Feminism is about women's equality to men and not their superiority."

    No, it is about empowering women at the expense of men whenever and however possible. It is also about regarding maleness and masculinity as "issues" that are the cause of most of the world's problems.

    It is fundamentally an anti-male ideology.

    And women are not inherently equal to men, by the way, either in terms of their ability to defend society or their ability to excel in certain critical fields that are essential to the advancement of humanity (i.e. the sciences and technology). So even that premise is a false one.

    Should everyone enjoy basic rights? Yes, but that is as far as "gender equality" should be allowed to go.

    Posted by: Rick | Oct 22, 2012 11:33:39 AM

  14. @Zeno...what makes her ill-informed? Your comments makes as much sense as a Sarah Palin soundbite.

    I wish that more Republicans would take a page from Kelly Clarkson's book...especially the sell-out Log Cabin Republicans. She is a republican at heart but has too much self-respect to vote for someone who would deny women and gays their rights. She strikes me as an informed voter and rational human being.

    Posted by: Michael | Oct 22, 2012 11:36:25 AM

  15. Why does voting for Obama help advance marriage equality? Simple. He will likely appoint the next Supreme Court judge if he wins.

    Posted by: Ken | Oct 22, 2012 11:48:09 AM

  16. "And women are not inherently equal to men, by the way, either in terms of their ability to defend society or their ability to excel in certain critical fields that are essential to the advancement of humanity (i.e. the sciences and technology)."

    Damn, you're going to believe this sh.t until the day you die.

    Posted by: Derrick from Philly | Oct 22, 2012 11:56:38 AM

  17. Jason - Even though I make it a point not to engage trolls, I must categorically disagree that Obama has only paid lip-service to gay marriage.

    First, he opposes DOMA and said it should be repealed in its entirety. DOMA keeps legally married same sex couples from receiving any of the federal benefits of marriage. Although DOMA is still being enforced because it's the law, the Justice Department doesn't have to defend challenges to it, and they aren't. In fact, the Justice Department has argued in court that gay people should be treated as a suspect class, which means they have been the target of systemic discrimination and that any legislation that directly or indirectly treats them negatively different from the rest of the population needs an almost impossibly high bar of defense. If the courts agree, it would be the single most powerful thing to happen for gay rights in the history of the entire world. Seriously, no exaggeration.

    Romney opposes same sex marriage. He fought Massachusetts' court ruling, tried to put it on the ballot, and dredged up an archaic 1913 state law to prevent out-of-state gays from marrying (while allowing out-of-state straights to marry). He thinks DOMA doesn't go far enough, and wants a Constitutional Amendment banning all gay marriages and repealing existing ones.

    But I suspect you already know all that.

    Posted by: Kevin_BGFH | Oct 22, 2012 12:37:29 PM

  18. Heigh-ho. @Michael - My point (admittedly, somewhat elliptically expressed) was that IF same-sex marriage is such an important issue to her that she would rather vote for Obama and Romney, and IF she were familiar with the Republican party's recent history as well as its current platform, she would not describe herself as "a Republican at heart." That's all.

    Posted by: ZENO | Oct 22, 2012 12:56:53 PM

  19. and, in the immortal word of Rick Perry, "Oops." I meant to say in my last post "she would rather vote for Obama THAN Romney". Not "Obama AND Romney". Anyone who votes for Obama AND Romney truly IS an ill-informed voter.

    Posted by: ZENO | Oct 22, 2012 12:59:13 PM

  20. Maguita: In a nutshell, you say that being a true Republican does not involve any of the major pieces of the current Republican party's platform.

    So what *is* a Republican then?!

    Posted by: redball | Oct 22, 2012 1:13:15 PM

  21. As a male, proud feminist I find Rick's words to be not only ignorant but misogynistic.

    Posted by: Eric | Oct 22, 2012 2:39:25 PM

  22. Bless her heart. Will someone please tell her she's a Democrat?

    Posted by: kw | Oct 22, 2012 3:04:35 PM

  23. I think what she could mean is that she may be for separating government interference in personal relationships and for more fiscally conservative policies. Thats a more purer republican ideal that what the current party is spouting, kind of like Small r versus big R.

    Posted by: law | Oct 22, 2012 3:12:09 PM

  24. @Redball: What Maguita and Clarkson seem to be talking about when they say "Republican" is "conservative", which is very different than the radically far-right, fiscally and politically regressive coalition of Conservatives that it has become.

    Conservation, the people, and the republic falls by the wayside, in favour of attracting all the people, ideas, and money that opposes the only other electable party. Much of the moderation ideology of the Democrats is adopted from conservatism in the first place, a funny thing called "progress".

    @Rick: Stop your personal projection of being threatened by femininity and women. Feminism is criticism of male privilege, inequality, and the real problems it has caused. While it has its flaws, it provides a basic framework for much of the civil rights developments since. It has little in common with your "anti-male" and countering "anti-female" strawmen.

    Your own premise of the basis for equality is false, since your criteria are personal ideals of masculinity, broadly generalized as ALL the vital physical and intellectual contributions of humanity. I hate to break it to you but there is a lot that women and femininity have and continue to contribute, despite the barriers that people like yourself would have put up again.

    It must be some ego boost that the game is stacked in your favour and no one around to trouble that pristine fantasy. Easy for you to set the limits of "basic" equality, when you assume that any loss of rights wouldn't include your own.

    Posted by: kerwot | Oct 22, 2012 4:43:00 PM

  25. Today's Republican party is far too influenced by the Tea Party. She can be a Republican at heart, meaning she's not a Tea fan.

    Posted by: Tim | Oct 22, 2012 5:29:26 PM

  26. 1 2 »

Post a comment


« «Obama Campaign Drops Foreign Policy Ad Ahead of Tonight's Debate: VIDEO« «