2016 Election | Gay Marriage | Karl Rove | News

Karl Rove: 'I Could' Imagine a 2016 GOP Presidential Candidate Saying 'I am For Gay Marriage - VIDEO

Rove

Mediaite clipped this moment from a discussion on ABC News' This Week this morning.

“Karl Rove, can you imagine the next presidential campaign a Republican candidate saying flat out ‘I am for gay marriage,’” asked Stephanopoulos.

“I could,” said Rove, before turning the discussion back to the Supreme Court’s hearing on the issue.

Watch, AFTER THE JUMP...

Rove of course, was key to making same-sex marriage a wedge issue in the 2004 election by placing several measures to ban it on the ballot in key swing states.

More on this roundtable, if and when it becomes available.

Feed This post's comment feed

Comments

  1. It's like saying I'm for women's right to vote. Or African American should allow to be President of USA. By 2016, that's old news. If you have to be constantly playing catch up, might as well throw in the white towel now.

    Posted by: bambinoitaliano | Mar 24, 2013 12:17:51 PM


  2. If rove tells a candicate to say it - he (I can not image teabagistan accepting a woman) will say it. The "candidate" is nothing but a puppet for the like of rove and his buddies

    Posted by: Michael White | Mar 24, 2013 12:26:07 PM


  3. This constipated wind-bag's time is coming to an end slowly. Tick tock Karl......

    Posted by: nick | Mar 24, 2013 12:26:09 PM


  4. After two reasonable words, though, Rove goes back into nutcase mode. I can't conceive of it being 7-2 or 8-1 against. Justice Ginsberg's prior statements do make me just a little bit queasy, though.

    Posted by: Liam | Mar 24, 2013 12:28:21 PM


  5. I think more Republicans are willing to make these statements because by 2016 this will hopefully be a non-issue. They are seeing the inevitable come to happen as as much as it pains them they are finally swallowing their vitriol against it.

    Posted by: Mercedes | Mar 24, 2013 12:30:38 PM


  6. What I cannot imagine is Karl Rove having sex without paying for it.

    Posted by: Imagine | Mar 24, 2013 12:34:14 PM


  7. Yeah because Karl your party seems to have people bailing.

    Posted by: pardon me, but . . . . | Mar 24, 2013 12:46:00 PM


  8. The end of that clip reminded me of something. Until 10 months Obama opposed gay marriage, today he can't imagine a circumstance in which a gay marriage ban could be constitutional.

    Posted by: Zach | Mar 24, 2013 1:13:05 PM


  9. The end of that clip reminded me of something. Until 10 months Obama opposed gay marriage, today he can't imagine a circumstance in which a gay marriage ban could be constitutional.

    Posted by: Zach | Mar 24, 2013 1:13:06 PM


  10. Saying you're for gay marriage and acting in a way that supports gay marriage are not the same, the GOP candidates will say whatever they have to in order to be considered candidates but doing something other than talking about it is farther off than 2016, they'll be using the words they've always called i us in private.

    Posted by: lk | Mar 24, 2013 1:15:21 PM


  11. Gee, Karl. Nice of you to "imagine" such a thing. How about this: I imagine you and that other Republican reprobate Ken Mehlmann will waltz down the aisle together once marriage equality is the law of the land. You'll make a very nice couple.

    Posted by: jamal49 | Mar 24, 2013 1:23:04 PM


  12. What, like Portman who supports gay marriage, but only passively in a way that means he takes no real actual leadership on the issue?

    *blech*

    well, let's see what happens in three years. given the CPAC presence and the outpouring of "well, if I had a gay kid i still wouldnt' support gay marriage" comments from prominent republicans this seems hiiiiighly unlikely

    Posted by: Little Kiwi | Mar 24, 2013 1:23:11 PM


  13. this is one more nailin rove's coffin the right already distrusts him so the more statements like this the less effective he becomes

    Posted by: walter | Mar 24, 2013 2:00:15 PM


  14. @Little Kiwi: you nailed it. I've had many heated discussions as to why I was and am less than enthusiastic about Bob Portman's tepid endorsement of marriage equality. I still maintain that if his son had not been gay, Portman would be out there, trolling for evangelical votes, making scurrilous comments, as he has done in the past, against gay people in order to make political points with his Ohio Republican, evangelical "base"--those who elected him to the Senate because he was willing to skewer LGBT people over the coals. I can do without Bob Portman's suddenly becoming an "ally". With friends like Portman, who needs enemies?

    Posted by: jamal49 | Mar 24, 2013 2:41:38 PM


  15. ABC's This Week was totally lame... but for that one moment when Rove was forced to say, "I could (imagine a candidate supporting gay marriage)."

    Why Stephanopolis can't manage to say, MARRIAGE EQUALITY is beyond me. Nice that they gave George Will a wkend off, but then Rove instead. And Peggy Noonan who keeps harping on letting it be a process through the states (think Prop 8) with no push-back from the moderator. "How long should people wait? Is it right to deny equal benefits to children spouses today? What right are you willing to have voted on in a ballot box?"

    It's so easy, and yet they never ask. Could someone in TV production, please explain what I'm missing?

    Posted by: Pete N SFO | Mar 24, 2013 2:51:58 PM


  16. Yeah, well I can and have imagined Karl Rove perishing in a grease fire but I'm not holding my breath for that to happen either.

    Posted by: Caliban | Mar 24, 2013 3:11:30 PM


  17. Eventually I think that this will be a non-issue, as people have stated. It seems like a rift between fiscal conservatives and moral conservatives is starting to form...

    Posted by: MuscleModelBlog.com | Mar 24, 2013 3:13:11 PM


  18. Olivia Pope says TEN years. Does Chaney know something she doesn't?

    Posted by: Jerry | Mar 24, 2013 3:36:21 PM


  19. Karl Rove is so good at predicting the outcomes of things, isn't he?

    Posted by: Marc | Mar 24, 2013 9:59:07 PM


  20. They all read the polls, and they're not all nuts. Just jerks.

    They do whatever is expedient, like all politicians. Cheney actually took a stand in the early 90s, but only because Mary is his favorite kid.

    Posted by: Paul R | Mar 24, 2013 10:00:05 PM


  21. Rove is a totally amoral opportunists who will do and say anything to get the people he and his rich supporters want to see in office.

    Posted by: andrew | Mar 25, 2013 2:57:18 AM


  22. Like anybody cares about what this creep is capable of imagining.

    Posted by: Jack M | Mar 25, 2013 9:24:18 AM


  23. I can imagine a Republican candidate supporting marriage equality in 2016 too, just not the Republican *nominee*. Fred Karger already supported marriage equality in 2012, but he was blacklisted by pretty much everyone in the Republican party, and ignored by the media as well, even though he apparently had enough polling support to where he should have been looked at as a legitimate candidate. I still would have supported Obama over him, but it still wasn't right that he was ignored. It's pretty amazing that morons like Michelle Bachman and Rick Santorum were viewed as being more "legitimate".

    Posted by: Belar | Mar 25, 2013 10:51:29 AM


Post a comment







Trending


« «Atty General Kamala Harris: '50,000 Children in California...are Asking, Why Can't My Parents Be Married Too?' - VIDEO« «