and might do so again in 16 but I might support someone else, it all depends on who is running.

IYKWIM.

were trying to imply with the way it was reported. how she acted a certain way.

i didn't watch it but from those who did it seemed like the article was sexist .

it is coming up on All In. But what I have heard of it is nothing like what say Chris Christie has done at press conference after press conference with no such overwrought commentary. Of course it is sexist.

...if you haven't heard it yet.

I thought Hillary answered the question multiple times. The interviewer was being incredibly obtuse and annoying as hell.

TYY

almost Romney-like back and forth. I support her but exchanges like that should be avoided at all costs. I can tell she really really wants to be President but she should try to have more fun with it and adopt a more carefree attitude.

I obviously changed my mind as the arguments for marriage gained steam and also honestly as more LGBT organized and started giving their reasons. I don't even recall much push for marriage in 1996.

Hillary Clinton is a very smart women, and I don't believe she ever really was concerned with gay people getting married. However, her public persona once was. I assume many capitalistic Republican Party Leaders (Karl Rove for example) could care less about it, but give the religious right lip service as well to win the south. I assume that as gay marriage support goes over 60% in the next few years, mainstream Republican politicians will start "evolving" on this issue in the same way mainstream Democrats did in the past few years. Even if it is coming to the correct position, it is still an insincere way of doing this. I do believe that people of all political persuasions notice this with politicians. Almost all of leaders are insincere and poll followers in both parties, on most issues. This is not to pick on Hillary Clinton, because this is the way the entire system is. However, it is always disheartening to watch the political system's insincerity on an issue as personal as gay rights. It becomes clear when you notice how politician's positions follow the polls on an issue this personal, that there are few leaders in Washington and lots of poll watchers.

You mentioned how public opinion changed on this issue. That is correct and it has been a gradual change. However, the change happened almost overnight with the Democratic party when polls hit a certain level. When the polls were at 40%, almost no Democratic Party Leaders supported gay marriage. once the polls hit 50% almost every leader supported it. Almost every leader in the party changed their position within about a 2 year timespan. I assume this same change again will happen in a few years with the Republican Party (outside of some religious strongholds in the deep south) after the polls reach a higher threshold where they determine it is to their advantage to change their position. That's the problem. None of its genuine, and its obvious marketing appeal on issues that actually impact people's personal lives.

And the transcript does not convey the true meanings of what was being asked and answered. There was no yelling or even big disagreement.

... but I agree. If you can't change your mind, maybe it's broken.

not reality). Why believe in something that couldn't possibly happen in our lifetime right? (You have to remember this was coming off the heels of the Reagan era and the Falwell "moral majority&quot . Since then several of those same Gay men have fled to where it's legal to get married. Anyone see the moral to this story?

I think she always believed in marriage equality but, for political reasons, only recently felt able to say so.

Terry Gross simply tried to get Clinton to say whether she'd changed her position because she'd changed her mind, or, by implication, taken one position or the other for political reasons.

Clinton tried to sidestep by saying "America evolved." Gross stayed with it and Clinton took offense, denying that she'd either changed her mind OR made a political calculation in taking either of her opposing views.

She essentially claimed there was a "third way" to look at it.

You are posting a thread defending Hillary Clinton in the DU GD forum?

I AM shocked.

to change her view on Wall Street?

but it's weird that she won't just SAY so. Instead she was spinning like a top, trying not to be pinned down. What was up with that?

I agree with Hillary saying she evolved just as the country did. My own mother evolved in much the same way as Hillary described over the same period of time.

I do think Hillary needs to "practice" how to use humor to deflect these situations.

She did fine.

A Political Escape Hatch.

She could easily have said...

"Look I grew up in a region of the country that would disapprove of gay marriage. That REGION would be pretty much the ENTIRE country.

Over the years I think we've all evolved on this matter, as a country, and as a people.

I won't pretend it was easy for any of us, but as we evolved, we thought Civil Unions would be an appropriate compromise. And maybe for a time it seemed that way. But as time went on, and our friends and family expanded... that was no longer good enough.

And then we were forced to gaze upon just what "Marriage" is, or was...

And we realized that it was for two people that love each other, and are committed to each other.

And yeah... I too... have evolved...

Like the rest of the country."

Not as verbose but that's what she said.

And it was members of the GLBT forum on DU2 that convinced me.

They're trying to manufacture a story out of thin air. I would consider Martin O'Malley or Sherrod Brown, maybe Elizabeth Warren, but Brown and Warren aren't running and I doubt O'Malley can finance a serious national campaign. I will have no problem supporting HRC in the general election and most likely wind up backing her in the primaries.

I know that the media is obsessed with every word Hillary utters, but I don't see the big deal about this interview. This is as overblown as the time her voice cracked in New Hampshire and the media went bonkers claiming that she "cried".

Much ado about nothing.

Hillary or Bill.

The interviewer was trying to play gotcha.

Asking the question was ok the badgering after the answer was bs and Hillary responded in an appropriate matter.