re: #274 iossarian

Well, I find it really hard to believe that there are people about to retire who would be both:

A) 30% worse off in net income under the Democrats and

B) in a low enough income bracket that they would be forced to eat saltines and spam as a result

But as a hypothetical I suppose it works.

Again, I know these are exaggerated. But my point is that to many, gay marriage is a fringe issue. I don’t think it is, you don’t think it is. But even to some that have no problem with gays marrying and would be happy to see it, the right to marry may seem fringe (and they may not even appreciate all the facts about what is entailed in that right).

a)Newt is pushing for a 0 cap gain rate, and democrats would like to see a 25% rate, so there is a 25% swing right there.

b) Stock market being as unpredictable as it is, I think people heading into retirement don’t feel all that secure.

re: #272 Obdicut

That isn’t a realistic scenario, though. No part of it. And there is benefit to him to having gay people get married.

It is realistic in the thought process. The numbers and impact are exaggerated. But if you think there aren’t many people who support gay marriage or at least do not oppose it but vote with their pocketbook for real and defensible reasons you are not being realistic.

By the way, what is the benefit to that hypothetical man of having gay people get married? How do you think that benefit ranks in the priorities of such a person.