Could Rob Portman still be a potential VP, now that he supports Gay Marriage?

[Link]

If Portman gets primaried, it's time to nuke the GOP once and for all.

Why?

So you were okay with the Iraq War but you want to "nuke" the GOP over gay marriage?!  No one ever died because they didn't get married.  There are plenty of decent people who support domestic partnerships and granting gay couples equivalent legal rights.  I personally wouldn't stand in the way of gay marriage, but I think "nuking" the GOP over something like primarying Portman is an odd place to draw the line.

I understand where Portman is coming from but he is basically saying if it is your kid who is gay tough.  Oops my kid is gay.  Guess I should accommodate him.  The end result is good but I wouldn't describe the initial process as the most noble.  What if his kid likes smoking weed now?  What if his kid likes going to prostitutes?  You have to have a better reason than, "my kid is doing it."

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

If the Supreme Court strikes down bans on homosexual marriage, Portman may have increased his VP chances. Unlike abortion, Supreme Court action would likely depoliticize the issue, so those who expressed support before the Court acts would not suffer major ostracism. While it would be enough to scuttle any chance of being the GOP's nominee in 2016, it would make him a possible VP choice for someone who is looking for a running mate to help with appealing to the middle as an example that not all Republicans are scary intolerant fanatics.

[Donerail]

Why can't the progressives out there understand that nature, Nature's God (ie The God of the Bible, the God of the Jew and Christian) , and Dan Quayle are on this issue. The left has admitted such.

God, an ent, and Dan Quayle walk into a bar...

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Why can't the progressives out there understand that nature, Nature's God (ie The God of the Bible, the God of the Jew and Christian) , and Dan Quayle are on this issue. The left has admitted such.

God, an ent, and Dan Quayle walk into a bar...

Does Quayle order potatoe vodkae?

[anvi]

No.  The only thing that could win back Ohio for the Pubs now is Obama-fatigue in another three and a half years.  Not Rob Portman's gay marriage decision. 

[TJ in Oregon]

If the Supreme Court strikes down bans on homosexual marriage, Portman may have increased his VP chances. Unlike abortion, Supreme Court action would likely depoliticize the issue, so those who expressed support before the Court acts would not suffer major ostracism. While it would be enough to scuttle any chance of being the GOP's nominee in 2016, it would make him a possible VP choice for someone who is looking for a running mate to help with appealing to the middle as an example that not all Republicans are scary intolerant fanatics.

I disagree with the bolded part Ernest. If the SC rules that banning same-sex marriage is a violation of the Equal Protection Clause, there will be a long, drawn out set of political battles about exactly what such a ruling would require. Issues such as those discussed in this thread will pop up continuously and the argument will be forever rehashed in the details. It will be quite different from abortion, however, in that there won't be a real attempt to overturn it by one of the two main parties. I'm not sure sure this issue will just disappear like that, although if it did that would be wonderful for the Republicans. I hope you're right though.

If Portman is primaried over this, it seems unlikely that his opponent will be credible. I doubt anyone in the Ohio GOP can make a real argument that Portman hasn't been a good senator or that they could be a better one (unless 80-year-old George Voinovich runs against him or something totally unforseen).

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

If the Supreme Court strikes down bans on homosexual marriage, Portman may have increased his VP chances. Unlike abortion, Supreme Court action would likely depoliticize the issue, so those who expressed support before the Court acts would not suffer major ostracism. While it would be enough to scuttle any chance of being the GOP's nominee in 2016, it would make him a possible VP choice for someone who is looking for a running mate to help with appealing to the middle as an example that not all Republicans are scary intolerant fanatics.

I disagree with the bolded part Ernest. If the SC rules that banning same-sex marriage is a violation of the Equal Protection Clause, there will be a long, drawn out set of political battles about exactly what such a ruling would require. Issues such as those discussed in this thread will pop up continuously and the argument will be forever rehashed in the details. It will be quite different from abortion, however, in that there won't be a real attempt to overturn it by one of the two main parties. I'm not sure sure this issue will just disappear like that, although if it did that would be wonderful for the Republicans. I hope you're right though.

It may take a few years to depoliticize it.  For instance, it probably will still be an issue in the 2014 election if the Supreme Court uses the DOMA case to strike down bans on same-sex civil marriage, but probably not by 2016, at least not at the Federal level.  And of course it will remain an example of judicial overreach to those opposed to such a decision, but only in a general sense, not something that sees it being politicized to the extent of abortion as an issue unto itself.

I will agree that the separate issue of to what extent the civil rights laws that intrude into private economic decisions that have been enacted under the commerce clause should be expanded to cover sexual orientation will likely remain politicized longer.  However, while related, that won't be dealt with by the courts, but the legislatures.

[Mister Mets]

It depends on the percentage of the population that supports gay marriage in 2016.

If it's the same as it is now, Portman will still be a VP contender, but his chances will be slightly lower.

It wouldn't be an issue for a Marco Rubio, since social conservatives mostly trust him.
It could be an issue for a Chris Christie, since he's a New Jersey Republican, so social conservatives won't trust him as easily (even though running as a pro-life anti-gay marriage Republican in New Jersey is a bigger deal than doing the same in Kentucky or South Dakota.)

If support for gay marriage continues to grow, Portman's chances will increase, because he was ahead of Hillary Clinton on the issue.