"For us to try to legislate federally into this area is probably the wrong way to go."
Now I realize several things: First, Mitt Romney wasn't even going to give lip-service to marriage equality, and would have presided over attempts to roll back the gains that have already been made. Second, we have a very good chance of passing true marriage equality here in Delaware next year, given the margins of victory the Democrats piled up.
But there is an important point to be made here: there is a distinct difference between passing marriage equality one state at a time and acknowledging that marriage equality is a Constitutional right.
Mr. Obama has just shown that his support of marriage equality during the campaign was more likely than not an opportunistic response to the hole VP Biden put him in rather than a profound personal evolution on the subject.
There was only one candidate on the ballot across the nation who made a point of saying--in every stump speech--that marriage equality is a Constitution right.
That was Governor Gary Johnson.
I am used to responses I know I will get from Obama supporters (who say them to me even when they don't write them here): Romney would have been worse. I'm not a single-issue voter. Gary Johnson could not have gotten elected anyway.
But please remember that this past election cycle in Delaware ONLY the Libertarian Party of Delaware put marriage equality into its platform. Only the Libertarian Party of Delaware candidates spent hours at the Delaware State Fair collecting signatures for the marriage equality petition drive. Individual Democratic candidates (Pete Schwarzkopf, who answered the question fully and frankly when I put it to him) were straight-up about their support, but many were quite squishy.
Remember that when there are votes in the General Assembly next year.
Without Libertarians this year, it would have taken longer.