[url=http://www.buzzfeed.com/mckaycoppins/jeb2016lgbtfriendly#.sayYYlmoAY]When Bush officially launches his presidential bid later this year, he will likely do so with a campaign manager who has urged the Republican Party to adopt a pro-gay agenda; a chief strategist who signed a Supreme Court amicus brief arguing for marriage equality in California; a longtime adviser who once encouraged her minister to stick to his guns in preaching equality for same-sex couples; and a communications director who is openly gay.
To an extent that would have been unthinkable in past elections, one of the leading candidates for the Republican presidential nomination has stocked his inner circle with advisers who are vocal proponents of gay rights. And while the Bush camp says his platform will not be shaped by his lieutenants’ personal beliefs, many in the monied, moderate, corporate wing of the GOP — including pragmatic donors, secular politicos, and other members of the establishment — are cheering the early hires as a sign that Bush will position himself as the gay-friendly Republican in the 2016 field.
[,,,]
At the same time last month, as Bush’s home state of Florida was hosting its first same-sex unions, he released a statement that was widely noted for its mollifying tone, urging “respect for the good people on all sides of the gay and lesbian marriage issue — including couples making lifetime commitments to each other… and those of us who believe marriage is a sacrament and want to safeguard religious liberty.”
If the statement seemed to represent a change of heart over the past two decades, it also reflected the political calculus of Bush’s message man, Mike Murphy. In a Time column just after the 2012 election, he wrote of the GOP’s electoral problems, “We repel younger voters, who are much more secular than their parents, with our opposition to same-sex marriage and our scolding tone on social issues.”
Excerpt from here[/url]
I thought that for every evangelical Christian fundamentalist there are probably some more liberal party members balancing things a bit out, and this article seems to prove it. Some Republicans seem to have understood that they're alienating possible voters with their stance on things like same-sex marriage, and that they have to acknowledge that times have changed, and so should their view on social policy. It's nice to see a less extreme Republican candidate, here's hoping that he will succeed. What does everyone else think, ia this a good sign, a half-hearted attempt in gaining votes or the wrong way for the Republican Party to go?
