Azriel James Ralph of The New Yorker parrots the progressive belief that gay marriage is inevitable, and therefore can't figure out why national political figures (of both major parties) are hesitant to endorse redefining marriage ... could it be because such support is indeed political "poison"?

...This week in Iowa – where same-sex marriage was legalized in 2009 – The National Organization for Marriage, a conservative group that opposes marriage equality, started running ads attacking Ron Paul for being the only GOP presidential candidate to support giving same-sex couples the right to marry. The ad notes that Paul said “sure” to same-sex marriage and calls this position “radical.”

Of course, Paul’s “sure” comment is not only radical when compared to the GOP field, but also to President Obama, whose views on the issue are apparently still “evolving.”

As support for gay rights has grown, Obama has attempted to perform an election year balancing act of appearing to be the equality candidate to supportive voters, without saying anything to alienate conservatives on a contentious cultural issue.

... unless Ron Paul wins the Republican nomination or Obama suddenly decides it is safe to say out loud exactly how his views on same-sex marriage have evolved, there is unlikely to be a presidential candidate in 2012 that has caught up with public opinion on the issue.