EQUAL RITES

Suze Orman’s Gonna Vote For Obama Because She Wants To Marry Her Girlfriend

Making an appearance on The View yesterday, Suze Orman said she would vote for Barack Obama over Mitt Romney because she wants to enjoy the legal and financial benefits of being married to her partner, Kathy Travis.

“It’s no secret that I am gay,” said the money maven. “So it is very difficult for me to look at any Republican nominee and go, ‘Oh, that’s who I want in office.’ Now I understand that President Obama isn’t necessarily for marriage and things, but I do believe that I have more of a chance” with Obama. “My social issue affects my financial issue,” Orman added. “If I die, my partner, K.T., is going to lose 50% of what I have, because we can’t be married.”

Photo via Freedom to Marry

Get Queerty Daily

Subscribe to Queerty for a daily dose of #kathytravis #marriageequality #suzeorman stories and more

25 Comments

  • Fitz

    Is she going to order the chicken because she feels like having a steak?
    Obama isn’t supporting gay marriage. Never has.

  • ron

    Obama will support gay marriage after he wins his second term.

  • hyhybt

    @Fitz: Sane people take the best of the available choices. The election is going to come down to Obama (who, though not so far officially supportive of marriage as such, is awful close in practice) and one of the Republicans who has promised to fight against us tooth and nail. The winner will also probably have the chance to make at least one Supreme Court appointment before they decide the marriage issue, assuming they do. Not to mention other issues; remember, the other side has promised to reinstate DADT, for example.

    Given that, which is better (or less worse, which is the same thing)? Obama or Generic Republican #12?

  • hyhybt

    Put another way, if you really want steak, but the options are chicken or boiled roaches, you go with the chicken.

  • Marie Cohn

    Whether it’s Romney or Obama, doesn’t matter: Girlfriend, you are DENIED!

  • wingfield

    I think Obama is cracking! I think as many people as he has met with… if he gets another four years he will only get more and more supportive of the gay community. Now he’s just gotta get some support from the other side which is not likely.

  • Kurt

    I support the President. I’m glad Suze is too. Love her financial advice. Am not ready to march in the street so millionaires can give millions tax free to their girlfriend.

  • erasure25

    Obama supports marriage equality, just not publicly. It doesn’t get him any new votes to do so whereas he could potentially lose votes. He will come out in favor of equality in his second term as the culmination of his “evolving” on the issue. That way he can deny that he made an abrupt change solely for political reasons. Pretty smart if you ask me.

  • jeff4justice

    I’d rather vote for a 100% pro-equality Green Party or Libertarian candidate over Obama who has the same position on marriage equality as Mitt Romney.

    As the Occupy and Tea Party movements have shown on both sides, people are tired of the corporately controlled establishment candidates. Voters are registering independent/decline to state in droves while the numbers are on the decline for the 2party system.

    It makes no sense why America is stuck on stupid with the 2party system. It’s an abuser-victim mentality where the victem is too afraid to leave.

    Nobama signs indefinite detention of Americans into law, he’s a warmonger, he appoints awful corporate insiders to important agencies, he and the Democrats wasted their time in power, he continues the drug war, and he’s not done much to protect the environment.

    Even liberals like Bill Marh, Cenk Uygur, Micheal Moore, Tavis Smiley, and Cornel West have been calling out Obama for his incompetency.

    Ron Paul is no LGBT ally but he’s not an anti-LGBT crusader. Jon Huntsman more or less has the same views as Obama on LGBT issues. The least damaging Republican nominee for LGBTs is Ron Paul or Jon Huntsman.

  • JD

    It doesn’t really matter if Obama supports gay marriage. It’s never going to happen without Congress, and thats very unlikely for the foreseeable future. The Supreme Court might make the decision for Congress, so a democrat President being in office to appoint the next judge helps our case.

  • pedro

    I’m no lover of Obama, but the three scenarios that force me to vote for him are 1. Repubs get a majority in the Senate and keep majority in the house, they pass a DADT reinstatement…Obama vetos, Romney signs…
    2. Though might be wishful thinking, Dems gain in the senate and regain control of house, pass a repeal of DOMA…Obama probably signs, Romney will definitely veto and
    3. Supreme court appointment comes up…Obama appoints more gay friendly justice…Romney appoints an Alito/Scalia/Thomas clone…we are fucked if marriage gets infront of that court! I have no choice but to vote the lesser of two evils…Obama is my only self-respecting choice.

  • Robert in NYC

    @jeff4justice: Really? Well, let me provide you with some information about Ron Paul. He believes in DOMA in states that have legislated for it. Under his absurd policies, we will NEVER have marriage equality in all 50 states let alone have DOMA repealed, even though his party supports marriage equality if states legislate for it. He can’t have it both ways. I’m a Green and I know my party will never make any inroads because this country isn’t ready for a third party, but I’m sure as hell not going to vote for my party come November because in doing so, it helps propel a homophobe into the White House who will wreak irreparable damage by appointing another right wing extremist to the Supreme Court sealing our fate forever. He also wants to repeal Roe v. Wade. Is that what you want? That’s what you’ll get if you sit this election out or worse, don’t support a democrat for re-election. I’m not exactly enthralled by some of the things Obama has done, but overall, he’s not our enemy. Nobody running for the presidency currently could win by publicly declaring support for marriage equality, that’s the reality of our system.

    As Pedro correctly says, republicans could easily take control of the senate and with that, you can kiss any equality legislation goodbye, not just for us but also for women. No thank you. Everyone must look at the larger picture.

  • Robert in NYC

    @jeff4justice: Really? Well, let me provide you with some information about Ron Paul. He believes in DOMA in states that have legislated for it. Under his absurd policies, we will NEVER have marriage equality in all 50 states let alone have DOMA repealed, even though his party supports marriage equality if states legislate for it. He can’t have it both ways. I’m a Green and I know my party will never make any inroads because this country isn’t ready for a third party, but I’m sure as hell not going to vote for my party come November because in doing so, it helps propel a homophobe into the White House who will wreak irreparable damage by appointing another right wing extremist to the Supreme Court sealing our fate forever. He also wants to repeal Roe v. Wade. Is that what you want? That’s what you’ll get if you sit this election out or worse, don’t support a democrat for re-election. I’m not exactly enthralled by some of the things Obama has done, but overall, he’s not our enemy. No Democrat or Green running for the presidency could win by publicly declaring support for marriage equality in the current political climate, that’s the reality of our system.

    As Pedro correctly says, republicans could easily take control of the senate and with that, you can kiss any equality legislation goodbye, not just for us but also for women. No thank you. Everyone must look at the larger picture.

  • Chuck

    Suze needs to use her financial guru platform to make the case that pro LGBT policies are good for business and good for America in general. Most Fortune 500 companies have LGBT inclusive policies because they know that the best and the brightest recruits would settle for nothing less. Gay people are talented! The reason you can be fired for being gay in most of America is because Republican politicians play to the lowest common denominator of scapegoating in order to get poor people to vote against their own economic interests by voting Republican.

  • redball

    @hyhybt: AWESOME :-)

  • Zee

    Finally Suze Orman says something that doesn’t make me want to tear my hair out. My whole opinion of her has changed.

  • Interesting

    I am not a fan of Obama, but between him and the GOP, on gay rights, its not a close call unless one is seriously got problems with reality. I mean- what do the GOP candidates have to do for gay Republicans to admit that they are crazy? For the record, I know there are so pro-gay rights Republicans. those people aren’t going to be the nominee.

  • Marco

    @Fitz:

    Actually, that not true. While a state senator in Illinois, Obama supported marriage equality. He was forced to alter his opinion to run for the presidency.

  • LandStander

    … There is always Nader …

  • wtf

    Wow. This changes my entire opinion of her. I love her candor, simple explanation and demeanor in this short clip. And to the dumba&*%s who keep saying, “Obama doesn’t support gay marriage either”…did you listen to the clip?? She said that. Keep up, idiots.

  • DW

    I don t get it..why would she lose 50% of her assets? Couldnt she leave it in her will?

  • DHW

    Im a bit ignorant to the issue…so why would she not be able to leave her all the assets in her will? Confused..

  • Hyhybt

    @DHW: @DW: Estate tax. If your worth is over a certain amount, the government takes a big chunk of that when you die before the rest passes on to your heirs. *Except* in the case of a spouse. Except federal law doesn’t recognize same-sex spouses.

  • Greg

    Suze Orman could solve this whole thing if she would dump some of her money into investment grade insurance. Then it WOULD pax to he life partner…tax free! All she needs to do is figure out how much to set aside to get under the limit.

Comments are closed.