Scott Stringer (left) and Terry Richardson (via terrysdiary.com)

Manhattan Borough President Scott Stringer is a busy guy--dealing with the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy and gearing up for the 2013 mayoral race--he's considered among the frontrunners to succeed Michael Bloomberg. But there's always time for a quick photo op.

Fashion photographer Terry Richardson (who's worked with the likes of Harper's Bazaar and GQ, with infamous shoots including the Glee stars "Gone Wild" and model Kate Upton licking a popsicle) posted a photo to his blog of himself and the Beep; Mr. Richardson gives his usual thumbs-up, while Mr. Stringer looks composed.

The connection between these two unlikely pals--besides celebrity? (Mr. Stringer's other supporters include Scarlett Johansson, who's hosted fundraisers for him.) Mr. Stringer's press secretary, recent Vogue profile-ee Audrey Gelman, is dating Mr. Richardson, as first reported by The Observer.

Given that one of Mr. Richardson's favorite gambits is to make subjects try on his oversized glasses, we'll be waiting eagerly for any future photos.

Democratic congressional hopeful Hakeem Jeffries. (Photo by Gray Hamner)

If you were wandering down Fulton Street between Washington Avenue and St. James Place in the Brooklyn neighborhood of Clinton Hill starving and with $3.50 to spend, you might stroll into trendy taqueria Cochinita and exchange it for a pork shoulder taco heaping with pickled onions. A couple of doors down, for the same price, Brooklyn Victory Garden would sell you a bagel slathered with “faux gras” (or, walnut lentil pâté—not that you didn’t know). Where you could not spend that small wad of dollars is the vacant storefront of Joloff, a shuttered Senegalese restaurant that, after 17 years in this location, has recently been nudged out and relocated deep in Bed Stuy.

Also nestled in this block of Fulton is the small campaign headquarters for Democratic congressional hopeful Hakeem Jeffries. On a visit last Sunday, The Observer found an array of frantic, fresh-faced college and high school students, typing away on brought-from-home MacBooks, noshing on tacos from the aforementioned Cochinita, and phone banking furiously. It is an odd (or perhaps perfectly fitting) place for an ideological battle to land: in a neighborhood newly defined by hastening gentrification, the race that has emerged is between an old-guard, ultra-left black Brooklyn politician and a young moderate, modern coalition-builder who has fairly painlessly raised $700,000.

That afternoon, the campaign office—staffed by living symbols of the population change—was in a fever pitch. Ten young volunteers circled a table with campaign-issued, pay-as-you-go cell phones, calling voters to politely remind them of today's primary.

The staff had been so busy for the past week that a copious bouquet sat wilting high above the office on a bookshelf, completely forgotten.

The Observer approached Eliza Schultz, an 18-year-old Johns Hopkins student pursuing international studies and public health, who was organizing a massive sandwich order for poll workers volunteering on primary day. As a sophomore in high school, Ms. Schultz had traveled to State College, Pa., for a week and volunteered on the Obama campaign, an experience she described as, “super exciting.” We asked her about the makeup of the regular volunteers in Mr. Jeffries’s office.

“It’s similar [to the Obama campaign volunteers. Most people you see coming in here are a certain age—a lot of us are in college, a lot from high school,” she said, shifting her weight in her wooden Swedish Hasbeens clog-sandals, favored by Sarah Jessica Parker and Maggie Gyllenhaal.

“It’s really amazing how many people were pulled from Uptown Manhattan [to come volunteer]. When I worked on the Obama campaign, we saw that, too. It’s amazing how many people have been pulled from all over the place. So many people come in from Westchester everyday. [Hakeem] has that same pull,” she said.

Indeed, for those whose first political solid food was the Obama run—or even those too young then to participate—the Jeffries run has provided a little bit of that old hope-and-change magic. Young and younger, they have flocked to Fulton Street for the latest hip political campaign to appeal to self-identifying locavores and proud public-radio supporters.

Andre Richardson, field director for the campaign, and Lauren Bierman, the campaign manager, emphasized that the volunteer base is broad and diverse and noted that there has been a unique word of mouth element to the high number of young volunteers.

“A lot of college students are here because they want to be involved ... Recruitment has come from word of mouth, and a lot of them bring their friends along,” Mr. Richardson said.

Ms. Bierman agreed, “If they hear about us, they bring their friends.”

Among the volunteers were several graduates or attendees from top-tier schools—Columbia, Brown, Yale and three of the campaign volunteers went to the tony St. Ann’s school in Brooklyn Heights together.

In a corner of the office, 19-year-old Emma Janger moved from task to task in her blue sundress with precision and assertiveness, dispensing instructions on how to purchase more cell phones for today's intense phone banking and juggling other tasks as we chatted. She’s involved with the College Democrats at Yale, where she will be a sophomore in the fall, and is currently living with her parents in Brooklyn Heights.
After she graduates, Ms. Janger says she wants to pursue politics, though she’s not sure in what capacity yet—all she knows is she’s going to buck the trend of her Boomerang Generation. “I love Brooklyn, there’s no reason not to be here—anything I want to do I can do it here ... It’s a debate with my parents right now. I do want to return, but I refuse to move home.” (She’s got a bit of Girls’s Hannah Horvath in her.)

A truly seasoned campaign volunteer, Tiffany Bryant, had set up shop in the back of the office, where we spoke. Ms. Bryant, since she graduated with a degree in political science from Columbia in 2008, has held a series of research and policy jobs. The Obama campaign was her first, and she made a point to do her volunteering in a swing state.

“Senior year of college, I [volunteered for Obama] in Pennsylvania and Ohio and then spent the summer and election in Florida, in Broward County. After 2000, I said, I have to be in Florida for 2008,” she said. “It was very exciting to be in a swing state for the election.”

Brendan Flynn, a Gowanus resident with side-swept bangs, is studying political science at the CUNY Graduate Center and working on his dissertation (the subject: “agriculture policy, sort of?”) and leading a fantasy basketball league (the most hipster of all fantasy sports endeavors), when he’s not spending eight-hour days at the Jeffries office coordinating volunteers. Mr. Flynn told us he too worked on the Obama campaign, canvassing in Philadelphia on election day.

It is not just these young people who note the similarities to Mr. Obama’s run. The Wall Street Journal, New York Magazine, The New York Daily News and The Washington Post, to name just a few outlets, have also drawn comparisons. Perhaps the connective tissue is reductive (one Jeffries volunteer winced when we suggested the comparison, noting that these comparisons are only made for politicians of color or female politicians), but bear with us: both attended and excelled at law school (Obama at Harvard, Jeffries at NYU), did time as associates at white-shoe law firms, ultimately left the lucrative private sector for the public one to work on issues of importance in ultra-local politics, and both are family men with two young children. And though he and his handlers downplay this comparison, Mr. Jeffries accepted the president’s tacit support, posing for a photo-op with the him at the Waldorf, and conceded to The Washington Post (in an article headlined: “Hakeem Jeffries: Brooklyn’s Barack Obama?”) that, yes, he and Mr. Obama share a birthday.

In the run up to the 2008 election, Steve Hildebrand, deputy national campaign director of Obama’s first run, told the Boston Globe that not only did the campaign see young people being galvanized to vote (66 percent of voters under 30 would end up casting their ballots for Obama), but unprecedented numbers of people volunteered. “Millions of Americans who haven’t been involved in a political campaign ever in their lifetimes [became] very active,” he said, estimating that it was the first time for 70 percent of their two million grassroots volunteers.

Jumping into such a campaign, especially one with eventual national ramifications and featuring a star candidate, no doubt also contributed to the constellation of helpers in the room.

This is volunteer Steve Kung’s first campaign, and he came looking for that excitement. The 22-year-old, who graduated in May from Brown with a degree in history, is still looking for a job.
What kind, we wondered?

“I’m not exactly sure. I’m casting my net pretty wide because of the economy, but I’m willing to lend my hand to this” in the meantime, he said. Asked why he chose this campaign, Mr. Kung said it had a reputation. “Apparently it’s supposed to be really intense and heated, one of the most intense primary races in New York City,” he said.

Chloe Shanklin, 19, another first-time campaigner, sported hot pink shorts as she worked on a laptop, tapping her white boat shoes anxiously as we spoke. (She had things to do.) On the advice from a professor, she joined up. “I thought I’d try something new and ended up loving it and sticking with it,” she said.

Ms. Shanklin is taking a semester off from Hamilton, but the experience has shaped her interests. “Last semester I thought biology, now I’m thinking something on the politics end. It’s changed my viewpoint. Being involved is great and it’s something I want to keep doing,” she said.

Exactly zero of the above young supporters live in Mr. Jeffries’s district—but given the prevailing trends, they might just end up there soon.

There is a very real demographic creep happening in the district, and it’s not just anecdotal. A recent article by education analyst Michael J. Petrilli named 11238, the zip code in which the Jeffries HQ is squarely located, one of the fasting gentrifying neighborhoods in the country, with a “change in white share” of 21.5 percent between 2000 and 2010.

Nevertheless the 8th district remains hugely diverse, with mostly white neighborhoods in north and south Brooklyn (Coney Island, Brighton Beach and the gentrification centers Ft. Greene, Clinton Hill and Prospect Heights) and a middle containing Bed Stuy and East New York—primarily black neighborhoods thought to be strongholds for his opponent Charles Barron. (The district is 53 percent black.)

It’s been a weird journey, this campaign. After the long-term congressman for the district, Ed Towns, unexpectedly dropped out of the race, it was suddenly wide open. An endorsement war followed (Mr. Towns, the powerful DC37 municipal union and former klansman David Duke endorsing Mr. Barron; Sen. Chuck Schumer, Gov. Andrew Cuomo and most every other union or politician who matters endorsing Mr. Jeffries), and despite Mr. Jeffries’s legislative accomplishments, star power and 10-times-greater fundraising cache, some began to worry that Mr. Barron was “surging,” as The New York Times put it.

The Jeffries campaign has publicly denied being worried, though the candidate did note in an interview that Mr. Barron had “morphed into an establishment candidate.”

Many agree today's primary election will hinge on voter turnout, which could well depend on Mr. Jeffries’s small army of young supporters.

A fact they no doubt had in mind Monday evening as they handed flyers to commuters disembarking the C train at the Clinton-Washington stop—many new residents in the neighborhood themselves.

lgriffin@observer.com

Illustration: Jason Seiler

“One thing about smart cars, there’s no room for error,” Rabbi Shmuley Boteach said as he piloted his 99-inch-long convertible along 10th Avenue. “I’m a little person, I like little things,” he said cheerily.

Mr. Boteach took directions from a GPS system as we zipped across Manhattan to the Lincoln Tunnel last week. Our window was at bumper level with the surrounding traffic as the rabbi made the sharp turns and tight maneuvers required for escaping Midtown. Wearing a Bluetooth headset and juggling a pair of cell phones to maximize his multitasking, Mr. Boteach said he often takes calls on the move. When he’s not driving, he opts for a much larger headset that offers better reception.

“It’s military grade,” Mr. Boteach tells us. “It’s like a landline.”

Always a busy man, the rabbi balances his career as a widely published author and Oprah-approved spiritual guru with a family of nine children and the daily demands of religious worship.

Now he’s running for Congress.

Despite the harried schedule, he managed to squeeze in (given the dimensions of his ride, somewhat literally) an interview with The Observer en route from a Torah study session with a friend in Midtown Manhattan to a meeting of the Bergen County Republicans, where he was scheduled to make a speech.

Like the car, Mr. Boteach may be little, but his aspirations—and his public profile—are anything but.

“I feel no matter what I’m doing, it’s not enough,” he said. “I mean, I think my experience of the campaign so far, and maybe it’ll change as I go more deeply into it, I feel, thus far, that a campaign is an experience of permanent inadequacy.”

Some of Mr. Boteach’s anxiety comes from the fact his congressional campaign is an uphill battle against a pair of Democratic incumbents in a district that’s already favorable toward Democrats. The new legislative lines drawn for Mr. Boteach’s district left a pair of veteran congressman, Steve Rothman and Bill Pascrell, battling for the Democratic nomination there.

He reported getting “maybe five” hours of sleep a night these days, but the stress of campaigning as an upstart is keeping him up at least a bit. Mr. Boteach, who manages to make time for worship by scheduling late-night Torah study sessions with his family, described running as an isolating and anxious experience that has deepened his need for a connection with a higher power.

“I feel I need God more, not to win, but just to remain who I am and to feel grounded and centered. I think that the whole process can be very dislocating, I’m studying more Torah, I’m studying with my kids almost everyday—late, a little bit too late, when I finish what I have to do,” Mr. Boteach explained. “If anything, I feel that my religion gives me strength through an arduous process.”

So far, however, Mr. Boteach looks set to grab the Republican nomination in his race. He secured the party’s line on the ballot by earning the backing of local parties in two out of the ninth district’s three counties. In Democratic circles, they’re focused on the heated primary between Mr. Rothman and Mr. Pascrell, but sources speculate Mr. Boteach may earn stronger-than-usual support than conservatives generally do in the district, thanks to his high profile.

Running on the slogan “The Values Voice,” he says his congressional bid is an effort to focus political discourse on core religious values rather than the divisive social issues that have come to characterize religious conservatives in this country. Specifically, he hopes to strengthen the institution of marriage by making family counseling tax deductible.

But unlike many of his fellow Republicans, Mr. Boteach doesn’t believe the institution of marriage can be bolstered by preventing gays from getting married or regulating contraception.

“Everybody wants values in their lives, everybody wants to raise their kids with values, everyone wants a more values-laden nation. But for some reason, we can’t have a serious conversation about the values of religion in America without it being hijacked yet again by contraception, abortion and this stuff never goes away,” Mr. Boteach said. “I mean, you have to say, it’s kind of infantile that we can’t talk about anything else and I think it’s very harmful to the country.”

Though he recognizes the Old Testament admonishments against homosexuality, Mr. Boteach believes there’s no religious reason for vehemently opposing gay rights.

“The Bible definitely refers to gay sex as an abomination and, yet, the word ‘abomination’ appears 103 times in the Hebrew Bible. It appears twice with regards to homosexuality, it appears with eating lobster, it appears with bringing a blemished sacrifice on God’s holy altar,” he went on. “I’m wondering why we chose these two verses to the exclusion of all others as the red line of morality in America.”

He clearly differs from many Republicans on social issues, but Mr. Boteach says the party’s stance on foreign policy attracted him to the GOP.

“What attracted me to the Republican Party, first and foremost, was the foreign policy of George W. Bush,” Mr. Boteach said. “I felt that he was holding tyrants accountable for slaughtering their people. I believe that mankind’s first moral obligation in this era we live in is to stop genocide.”

Bucking the party line has been a theme throughout Mr. Boteach’s career. He got his start at Oxford, where he was sent by Rebbe Menachem Mendel Schneerson, the late leader of the Chabad Lubavitch movement, to serve as a rabbi at the prestigious university. While at Oxford, Mr. Boteach began making a name for himself by founding an organization called the L’Chaim House and booking high-profile speakers to the group’s events including Boy George and Argentine soccer legend Diego Maradona. He eventually ran afoul of the Chabad establishment because his group and its big-name speakers attracted a large contingent of non-Jewish members. At one point, he also named a black, Baptist Rhodes scholar from New Jersey to be the group’s president. The final straw came in 1994, when Mr. Boteach invited Yitzhak Rabin to speak to L’Chaim House and he was subsequently relieved of his post by Chabad.

Mr. Boteach’s time at Chabad also included another theme that has become a common element in his career—questions over his charitable fund-raising. After his break with Chabad, L’Chaim House was able to stand on its own thanks to Mr. Boteach’s prodigious fund-raising ability, but questions were raised in 1999 when England’s charity commission investigated the group’s payments for a mortgage on the North London home where he lived. Mr. Boteach says the British investigation was a “simple dispute” over whether donors to his group would have to pay taxes on their contributions to the home.

“What happened in England is a simple thing,” Mr. Boteach said. “It was only a tax question. That was the only question—did they have to pay tax on it or not, people who contributed to the house, did they have to pay tax?” (The issue was subsequently resolved with Mr. Boteach being cleared.)

Another persistent theme throughout Mr. Boteach’s career has been his connections to famous and powerful allies who have propelled his rise. Mr. Boteach’s career in Chabad was advanced with the express personal blessing of Rebbe Schneerson, who is regarded as a messiah by many believers. Once at Oxford, his group rode its roster of high-profile guests to the spotlight. In 1999, Mr. Boteach made his biggest celebrity connection, none other than the “King of Pop” himself, Michael Jackson. Mr. Boteach said they first met at the home of another one of the rabbi’s friends, the star psychic, Uri Geller.

Mr. Boteach worked closely with Mr. Jackson on his Heal the Kids charity and became a spiritual adviser to the singer. Mr. Boteach’s connections to Mr. Jackson went a long way toward raising the rabbi’s profile. Three months after the singer’s death, Mr. Boteach released an account of their conversations together in book form.

His association with Mr. Jackson also led to questions about their work together in 2004, when former Fox News show business reporter Roger Friedman pointed out donations to Mr. Jackson’s charities went through the L’Chaim Society, an organization run by Mr. Boteach. Mr. Friedman questioned whether donors to Jackson, such as Denise Rich, who gave $100,000, realized their money was going to Mr. Boteach rather than to the singer. Through a spokesman, Ms. Rich declined to comment for this article. Mr. Boteach maintains Mr. Friedman, who was fired from Fox News in 2009 for publishing a review based on a leaked copy of the 20th Century Fox film X-Men Origins: Wolverine, criticized his charitable work with Mr. Jackson due to his bias against the singer.

“Roger Friedman is the foremost Michael Jackson hater on planet earth. He was fired by Fox News for being an unscrupulous reporter,” Mr. Boteach said. “There isn’t a character, a scintilla, a letter of what he wrote that is true.”

Though he and Michael Jackson ended their association in the early part of last decade, the notoriety he gained through his work with the singer propelled Mr. Boteach to new heights. He became a regular contributor on Oprah and spent two seasons hosting a TLC reality show focused on his efforts counseling troubled families.

Mr. Boteach currently runs a charity called This World—The Jewish Values Network. According to its website, This World’s mission is to “bring Jewish values to the mainstream culture via the mass media.” Both the New York Daily News and The Forward, a daily paper that’s widely read in religious Jewish circles, have raised questions about This World’s finances. The organization, which is based at Mr. Boteach’s home in Englewood, N.J., spends almost all of its budget on expenses and some of that money goes to Mr. Boteach, who receives a six-figure salary from the organization, and his wife, who also draws a paycheck from This World. According to the most recent numbers publicly available through the State of New Jersey, This World raised $651,121 in 2009 and spent all but $13,766 of that revenue on expenses.

Mr. Boteach insisted he and his wife are paid fairly for their efforts on This World’s behalf.

“I was paid $150,000 last year, my wife gets a salary of 40. She works full time, she does all the books she prepares all the Shabbat dinners, she’s a full-time administrator, full-time secretary,” Mr. Boteach said. “I raise all the organization’s money. I write all of its publications. I publish all of its books. I get world-famous speakers, my friends, constantly to do events for us.”

AS HE HAS IN HIS PAST PURSUITS, Mr. Boteach is hoping his connections to some big names in the political world help his congressional ambitions. Fittingly, for a man who’s campaigning as a nontraditional Republican, his closest political confidantes are unexpectedly bipartisan—Democratic Newark Mayor Cory Booker and Republican House Minority Leader Eric Cantor. Mr. Booker, almost inarguably the most visible Democrat in New Jersey, is the former Rhodes scholar Mr. Boteach made president of the L’Chaim Society at Oxford. He also now serves on the board of governors of This World.

Mr. Boteach has reportedly asked Mr. Booker not to make any endorsements in his congressional race. However, Mr. Boteach denies discussing the endorsement issue with Mr. Booker, saying he wouldn’t put his friend in a position “where he was forced to choose between his party … and our friendship.”

“I’m not asking him to stay out. Cory and I have talked a great deal about the race. I would never,” Mr. Boteach said. “It’s more than a friendship, he’s like a brother to me. Ours is an intense, intimate, very unique friendship that has had so much history. I mean Cory, he and I have studied Judaism for thousands of hours together.”

Mr. Boteach got to know Mr. Cantor later in life. He said he met the GOP’s top congressman when they were both in Israel at the same time and Mr. Cantor agreed to speak to a Birthright group Mr. Boteach was touring through the Holy Land. Since then, the rabbi said they regularly meet for Torah study. Mr. Cantor’s political action committee, ERICPAC, which stands for “Every Republican Is Crucial,” gave the maximum $5,000 donation to Mr. Boteach’s campaign. Mr. Boteach said Mr. Cantor’s support for him hasn’t only been monetary.

“Eric Cantor is a man of real humility and friendship. It’s amazing how much time he has given me, how much guidance,” Mr. Boteach said. “I’m not talking about politics, I’m talking about life.”

Neither Mr. Booker or Mr. Cantor responded to requests to comment for this story.

Mr. Boteach regularly touts his big-name buddies, but support from lesser known sources—his wife, Debbie, and their nine children (ages 3 to 23)—will likely be even more instrumental to his congressional bid. Mr. Boteach’s campaign is a family affair. At their father’s speech in Bergen County, Mr. Boteach’s oldest son, Mendy, manned a video camera while two of his eldest daughters kept tabs on their younger siblings.

On stage at the event, Mr. Boteach stuck to his theme of focusing on a discussion of traditional values rather than social issues.

“Our party is supposed to be a party that doesn’t bash gays, but that promotes marriage,” Mr. Boteach said. Our party is supposed to be a party that isn’t seen to just deny what a woman’s choice would be, but to encourage the respect of a man toward a woman so she’s never forced into that decision as to whether she’d have an abortion or not, because she’s married to a guy who’ll support her and wants to raise children with her and will create a family with her. Where is the positive articulation of our beliefs?”

After the speech, Mr. Boteach took his wife and children out for a meal. At home, the Boteachs organize their family Torah study sessions and meals by staying in touch on an intercom system that operates throughout their home. On the road, mobilizing the entire clan is a complex endeavor that involves a convoy of three cars and regular cell phone calls back and forth. On the night of the speech, the family ran into a road block because it was past closing time at the first two area kosher restaurants they tried to visit. Eventually, they settled on an agreeable Chinese restaurant.

Before they arrived at their destination, Mr. Boteach saw someone he knew in the street and called for the family motorcade to halt. It was the principal of the Hebrew Day School where his young son, Yosef, is enrolled.

“Yosef says he doesn’t have to do homework, because his dad’s running for Congress,” the principal said.

Shmuley laughed.

“I’ll have to talk with him about that,” the rabbi said earnestly.

hwalker@observer.com

The card showed Mr. Cooper and Robert Cooper, his domestic partner of 27 years, and the couple’s five adopted children. (Robert Cooper changed his last name when the couple adopted their first child 25 years ago.)

“He told me how beautiful my family looked, and I said to him that I hoped that if you decide to run for president that you will remain a strong and consistent advocate for gay rights and for gay marriage,” Mr. Cooper recalled.

The president, he said, looked him straight in the eye, put a hand on his shoulder and said, “Jon, we will get there together.”

“It sent a chill down my spine,” Mr. Cooper said. “This guy gets equal rights for gays. Of course he is a supporter of same-sex marriage.”

Mr. Cooper became the first elected official in New York to endorse Mr. Obama’s White House bid, served as the Long Island campaign chair in 2008, and was named an “Obama Victory Trustee” this year, tasked with raising at least $100,000 for the president’s re-election effort.

He married his partner in 2009, in Connecticut, a few months after same-sex marriage was legalized there.
But now he wishes that his fellow advocates for marriage equality would just lay off the matter for a little while.

“I’ve probably met the president 15 times, Mr. Cooper said. “And I happen to believe that personally Barack does support same-sex marriage. But whether he should come out—excuse the expression—and express public support for it is another matter.”

Mr. Cooper’s stance puts him at odds with major gay rights groups, especially the Freedom to Marry Coalition, which, in addition to gearing up for five state referenda across the country on the issue this November, embarked earlier this year on a quixotic quest: to get the Democratic Party to include support for full marriage rights into the party platform that will be introduced and voted upon in at September’s Democratic National Convention in Charlotte.

Of course, it has been a long time since anyone read, let along fought over the contents of a party platform. Instead, party platforms have become much like the conventions themselves—slicked up media narratives designed to be as bland as possible for an increasingly diminishing audience of party regulars. And once the convention is over, they are largely forgotten. Even off-handed comments made before a hot microphone get more attention than these supposed documents of party priorities.

Occasionally, scuffles will break out, but it has been a while. In 1992, a minor uproar took place on the Republican side of the aisle when a group of pro-choice delegates tried to tone down some of the platform’s harsh language on abortion rights, but they were quickly dismissed by the officials from the George H.W. Bush White House. On the Democratic side, you have to go all the way to the 1980 convention—when Ted Kennedy pushed for a health-care-for-all plank—to find the last major platform fight, according to Alice Germond, the long-time secretary to the Democratic National Committee.

“It is a statement of who we are, what our beliefs are, and how we will address national problems,” Ms. Germond said. “But to be honest with you, I don’t think there are that many Americans who will be waking up at 4:30 in the morning to find out what our party platform is.”

For Evan Wolfson, the executive director of Freedom to Marry, the platform push is an effort to codify what the Democratic Party implicitly believes about same sex marriage.

“This is where the majority of Democrats are, and it’s where the majority of independents are, and it speaks to the values that the party historically embraces,” he said. “Because we believe it is the right thing to do, and happily, the right thing to do politically, we stepped forward to put the party firmly on record with where the majority of the party already is.”

For Mr. Wolfson, Mr. Obama is already a de facto supporter of same-sex marriage—he noted that the president has already ordered the federal government not to defend the Defense of Marriage Act, has called on Congress and the courts to overturn the law and has opposed state efforts to enshrine antigay marriage laws in their constitutions. Last year, he notes, Mr. Obama told supporters at an LGBT fund-raiser that “I believe that gay couples deserve the same legal rights as every other couple in this country.” And then throw in the fact that at a pair of fund-raisers in New York this month, First Lady Michelle Obama told supporters that a Supreme Court heavy with Obama-appointed justices would permit their children to “love whomever they choose.”

“Has the president connected the dots between what he has said and what follows from it?” Mr. Wolfson said. “That is what we are calling for. But if he has affirmed the bedrock principle that gay couples deserve the same legal rights as every other couple—well, ‘every other legal right’ is the right to marry.”

At first, members of President Obama’s campaign scoffed at the effort, although part of their dismissal sounded like they simply resented being pressured on the issue from supposed allies. Now, however, there are signs they are starting to take it seriously. Last week, The Washington Post reported that the White House’s political team has had discussions with leading Democrats about the upsides and downsides of coming out fully in support of gay marriage. And in the few weeks since the effort was launched, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, as well as both New York senators and New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman have all signed on (Gov. Andrew Cuomo—who actually brought marriage equality to New York State when he pushed a bill to legalize same sex marriage through the Legislature—so far has not.) Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, who is serving as the chairman of the convention this year, has also come out in favor of it.

Both sides of the debate are able to cite polls saying that their side is correct.

Urging caution, Mr. Cooper said, “Fifty-four percent of African-Americans are not comfortable with same-sex marriage. Thirty-two percent of Latinos [are not]. There sizeable minorities of two key constituency groups. The reason I would urge it not to be incorporated into the party platform is that already Republicans are going to be involved in a very intensive effort suppress voter turnout among key constituencies. We don’t need anything out there that might inadvertently support those efforts.”

While it’s unlikely these voting blocs will fall to Mitt Romney, they could keep voters home in swing states like Ohio and Florida.

Mr. Wolfson however cites the fact that a majority of Democrats are already in favor of marriage equality, young people overwhelmingly support it, and even independents and Catholics, he says, support it.

“This is no longer the third rail that operatives used to think of it as. We are no longer in 1996. We are no longer in 2004. We are no longer even in 2008,” he said. “This is where the center of American politics is today, and the Democratic Party, which has done so much to get it there, should be able to stand with its own values to make the case to bring the country forward.”

What remains unknowable is where the president’s head and heart are. Asked earlier this month during a press conference call about Mr. Villaraigosa’s endorsement of the platform plank, Jim Messina, a top political adviser to the president, declined to speculate on what the party platform would ultimately say.

“Look, we’re in the big-tent party here,” he said, and proceeded to detail Mr. Obama’s “great record on fighting for fundamental fairness for all Americans: Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, and many other accomplishments we are very, very proud of.”

Still, it is hard to find anyone close to Mr. Obama who honestly takes the president at his word that he is “evolving” on the question of gay marriage—as if somehow the son of two parents whose own union was illegal in many states when he was born and who grew up to be a constitutional law scholar is merely a witness to his own mental transformation on the issue.

“I have no doubt that if the president gets re-elected, that he will come out in support of gay marriage,” said one supporter who has discussed the issue with the president and who asked to remain anonymous to avoid revealing the content of private conversations.

It is this hesitancy, driven by a presumption that an ever-narrower slice of swing voters disapproves of marriage equality, that is the single biggest animator of Mr. Wolfson’s effort.

“In politics there are people who make their living by being risk-adverse,” he said. “There are others who make their living by trying to slice things into narrow little chunks, and there are others who put forward a vision and trust that the American people will respect leadership and authenticity and values—and often it's those are the ones who change our politics and strengthen our country.”

In the press call, Mr. Messina attempted to deflect the decision away from the president, saying, “You know, there’s a process. There’s not even a delegate platform committee yet. There’s a process to go through this discussion and the DNC will go through that and we will have a platform.”

In truth, there are complicated parliamentary rules that detail who gets on the platform drafting committee, how the planks get voted upon, what kind of amendments may be offered and what the final document looks like, but there is little doubt that the party platform will represent the priorities of the president.

“There is a platform committee, but they rubber stamp it,” said Ed Kilgore, a Democratic strategist and someone closely involved with several Democratic conventions in the past. “It is going to be totally up to the Obama people. No way somebody will get up on the floor and propose a plank [without his approval]. The real question is whether the president is ready to back marriage equality. He is ‘evolving,’ but most of the Democratic Party is already there.”

Mr. Kilgore, however, said that he could imagine a scenario where other gay groups try to curb some of Freedom to Marry’s efforts, citing the fact that they have been on a roll in states across the county and may be hesitant to push their luck over platform language that is largely meaningless.

But if he is wrong, and Mr. Wolfson and his supporters push a marriage plank only to have it fail, there is no telling what will happen at the Democratic convention, although there could be enough drama to make the “brokered convention” fantasies over the Republican side of the aisle seem tame by comparison. Democrats sound determined to avoid this fate.

“We will not let Republicans enjoy a party,” Ms. Germond said. “We are united by candidate. I do not expect there to be a floor fight.”

But Mr. Wolfson refused to rule out the possibility of walkout.

“It is way premature to have any conversation about that. The process hasn’t even begun yet. We have begun the conversation. We believe we are talking with friends and people who are mostly in support of the freedom to marry and we have every reason to believe this will be in the platform.”

So, nothing dramatic or symbolic if you don’t get your way?

“The convention is in September,” he replied evenly.
dfreedlander@observer.com

O'Donnell (Getty Images)

After walking out of her interview with Piers Morgan, Christine O’Donnell addressed the Women’s National Republican Club on West 51st Street, starting about 45 minutes late, just before 7. “I want to apologize for being so late. I know that’s not respectful of your time, so please accept my apology,” Ms. O’Donnell began. “We started out at about 5 o’clock in the morning at Fox and Friends and we’ve gone nonstop until the final stop at CNN a few minutes ago.” Strangely, no mention was made of the walk-out that Piers Morgan was at that very moment hyping on Twitter.

After her brief remarks, The Transom tentatively approached the book-signing table, where Ms. O’Donnell was inscribing a copy of Troublemaker: “Gov. Christie: Keep up the great work! -Christine O’Donnell.” The book was for a well-wisher who said she intended to gift it to Chris Christie.

Why had she stormed out of Mr. Morgan’s studios? (Even during the Q.&A. session following her speech, when asked about the media’s treatment of her, Ms. O’Donnell chose to focus on what she saw as the evenhanded treatment she’d received at the hands of ABC’s George Stephanopoulos.) Ms. O’Donnell laughed when we told her it was a big story. “Is it?” she asked, with (sincere?) incredulity.

“We were late for this, and he wasn’t ending, and we were going, ‘Wrap up, wrap up!’ He was late and he wasn’t ending. He’s looking for ratings. He’s looking for ratings. He was being rude, and I said, ‘Piers, I gotta go! You know, I’m late already!’ He’s looking for ratings, and trying to stir up a controversy.”

“But it was fun!” said an aide.

“It was fun,” concurred Ms. O’Donnell.

(During that Piers Morgan interview, Ms. O’Donnell states, “I was supposed to be speaking at the Republican Women’s Club at 6 o’clock and I chose to be a little late for that not to be—not to endure a rude talk show host but to talk about my book and talk about the issues I address in my book. Have you read the book?” Ms. O’Donnell mentions her lateness to the Women’s National Republican Club only after calling Mr. Morgan “rude” twice and making clear that she is walking out.)

But a mere media contretemps is far less troubling to Ms. O’Donnell than what she sees as double standards faced by female candidates. She told The Transom: “In the 2008 campaign, no one would have dared ask Barack Obama, ‘How are you going to control your libido? You’re a strapping young man. What are you going to do around all those interns?’ But people can ask Michele Bachmann about her migraines.” That said, Ms. O’Donnell is intrigued, so far, with Mitt Romney, Michele Bachmann and Rick Perry as presidential candidates, but declined for now to make an endorsement. “If it gets close, and we need to wrap it up, then I might make an endorsement.”

Of her time in New York—she was leaving after the speech to go to Washington for more promotion—Ms. O’Donnell told The Transom: ”It’s been a whirlwind!”

ddaddario@observer.com :: @DPD_

There is a double standard at work for women candidates, Ms. O'Donnell told The Observer: "In the 2008 campaign, no one would have dared ask Barack Obama, 'How are you going to control your libido. You're a strapping young man. What are you going to do around all those interns?' But people can ask Michele Bachmann about her migraines." Ms. O'Donnell is intrigued, so far, with Mitt Romney, Michele Bachmann, and Rick Perry as presidential candidates, but would decline for now to make an endorsement. "If it gets close, and we need to wrap it up, then I might make an endorsement."

ddaddario@observer.com :: @DPD_

Bloomberg hates this!

Mayor Michael Bloomberg has come out against "perp walks", reports the Post--the forced march of famous suspects before the media--now that the Dominique Strauss-Kahn case looks weaker. "I've always thought perp walks were outrageous," said the Mayor, comparing the walks to "Roman times" for their presumption of guilt.

How things have changed! On May 17, with Dominique Strauss-Kahn widely presumed guilty, the Mayor said, "If you don't want to do the perp walk, don't do the crime." The two viewpoints aren't entirely incongruent--one could be morally opposed to perp walks and still see them as a deterrent--but they present the image of a man who'll lean with public and tabloid opinion. Of course, Mr. Bloomberg's just winding down his third term by musing philosophically here--there's nothing he can actually do about press presence at precincts. "We have a free press in this country," said a spokesman.

ddaddario@observer.com :: @DPD_