Openly LGBT VP for Clinton?

[Del Tachi]

Are there any prominent LGBT politicians who could be considered serious contenders for Vice President in 2016? 

While it seems like the GOP base would not tolerate an openly LGBT VP nominee in 2016, is it something that Hillary Clinton could look into as a way to energize a growing, vocal portion of the Democratic base?

The two likeliest LGBT VP nominees for Clinton I could think of would be either Tammy Baldwin or Jared Polis.  Baldwin is unlikely to be on a national ticket because Scott Walker would be able to fill her Senate seat with a Republican appointment, and I think its unlikely that Clinton would tap another woman.

However, Polis is a new, fresh face that Clinton will need on the campaign trail.  He will carry a large appeal to Sanders-type Democrats and LGBTs, and he hails from an important swing state, Colorado, where Clinton tends to poll poorly.  However, I think he's known to be pretty personally abrasive, has never been exposed to the national spotlight and thus could prove to be a loose cannon, and is several steps to the left of the Democrats' ideological center (which could make it difficult for Clinton to co-opt him into her campaign).  Moreover, it seems like he might be perfectly happy climbing his ranks within the House.

Any other LGBT politicians who could find their way onto a major-party ticket in 2016?     

[Lyin' Steve]

No, and if the democrats pick an LGBT VP just to have an LGBT person on the ticket they would instantly lose my vote.

LGBT vote 100% democrat anyway, they are rabidly anti-Republican.

[King]

Nobody should not be picked because they're LGBT, but I don't see any LGBT choices who are particularly strong.

[GOP732]

LGBT vote 100% democrat anyway, they are rabidly anti-Republican.

Incorrect

"Gallup's landmark study of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) Americans finds that 44% identify as Democratic, 43% as independent, and 13% as Republican."

http://www.gallup.com/poll/158102/lgbt-americans-skew-democratic-largely-support-obama.aspx

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

lgb people voted 76% obama

[Frozen Sky Ever Why]

I remember ABC had exit polls of 2000, and in WA Bush got like 46% of the LGBT vote, with Gore at only around 33%. Of course there was a strong Nader vote. No way to look at that anymore, since only the CBS exits from that year are still up.

[Brittain33]

I think it's more likely that she appoint someone openly LGB to a high-profile cabinet office (Attorney General, Secretary of State—Hillary's probably too gunshy to nominate to Defense) or to the Supreme Court.

I could see Tammy Baldwin being the first openly gay VP candidate at some time in the future, but it doesn't add up in 2016 for Hillary IMO.

I'm definitely splitting T out from this one because society is just beginning to make progress on that angle and we will have checked many boxes off for gays and lesbians while trans individuals will still be "too risky." Obama was the first President to appoint a first openly trans official to any position, and nothing prominent. Even George W. Bush appointed openly gay ambassadors.

[Mister Mets]

At the moment, the only ones who seem plausible national contenders are Baldwin and Polis.

I don't see Hillary going with a lesbian as a running mate.

Polis is a well-regarded swing state congressman, although there was that flap about his belief that colleges should expel anyone suspected of sexual abuse.

https://reason.com/blog/2015/09/10/rep-jared-polis-thinks-colleges-should-b

There are some pros and cons. It could bait the Republican ticket and surrogates into saying something stupid or offensive. But it could also piss off centrists if they think someone's sexuality helped them to the top of the ticket.

Mark Takano has some political talent, but he's too green as a second-term Congressman.

[Brittain33]

If Hillary is looking to make history with an underrepresented demographic, she doesn't need to go (and shouldn't go) with openly gay as the criterion.

[ShamDam]

Maybe not VP, but as a Houstonian I would be SUPER stoked if Annise Parker could get a cabinet position.

[RINO Tom]

No, and if the democrats pick an LGBT VP just to have an LGBT person on the ticket they would instantly lose my vote.

LGBT vote 100% democrat anyway, they are rabidly anti-Republican.

Actually, Republicans regularly win about 30% of their votes.

[I support Sanders]

I don't think there are many openly LGB candidates who would qualify to be VP. Baldwin supported the TPP, so that would be a turn-off to progressives, a group that Clinton is already having some issues wooing. Jared Polis and Annise Parker don't have any name recognition that would boost Clinton's support. I have never been a fan of politicians choosing running mates based on their membership in a minority demographic (this is something the Republicans will almost certainly do next year: Fiorina's a woman, Rubio and Cruz are Latino, Carson is black, Jindal is Indian), but I think a strong progressive VP nominee (assuming Clinton doesn't select Sanders or O'Malley), who just so happens to be in a minority group, would be Keith Ellison of Minnesota; he is a Muslim and he is as progressive as Sanders, O'Malley, Elizabeth Warren, Sherrod Brown, Alan Grayson, etc.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Caitlyn Jenner. Advantages:

- Donald trump proves people want reality TV stars in gov
- American heroine in the Olympics
- Republican, so appeal to moderates.

[Bakersfield Uber Alles]

Caitlyn Jenner. Advantages:

- Donald trump proves people want reality TV stars in gov
- American heroine in the Olympics
- Republican, so appeal to moderates.

Clinton/Jenner 2016

[bobloblaw]

Nobody should not be picked because they're LGBT, but I don't see any LGBT choices who are particularly strong.

Tammy Baldwin???

More strong than the idiot Castro Brothers.

[Bigby]

Identity politics is disgusting. I have nothing against an LGBT VP, but please pick them for a reason besides solely who they enjoy having in bed with them.

[JonathanSwift]

Lindsey Graham.

[Mike Thick]

I don't think an LGBT VP would win over many undecided voters, as it would probably be seen as pandering to the base. Neither Polis nor Baldwin is superior policy-wise to some of the more frequently suggested folks, like Julian Castro or even Tim Kaine, and I think most people would see it as a rather nakedly political move. In any case it would be meant to gin up the base, and even then I don't think that a lot of people would vote for Clinton/Polis that wouldn't have voted for Clinton/Kaine or Clinton/Castro anyway. Promising to nominate an LGBT person to the Clinton cabinet, perhaps, is another story.

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

Identity politics is disgusting. I have nothing against an LGBT VP, but please pick them for a reason besides solely who they enjoy having in bed with them.

((it's easy to dismiss "identity politics" when your identity isn't constantly under attack))

[Taco Truck 🚚]

Identity politics is disgusting. I have nothing against an LGBT VP, but please pick them for a reason besides solely who they enjoy having in bed with them.

Oh, brother.  All politics in this country is identity.  Young vs old.  Black vs white vs hispanic.  Christian vs Jew vs Muslim vs atheist.  Tall vs short.  If you think how God made you or how you act doesn't have an effect on your chances of getting into office you need to find another hobby besides politics.

Having said that I notice this forum has a very peculiar obsession for/against LGBT issues.  I don't frequent gay forums but this is the only place in my daily life where someone would even start a thread like this with a straight face.  No, there will not be an openly LGBT running mate for Clinton.  Get real people.  Even Obama chose the standard old white guy to take the edge off his... edginess.  The topics on this forum...

[Oswald Acted Alone, You Kook]

She's already bisexual.

[Brittain33]

Identity politics is disgusting. I have nothing against an LGBT VP, but please pick them for a reason besides solely who they enjoy having in bed with them.

Coming off of 200+ years of people caring about "who we enjoy having in bed with us" as a reason to disqualify us for public office—an era that hasn't ended in most of the country yet—we've got a ways to go before we can pretend we're a society that judges gays by our professional records and ethics only. 

[Brittain33]

Having said that I notice this forum has a very peculiar obsession for/against LGBT issues. 

We have a really high proportion of gay posters.

[bobloblaw]

Identity politics is disgusting. I have nothing against an LGBT VP, but please pick them for a reason besides solely who they enjoy having in bed with them.

Coming off of 200+ years of people caring about "who we enjoy having in bed with us" as a reason to disqualify us for public office—an era that hasn't ended in most of the country yet—we've got a ways to go before we can pretend we're a society that judges gays by our professional records and ethics only. 

you want us to care who youre in bed with and give you a prize for doing so.

[SNJ1985]

Identity politics is disgusting. I have nothing against an LGBT VP, but please pick them for a reason besides solely who they enjoy having in bed with them.

((it's easy to dismiss "identity politics" when your identity isn't constantly under attack))

The media and entertainment industry in this country are overwhelmingly pro-LGBT.

To name one of many examples, a Pew Research Center study in 2013 showed that the media was overwhelmingly biased in favor of ''same-sex marriage'':

http://www.journalism.org/files/legacy/EMBARGOED_Same-SexMarriageandNews.pdf

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Hollywood has been promoting and encouraging homosexuality for decades, and has swayed significant portions of the American public into supporting it as well:

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/paul-wilson/2012/05/10/hollywood-driving-homosexual-agenda-40-years

http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/hollywoods-gay-culture-reshaping-america