Why do quite many homosexuals vote Republican?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 01:38:51 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  U.S. General Discussion (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, Chancellor Tanterterg)
  Why do quite many homosexuals vote Republican?
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5]
Author Topic: Why do quite many homosexuals vote Republican?  (Read 10374 times)
t_host1
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 820


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #100 on: August 07, 2012, 11:04:55 PM »

Oh, I will say this: I feel like this election will help solidify gay voters around democrats by a margin similar to their numbers with blacks. It's just that much harder to justify being a Republican when you can't just say "ah, both sides suck when it comes to gay rights."
I haft to say, a distinction that is of no grey area.
Logged
MorningInAmerica
polijunkie3057
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 779
United States


Political Matrix
E: 5.55, S: 0.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #101 on: August 07, 2012, 11:05:57 PM »
« Edited: August 07, 2012, 11:07:45 PM by MorningInAmerica »

Oh, I will say this: I feel like this election will help solidify gay voters around democrats by a margin similar to their numbers with blacks. It's just that much harder to justify being a Republican when you can't just say "ah, both sides suck when it comes to gay rights."

Simply because Obama came out for gay marriage as an obvious political tactic, which is a state issue in any event?  I think you may be selling gays short myself. I would like to think they are more serious than that.

Agreed. And I think it's important to point out that Obama didn't just flip-flop on gay marriage, he flip-flopped-flipped on it. He supported gay marriage as a state Senator from Illinois...opposed it as a presidential candidate in '08 and President from '09-'12. Then supported it in the Spring of a presidential election year. That's where I'm coming from when I say "gays have been jerked around by both sides."


Edited to say no pun, whatsoever, intended.
Logged
Small Business Owner of Any Repute
Mr. Moderate
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,431
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #102 on: August 07, 2012, 11:31:53 PM »
« Edited: August 07, 2012, 11:37:36 PM by Mr. Moderate »

Cue the opening of The Apprentice.

It's not that a lot of them don't know what they're doing is wrong, it's just ... you know, money is more important sometimes. And Iraq too whatever we guess, old news.
Gay Republicans are immoral because they are greedy and something about Iraq Huh

I just can't see it as anything other than wrong, anymore. There's just too strong of an "they're the enemy" line being drawn right now.

Simply because Obama came out for gay marriage as an obvious political tactic, which is a state issue in any event?  I think you may be selling gays short myself. I would like to think they are more serious than that.

No, not simply because Obama came out in support. That was probably the most visible cue, but let's not forget the 50 state battle that's being waged across the country. Lines are very sharply being drawn in New Hampshire, New York, Connecticut, New Jersey, Maine, and even North Carolina. Many, many Democrats have gone to the wall for gay marriage rights. Many Republicans have gone to the wall to stop them. The division is only going to get more and more pronounced as time goes on, lest Republicans finally understand what a losing issue their base has saddled them with.

Oh, I will say this: I feel like this election will help solidify gay voters around democrats by a margin similar to their numbers with blacks.

So you honestly believe gays will go from voting 31% GOP 2 yrs ago to voting about 5% GOP (which is about what McCain got from blacks in '08) this November?

Nah. The shift will happen, but it won't be so sharp and so immediate. But it only makes sense to say that a notable shift begins now, the first real election cycle where support for gay rights has finally been deemed "mainstream."
Logged
Ogre Mage
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,500
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.39, S: -5.22

P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #103 on: August 08, 2012, 12:41:16 AM »

I can tell you that here in Washington State when we had battles over anti-discrimination laws, domestic partnerships and eventually marriage, the large majority of Democrats supported gay rights while the large majority of Republican opposed them.  I believe this has been true in many other states as well.  That is a real difference on an issue, not just being "jerked around."

I would not say that all gay Republicans are self-hating.  Some in my state have done good work on LGBT issues.  Pablo Monroy, for instance, filmed an excellent video in favor of R-74.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/25/gay-marriage-washington_n_1624913.html

That said, it is easy to find even more counterexamples:  Larry Craig, Jim West, former WA state legislator Richard Curtis, Ted Haggard, Phillip Hinkle, etc. we could go on and on.  These folks are either Republican politicians or affiliated with the Republican party.  They denounced LGBT and LGBT rights and/or voted against them while engaging in gay sex.  So yeah, I would call them "self-hating."  Perhaps one can see how gay Republicans have developed a negative reputation in the larger LGBT community.
Logged
Torie
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,057
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #104 on: August 08, 2012, 12:54:12 AM »
« Edited: August 08, 2012, 12:56:12 AM by Torie »

I appreciate what you say Mr. Moderate about state battles, but I hope you bear in mind that gay marriage is muddled when it comes to the usual partisan divides. It is more about class and education and secularism really. But the point is, is that electing a POTUS who will not really have much impact on this, to me has little to do about these state battles, most of which we are destined to win, and sooner rather than later, anyway, outside the zone most gays avoid like the plague anyway, for reasons going beyond the homophobia quotient, like living in a place in which it is worth living, if you are gay, educated, etc., etc.

No, I am not trying to change your mind here Mr. Moderate about your POTUS choice, as simply trying to explain as best I can - however pathetically - mine.
Logged
Rhodie
Rookie
**
Posts: 245
South Africa


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #105 on: August 08, 2012, 01:42:58 AM »

I doubt those numbers will continue, what with full-on marriage equality from the Democrats.

I didn't realize the number 1, top, most important issue for gays was getting "marriage equality". Maybe they just vote like the rest of us.
Logged
World politics is up Schmitt creek
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,248


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #106 on: August 08, 2012, 01:48:53 AM »

I doubt those numbers will continue, what with full-on marriage equality from the Democrats.

I didn't realize the number 1, top, most important issue for gays was getting "marriage equality". Maybe they just vote like the rest of us.

Would it actually surprise you if I said that the main issues for not all but many gay people are indeed those issues that affect them as a discrete group, and if so, why?
Logged
Rhodie
Rookie
**
Posts: 245
South Africa


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #107 on: August 08, 2012, 01:53:30 AM »

I doubt those numbers will continue, what with full-on marriage equality from the Democrats.

I didn't realize the number 1, top, most important issue for gays was getting "marriage equality". Maybe they just vote like the rest of us.

Would it actually surprise you if I said that the main issues for not all but many gay people are indeed those issues that affect them as a discrete group, and if so, why?

Isn't it about time they were treated as normal individuals, as opposed to this homogeneous "gay bloc"
Logged
World politics is up Schmitt creek
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,248


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #108 on: August 08, 2012, 01:58:16 AM »

I doubt those numbers will continue, what with full-on marriage equality from the Democrats.

I didn't realize the number 1, top, most important issue for gays was getting "marriage equality". Maybe they just vote like the rest of us.

Would it actually surprise you if I said that the main issues for not all but many gay people are indeed those issues that affect them as a discrete group, and if so, why?

Isn't it about time they were treated as normal individuals, as opposed to this homogeneous "gay bloc"

It is. Get to your party grandees about that, why don't you?

In all seriousness, it shouldn't come as any sort of shock that groups of people exist. This is what makes demographics a relevant discipline. The fact that this seems to surprise and upset you is revelatory.

Isn't it about time white Southern evangelicals were treated as normal individuals, as opposed to this homogeneous 'white Southern evangelical bloc'?
Logged
MorningInAmerica
polijunkie3057
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 779
United States


Political Matrix
E: 5.55, S: 0.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #109 on: August 08, 2012, 03:03:50 AM »

I doubt those numbers will continue, what with full-on marriage equality from the Democrats.

I didn't realize the number 1, top, most important issue for gays was getting "marriage equality". Maybe they just vote like the rest of us.

Would it actually surprise you if I said that the main issues for not all but many gay people are indeed those issues that affect them as a discrete group, and if so, why?

Isn't it about time they were treated as normal individuals, as opposed to this homogeneous "gay bloc"

It is. Get to your party grandees about that, why don't you?

In all seriousness, it shouldn't come as any sort of shock that groups of people exist. This is what makes demographics a relevant discipline. The fact that this seems to surprise and upset you is revelatory.

Isn't it about time white Southern evangelicals were treated as normal individuals, as opposed to this homogeneous 'white Southern evangelical bloc'?

Wow...see I can get into this whole "reasonable conversation" thing. Please continue.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.226 seconds with 12 queries.