Skip to main content

When you know that your party thinks you're a Captive Voter....

We know that the traditional wisdom is for presidential candidates to run toward their base in the primaries and then back to the middle in the general election. (Obviously, the general wisdom has been breaking down in a number of interesting ways over the past decade, but that's another story.) So Republicans pay more attention to courting evangelicals during the primary season, then essentially sort of desert them, because what are they going to do--go vote for Hillary in protest?

Of course there is always the chance that you'll piss off you captive voters so badly that some WILL defect (Latinos to George W. Bush in 2000) or that too many of them will just stay home on election day (which has got to be one of John McCain's current worries).

Which brings me to one of the most captive populations of all: gay (read GLTGB) Democrats. Despite the existence of Log Cabin Republicans, the idea that a significant number of gays are going to rush out and vote GOP is so laughable that the Dems can not only afford to ignore them, they can abuse them.

Here are some quotes from what Outright Libertarians describes as "the Democratic Party's most popular online community" in a trenchant post entitled Guess Which Party is Queer Bashing Again?


Transgender is a choice, so it doesn't fit with the rest.


...

There's an awful lot of unspoken about rape and sexual assault in lesbian relationships.


...

Sexual Orientation IS different from race in the same

Sense that women are not allowed in front-line combat units and were not allowed on shipsl.

It is all about sex, attraction, foxhole desires and showers...

Right or wrong, the comparison to race is fallicious at best.


...

Who in the hell in their right mind would think, this woman, smart, intelligent, strong leader and very very conscience of the public eye on her would have a lesbian relationship.


(God forbid!)

...

The issue of gay marriage is hardly the most pressing issue facing our nation this year. Iraq, the economy, the environment--all of these take much more precedence in my book. Social issues in general will always arouse the emotions and passions but generally take a back seat when it comes to issues of national importance.


(Funny, when we point out that Democrats are opposed to marriage equality, we always get attacked by Democrats!)

That's just a small sample.


If your primary (or at least one of your primary) political values happens to be civil rights for all Americans, sexual orientation notwithstanding, where do you go? Outright Libertarians has formally endorsed George Phillies, but to be real, let's think about candidates with an actual statistical chance of becoming president.

Then it would seem that you only have one choice. Waldo has covered this aspect of the campaign numerous times: if you want the only candidate who has unequivocally--even when it could hurt him politically with other core constituencies--supported civil rights for gay Americans is Barack Obama.

Which appears to be one of those rare cases of a candidate willing to rise above the prejudices of his party faithful.

Not necessarily and endorsement; just a fact.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Comment Rescue (?) and child-related gun violence in Delaware

In my post about the idiotic over-reaction to a New Jersey 10-year-old posing with his new squirrel rifle , Dana Garrett left me this response: One waits, apparently in vain, for you to post the annual rates of children who either shoot themselves or someone else with a gun. But then you Libertarians are notoriously ambivalent to and silent about data and facts and would rather talk abstract principles and fear monger (like the government will confiscate your guns). It doesn't require any degree of subtlety to see why you are data and fact adverse. The facts indicate we have a crisis with gun violence and accidents in the USA, and Libertarians offer nothing credible to address it. Lives, even the lives of children, get sacrificed to the fetishism of liberty. That's intellectual cowardice. OK, Dana, let's talk facts. According to the Children's Defense Fund , which is itself only querying the CDCP data base, fewer than 10 children/teens were killed per year in Delaw

With apologies to Hube: dopey WNJ comments of the week

(Well, Hube, at least I'm pulling out Facebook comments and not poaching on your preserve in the Letters.) You will all remember the case this week of the photo of the young man posing with the .22LR squirrel rifle that his Dad got him for his birthday with resulted in Family Services and the local police attempting to search his house.  The story itself is a travesty since neither the father nor the boy had done anything remotely illegal (and check out the picture for how careful the son is being not to have his finger inside the trigger guard when the photo was taken). But the incident is chiefly important for revealing in the Comments Section--within Delaware--the fact that many backers of "common sense gun laws" really do have the elimination of 2nd Amendment rights and eventual outright confiscation of all privately held firearms as their objective: Let's run that by again: Elliot Jacobson says, This instance is not a case of a father bonding with h

The Obligatory Libertarian Tax Day Post

The most disturbing factoid that I learned on Tax Day was that the average American must now spend a full twenty-four hours filling out tax forms. That's three work days. Or, think of it this way: if you had to put in two hours per night after dinner to finish your taxes, that's two weeks (with Sundays off). I saw a talking head economics professor on some Philly TV channel pontificating about how Americans procrastinate. He was laughing. The IRS guy they interviewed actually said, "Tick, tick, tick." You have to wonder if Governor Ruth Ann Minner and her cohorts put in twenty-four hours pondering whether or not to give Kraft Foods $708,000 of our State taxes while demanding that school districts return $8-10 million each?