Gays and conservatives - strange bedfellows right? Not as much as you'd think. In the UK, the majority of our gay MPs belong to the Conservative party, whose leadership has just passed equal marriage in the UK. And in the US, despite Obama being "the most radical pro-gay president in history" according to opponents, 25-30% of LGBTs supported Romney for president - far more than the 5 or so percent of black Americans who supported his campaign. Why is this? Some stipulate that gays are generally more fiscally aware and largely identify with Republican economic principals, but vote Democrat because Dems attempt to capture their vote by offering "stuff" in exchange for votes. Personally I think gays are more at home with libertarian ideals but are put off by the socially conservative aspect of the Republican party... Opinions?
My youngest brother (41) is gay and lives with his long time partner in LA....both are fiscal hawks who, like me, believe this country... due to dependency, unsustainable debt, and desperate, loose monetary policies.... has entered into the bread and circuses stage... yet...the quintessential useful idiots... they vote straight ticket Democrat because of gay issues. I dearly love them both, but sometimes I'd like to wring their necks.....hate crime, yo
That's the annoying thing... Many LGBTs KNOW Republican policy is more responsible, but they can't help but vote with the party that offers them the promise of thousands of rights (marriage), quite clever of the Dems really to milk yet another minority. I think though when the whole same-sex marriage thing becomes less of a political issue, gays will naturally gravitate back to the party of fiscal responsibility.
In regards to fiscal matters, hamstrung, "trusting", milquetoast "Republican policy" has proven farcical.
In what way? I'm no Republican cheerleader, but I think the Democrats short of a few good social policies have developed a policy of freebies and entitlements. From a purely outsider perspective of course...
I am pretty sure there were a lot of gays who supported Reagan and Bush Sr. It is much less the offers of the liberal side than it is the hatred in the right wing rhetoric against gay rights. Would you vote for someone who accepted the support of people who openly hate you? I think the same applies to hispanics and other minorities. Hispanic americans are much less likely to use welfare or food stamps than whites who are eligible. Yet they are targeted as lazy dirty sponges. The democratic strategy may be more refined than you imply. The offer of acceptance into mainstream society is not so much about wooing the gays as it is about exposing the intolerance and viciousness of the republican base.
Well, webby sees it like this...progressives have rammed through unconstitutional entitlements and transfer payments for going on 80 years...Obamacare being the latest example....(thank you, "conservative" justice John Roberts....(*)(*)(*)(*)ing scumbag).... while DC Republicans...gullible, beaten down and terrified of how they'll be portrayed in the left's viciously protective "if you vote for them, they'll take away your _____________" class warfare screeds, PAC ads, and a more than willing alphabet media... have been steamrolled.....at best, just paying lip service to their "principles" and the unsustainability of the programs....at worst, piling on a few of their own.
Salacious exploitation of the "Victim / Oppressor" Hegelian Dialectic. exploiting and pandering to an endless supply of largely invented new victims of "right-wing oppression" is precisely how state collectivist ("progressives") derive their relevance and political power. Surprised to see such so openly admitted, I am.
Not such a big deal. Everyone uses it. Hasn't reverend Wright in the news for years now for his brand of intolerance? The only reason the republicans don't use the strategy more is a lack of resource. Not moral foundation.
No. I can see I am going to have to continue hammering on this one point, regardless of the topic at hand: People of same-sex orientation are a diverse set of individuals. Whatever trends you see among us as a group have NOTHING to do with our orientation and EVERYTHING to do with it having been politicized. We are not "more at home with libertarian ideals", because there is no "we" in this. It is a matter of what each individual, who happens to be gay, thinks as an individual. Not what gay people think as a group. Because we don't think as a group. Are some of us "more at home with libertarian ideals"? I suppose some are, and probably to varying degrees. I would not even venture to guess though what percentage of the group that comprises. Sorry, I don't mean to be a jerk about it, but I'm just really, really, 17 x really sick of generalizations about gay people as a group. It's just one aspect of who we are, and the extent to which it potentially influences our thoughts on political matters, as well as the direction in which it steers us, depends very much on the individual and how one weighs any number of factors in the mix. Quite clearly some are not, which is why the Log Cabin Republicans have survived for decades, and why there's now a second group of gay Republicans (GOProud). Personally speaking, the corruption present in both parties makes me never want to waste my time voting again. So long as the Republicans remain aligned with the religious right (especially the Arlington Group), they won't get a single vote from me. And if Democrats let banks and corporations write legislation, reducing their own role to that of grammarians in the legislative process, I won't cast a vote for them, either.
Sorry, should have said "gays by and large (in my experience)..." - and you may still of course disagree, but this is generally what I have found by speaking to various gay people... (and obviously based on my own judgments as a gay person).
The whole notion of government being in marriage is absurd. This should be the position of the GOP, but the GOP is not for smaller government and it is why they would never adopt this policy. Shrug. I think that perhaps the GOP enjoys talking about gay sex more than cutting deficits.
I think the notion of why is clear is in Perriquine's post. Like every other group, there is diversity. More in some, less in others. For example Jews are a pretty strong Democratic base but many many vote for Republicans. Why? Some because of fiscal policy, some because of Israel, some, in the last election, because they disliked Obama. There is a lot of thought that goes into voting for many people and very few people are one-issue voters.
Any man or woman who stands at my side at the barricades ready to resist the *******n leftists is my brother or sister. Nothing else matters.
Gays are between a rock and a hard place. On the one hand, they have the DNC in the US who cators to them and wishes to give them anything they desire. However, the GOP offers them lower taxes. By in large gays make more money than heterosexuals, thus they have more to lose in taxation.
To think that the DNC loves them is hilarious. All they want is their support and subsequent political power. The GOP is simply trying to placate the religious right at the same time reaching out to gays. The GOP has no soul and neither does the DNC. Now if polygamists start throwing money and support at the DNC, maybe they will care about them as well. LOL.
I don't think that the DNC loves gays. I just think that they've been far more gay-friendly than the RNC. I also think that DADT was very progressive for its time. I'm pretty sure that the GOP-backed DOMA will be ruled unconstitutional within a few weeks. I doubt there will be a Prop8 decision, but I do think that DOMA will soon be history.
Peoples sexual orientation should not be exploited. Government should not be in the marriage business.
