Michael Crawford

Which Republican are You Supporting for President?

Filed By Michael Crawford | February 03, 2008 11:05 AM | comments

Filed in: Politics
Tags: campaign 2008, LGBT rights, Republicans

Yesterday I asked "which Democrat you are supporting for president?" Today I am flipping the script and asking the question "which Republican are you supporting for president?



Recent Entries Filed under Politics:

Leave a comment

We want to know your opinion on this issue! While arguing about an opinion or idea is encouraged, personal attacks will not be tolerated. Please be respectful of others.

The editorial team will delete a comment that is off-topic, abusive, exceptionally incoherent, includes a slur or is soliciting and/or advertising. Repeated violations of the policy will result in revocation of your user account. Please keep in mind that this is our online home; ill-mannered house guests will be shown the door.


Brynn Craffey Brynn Craffey | February 3, 2008 12:14 PM

OK, this is a good opportunity to ask: how can any LGBT person support or be a Republican? I honestly don't understand it. Sure, there are some great individual elected representatives. The party itself, however, has been hijacked by religious fanatics who not only repudiate LGBT folks, but the more extreme adherents would like to incarcerate us or worse.

And don't tell me it's based on fiscal policies. All I need to say to that is "Ronald Reagan and GW Bush." For a great graphic representation or before attempting that argument, please go here,.

I answered undecided, like with the Democratic side....

Still waiting for one of them to support anything I think is important. Oh, well, I guess that's American politics for ya!

ok as one of the few Republicans here my choice is John McCain not only this time but the first time he ran.Yes You can be TGLB and not be a Democrat or a Liberal though according the the Socilist right im now one of the new Liberals in the Republican Party.Also we in the TGLB have been betrayed more by the Dems than the Republicans after with the Socialist Right you know thye just plain dont like us and there were 30 odd Republicans who voted for ENDA.

I understand Republicans who vote for actually gay-friendly Republicans in say, a county, state, or any other type of office. What I don't forgive is a Republican who forsakes a Democrat that is clearly superior on LGBT issues to the Republican alternative and tries to rationalize it ala LCR.

Bah. Where's the "None of the Above" option? I chose Undecided because I just can't decide which one I dislike more...

FOTFLMAO!

Support a Repug for president? I'd rather come down with bird flu or ebola. Never voted GOP in my life and never will.

I grew up in a Kennedy-worshiping family of Italian-Americans. We don't vote for Repugs!

This is a really easy question to answer Brynn.

I have friends who are Lesbian Gay Bisexual and Transgender. ....
I am not part of and really don't support the LGBT political machine......
And i don't identify as any G,B, or T label. I am just this Lesbian you know...:)

LGBT issues don't impact my life.
What does are larger issues like the stupid war and the economy which is circleing the hole in the tolit bowl.

The face i might need to buy a dinner at Soup plantation and pay $45.00 for it because the dollar is garbage makes more difference's to me then some platitudes about equality and social justice.
Do you like to eat?
Do you like to pay only 40% of your income to have a roof over your head?
How about your 401-K?, what has that been doing?

Please I am not attacking you or anybody else. I am asking questions that impact your daily life.

This war is Killing us it has destroyed the economy, we have been in a recession for the last two years, maybe longer....

I see Ron Paul as being the only answer to these issues.

As for Socialized health care...
Hillery's plan is mandatory not voluntary that is against the spirit of what this country country stands for.
It's really about more then GLBT issues....

Sue

Michael Bedwell | February 3, 2008 5:57 PM

I believe that we fall into four categories of voters:

1. Those who, within the realm of reasonable expectation of events, will always vote for the Democrat for President. Estimates vary, but based on exit polls in 2000 and 2004 I'd say 70-80% is a believable range.

2. Those who within the realm of reasonable expectation of events will always vote for a Republican for President. 20-25%

3. Those who vary their votes between Democrats and Republicans. For lack of a better term, Independents. Say, 4%

4. Someone who hasn't seen them fuck things up as often as I have might be more charitable and call them the "Voters for Principle," but I call them the loons, aka the lunatic fringe, who are always sniffing for, susceptible to, candidates that have no chance of winning. Included in this are those who, time to time, consciously refuse to vote at all because no candidate passes their childishly high threshholds of purity. And, yes, the Naderities who carried George Bush fils to the Oval Office via the Supreme Court fall into this category despite often being otherwise good people. Chalk it up to temporary insanity that resulted in if not permanently damaging humankind and the planet at least past the duration of many of our lives. 1%, though it might have been higher for Nader.

WHY?

DEMS: a combination of coming from Dem-dominant families and/or those who have actually examined the records of the parties over the last century which, obviously, would retroactively go past their earliest records on gay issues to feminism, racism, militarism, and what Jesse Jackson called the human misery index.

REPUBS: a combination of coming from Repub-dominant families and/or those who have actually examined the records of the parties over the last century which, obviously, would retroactively go past their earliest records on gay issues to feminism, racism, militarism, and what Jesse Jackson called the human misery index—AND DECIDED THAT association with wealth and stereotypical "normalcy" trumps all of those other issues. Stonewall-era activist, cofounder of GLAAD [when it had balls], and film historian Vito Russo told an audience at the Castro Theatre right before the 1988 election starring George Bush pere that "Too many people think this election is about Rolex watches." I'm confidant he knew it was not just about aspirations of wealth but aspirations to still the screams of their self-loathing hearts by contradictory identification with the man who had been a part of the AIDS plague-enabling Reagan administration. Throw in a soupcon of Stockholm Syndrome and you get the Log Cabin Republicans, the Austin 12, and others unaffiliated but voting the same solipsistic way.

Three decades+ ago, Laud Humphrey’s study, “Tearoom Trade,” showed that a disproportionate number of men who had sex in public restrooms were politically conservative. There are exceptions like Johnson aide Walter Jenkins, but from Larry Craig to gay prostitute devotee Ted Haggard, the correlation persists.

While the Log Cabin Heads have already started shoving them up John McCain's ass, at least even they did not endorse Bush fils for a second term after he, among other things, endorsed an antigay amendment to the US Constitution. Yet, as I recall, 20-23% of self-identified gay voters said they voted for Bush in exit polling.

INDEP: The most gentle thing I can say is because they're naïve, and because they are more influenced by candidates’ personalities. They don’t get that a President, irregardless of his or her unique characteristics, sits atop their party affiliation and will, with rare exception follow more than lead. And, again, no sane person can weigh the Democrats' cumulative record on all of these issues against the Republicans' cumulative record and conclude that any Republican Presidential candidate in the foreseeable future [read 25 years] is going to be more LGBT/racial minority/women/poor-friendly or more resistant to the military-industrial-authoritarian complex than any Democrat.

Category 4: Because they're crazy or simply can see that their "principles" result in criminally selfish abandonment of responsibility. No "principle" ever protected anyone from the rain or cold; never clothed the naked; healed the sick; nor filled the bellies of the starving.

The shorthand: 95% of LGBT Republicans will go to their graves, possibly taking the planet with them, a lost moral cause.

Michael
You Forgot
5 These are voters who vote for the man (or woman) based on those ideals that person supports by His/Her political history. These people usually make up the smallest group of voters and usually see both parties for what they are, two sides of the same coin.

I fall into the category.
Over my life i have voted democratic republican Libertarian and Green depending the Man (since i have not seen a woman that i can support) and his political position. I might support a binary social-sexual construct but i certainly support a multi-party political construct.

Good comment by the way i can agree with nearly all of it.
Take care
Sue

Interesting how the poll is shaping up undecided followed by John McCain then Ron Paul.But judging from the anti Republican comments most of the readers here are not Republicans and never will be so to remove the Undecided from the mix.Its a McCain vs Paul poll no Romeny supporters at all and no Huckabee ones. For the Record I have voted for Democrats Republicans and yes even Libertains and all the time calling myself a Republican. I vote for the person who I belive can do the job not just the party.

Hi Cathy..
That would be a good call...
The media treats Dr Paul in a most interesting way considering he was second by a point in Nevada and the Faux news service reported him as third.
Propaganda is an interesting in it's current incarnation "Spin"

To Quote the late William Cooper

"under the best of circumstances the truth is illusive. Under the worst of circumstances the truth is damned near impossiable to farrot out."

Take care
Sue