At 1:28 in this video clip of Hillary Clinton's concession speech today, check out the ecstatic reaction of the young people in the crowd behind her when she hits "gay and straight" in her litany of supporters.
We're not baggage any more. A rising generation of voters identifies with us...and will shun politicians who shun us.
Glad I lived to see it.
13 Comments for ““Gay and Straight!””
posted by queerunity on
i was pleased that she mentioned our community
http://queersunited.blogspot.com/
posted by Richard on
True enough. Young Americans are generally less racist, sexist or homophobic then their parents or grandparents.
Yet, they do not run either party and many of them do not even vote.
posted by Carl on
The Democratic Party has been more than happy to mention us in speeches. We give them plenty of money and boots on the ground. It’s the actual support beyond lip service that they seem to have a problem with. That’s what happened with Bill Clinton, and probably with Obama too.
posted by Bobby on
“Yet, they do not run either party and many of them do not even vote.”
—Why should they? It’s the electoral college that picks the president. So your vote doesn’t really count. Even in the democratic primaries you got super-delegates whose votes count more than your own.
posted by Pat on
Why should they? It’s the electoral college that picks the president. So your vote doesn’t really count. Even in the democratic primaries you got super-delegates whose votes count more than your own.
Bobby, I couldn’t agree more. The primary process needs to be changed. Besides the silly way delegates are determined, and the fact that Iowa and New Hampshire always have to be first tell you that the system is seriously flawed.
And the electoral college, which MAY have served a useful purpose in the past needs to go fast. My vote is totally meaningless. If it’s a close race, NJ’s electoral votes go to Obama no matter who I vote for.
Sure, it’s nice to hear Hillary mention gay people. But the real question is what Obama and the Congress will do if Obama wins and Democrats retain control of Congress.
posted by Grant on
It was an interesting inclusionary gesture. However, I don’t recall hearing her include us in the list of Americans until she had lost. Maybe I just missed it before – but if not, it loses a lot of its meaning.
posted by Doug on
“My vote is totally meaningless.”
What, you think it would be meaningful if we elected the President by popolur vote? Do you expect your vote to be the tiebreaker?
posted by Gerald on
“Do you expect your vote to be the tiebreaker?”
My vote isn’t meaningless, but I would like to see it worth the same as voters in other states. Under the current system, Wyoming gets one elector for about every 172,000 people. Here in California, we get one elector for about every 673,000 people. The political leaders in the small states know that they have an exaggerated voting power, and they aren’t likely to give it up. The last time it was really tried, with a constitutional amendment bill in 1970, the little states filibustered it to death in the Senate, despite passing in the House. The Senate couldn’t get the 60 votes to invoke cloture.
posted by BobN on
“The Democratic Party has been more than happy to mention us in speeches. We give them plenty of money and boots on the ground. It’s the actual support beyond lip service that they seem to have a problem with.”
Indeed! Thank goodness for the stalwart Republican politicians who labor on year after year, decriminalizing our sex lives, instituting workplace safeguards, fighting gay bashing, giving us domestic partnerships, etc., all with nary a solitary “thank you” over the sixty years of their struggle…
posted by Michigan-Matt on
BobN, spoken like a true gayDemocrat! And to think you beat Richard-the-Independent to the punch in spitting out the oh-so-typical gayLeft condemnation of GOPers… congrats on the 100% spin fest.
The point you missed, BobN, is that the gay voice in politics has long been dominated by gayDemocrats who routinely and gladly sell our votes, our volunteers and our future to the Democrat Masta’.
It’s the same with felons on the cell block, blacks in the inner cities or elite intellectuals hiding out in the academic ivory towers that mar our fair land… like them, gays have been sold into vote-slavery to the Democrat Masta and we’ll never break free until our community admits the last 30 yrs of political alliance with Dems has failed, miserably.
The point was that Hillary or BarryO will gladly recognize gayDemocrats as long as they keep delivering the vote… when that starts to diminish, we’ll be left behind faster than the hispanic vote, the legal immigrant vote, the Catholic vote or the asian vote.
posted by Richard J. Rosendall on
MM wrote that “gays have been sold into vote-slavery to the Democrat Masta”
Kindly speak for yourself. I make up my own mind and always have.
“and we’ll never break free until our community admits the last 30 yrs of political alliance with Dems has failed, miserably.”
Failed? By what measure? And is it slavery, or an alliance? Please make up your mind.
I am no fan of putting all our eggs in one party’s basket, and I have even volunteered for a few Republican candidates. I have worked amicably over the years with Log Cabin Republicans. But Democrats have been much better on gay issues than Republicans. We have a long way to go, certainly, and the Democratic side of the aisle is not teeming with profiles in courage. But at least the Democrats have not tried to write us out of the Constitution; indeed, they blocked FMA. The solution to disappointment with elected officials of either party is continued organizing and not expecting politicians to do our work for us.
posted by Pat on
What, you think it would be meaningful if we elected the President by popolur vote?
Yes!
Do you expect your vote to be the tiebreaker?
No, as it would be very unlikely, but still possible. Call me a “one person, one vote” guy who no longer appreciates the circus called the Electoral College.
The last time it was really tried, with a constitutional amendment bill in 1970, the little states filibustered it to death in the Senate, despite passing in the House. The Senate couldn’t get the 60 votes to invoke cloture.
Gerald, some good news on this front. First of all, it’s the states that are given the power by the Constitution to decide how they use there electoral votes. And now some already see the obsolescence of the Electoral College. There is an initiative called the National Popular Vote in which the states who pass this initiative will agree that their electoral votes will go to the candidate with the highest popular vote total. It would only come into effect when there are enough states that would have a majority of the electoral votes. Right now, there are four states, Maryland, New Jersey, Illinois, and Hawaii (comprising a total of 50 electoral votes) have signed on. Further, most of the states are taking action on this issue. It’s nice that, once in a while, we do the right thing in NJ.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
RJR notes: “MM wrote that “gays have been sold into vote-slavery to the Democrat Masta” Kindly speak for yourself. I make up my own mind and always have.”
And that’s terrific, RJR; I would only wish that more gays were like you and I and not content to serve as patsies for the gayLeft leaders and organizations that routinely sell out our interests (and keep our voters & volunteers ho’ing the rows on the Democrat Plantation) to the Democrats… there have been a number of posts by your peers on this site clearly demonstrating the cross-over/sharing/cross pollinating between gayLeft groups and Democrat Party staffs.
It’s great that you aren’t one of them. That doesn’t go to the substantial issue raised here that gays in general need to break out of the mold of identity politics that traps blacks, felons, inner city voters, gays, etc into voting for Democrats NO MATTER WHAT the record on gay rights.
As for your queery, is it an alliance or slavery? It’s a political alliance that closely resembles vote slavery because gays, in large measure, continue to pull that lever for Democrats no matter what the Democrat record on gay civil rights.
Remember, it was a Democrat prez who stuck us with DOMA and DADT. I think that’s a record which ought to make every gay voter a true independent… but it hasn’t because the gayLeft and it’s media pals have kept the gay vote solidly for the Democrats… and gays go blithely along.