What do gay and lesbian voters deserve from Democrats?

[dsc]

In 1992 gays and lesbians made up about 6% of the total voters and voted about 90% Democratic in a three way race. That is 12.6% or a little over 1 out of 8 voters for Bill Clinton. In 2000, gays and lesbians made up about 5% of total voters and went 70% Democratic. That was 7.2% of Gore's votes or slightly better than 1 in 14. The first is a pretty great ratio, the second is still not bad. I think that the numbers will be closer to Clinton's this time. Had Gore done as well as Clinton did among gays and lesbians he would be in the White House today, and 11% of his voters would have been gay or lesbian (around 1 out of 9).

So what should we get for those numbers? Under Clinton we got, via executive order, the end of gays and lesbians being fired from civilian government jobs. We got two confirmable appointees, HUD Deputy undersecretary and an ambassador, and a good policy on AIDS. We didn't get ENDA, cabinent appointees, a hate crime law, or any permanent change. So this time, what should we get for our votes.

Barney Frank in the cabinet, ENDA passed, ending Don't Ask Don't Tell, what?

[countmyvote4real]

1. Do you think we're in a position to negotiate?

Bush has declared in the SOTU that he intends to make us (or our partnerships) unequal with a constitutional ammendent no less.

While we are a very vocal and active group, your numbers support that our sector doesn't always show up at the polls.

What's to negotiate in this situation other than our penalty for being gay? Yes, the Dems need us, but they know we need them more.

[lcordero]

2. I don't agree with you

Yes, the Dems need us, but they know we need them more.

The Dems need every vote that they can get. If you don't like the deal that you are getting then you can walk, I will walk with you, and they will suffer for it. I know I sure as hell will vote with my feet.

on edit: I'm a hetero Latino. If they hand you a raw deal then they are handing me a raw deal.

[Sapphocrat]

6. Your post, lcordero...

...really touches me. Thank you.

[holeinboatoutatsea]

3. What do gay and lesbian voters deserve from Democrats?

respect.

All people are people, last time I looked.

[newyawker99]

9. Hi holeinboatoutatsea!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[foreigncorrespondent]

4. The simple answer...

...conplete recognition and respect.

[Sapphocrat]

5. For my own, personal, selfish self?

Easy: Passage of the Permanent Partners Immigration Act (PPIA), which has been languishing in the House for nearly four years.

Never heard of it? No surprise. Go here:
http://www.mountposeidon.com/atw/fair/

I'd frigging settle for that -- and that is not asking the moon.

But as long as they get our votes -- and our donations -- without our ransoming either for just one, lousy, freaking piece of the pie, what do we have to negotiate with?

Yeah, I'm bitter. Very, very bitter.

[dbt]

7. Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness, for openers.

Then we should just go through the Consitution and see where it says y'all are to be treated as less than equals.

JMO,
:freak:
dbt

[Smirnoff]

8. Expect More

I think you deserve more attention and more consideration than you are getting. Maybe I'm mistaken, but I don't feel like GL issues are given the attention they deserve. For example, in a speech by Wes Clark people were asking questions, and every question that was asked he had an answer, plan, and explanation. However, when a man asked if he was going to do away with the "don't ask don't tell" policy he just said simply "yes" and moved on to the next question. To me that doesn't really sound like he gives a crap. I want someone that is actually concerned with these issues and doesn't just brush them off.

[Touchdown]

10. However...Clark saying "yes" is exactly what we wanted to hear.

A very emphatic YES. We've been through the political circumlocutions most politicians give us, and I thought that one word answer was perfect.

It not only spoke volumes about what he thought about DADT, but also speaks volumes about what he thinks of gay people in general. He respected us enough not to feed us a line of bullshit.

[Smirnoff]

11. What do you think

How do you know that it isn't a line of bullshit? I saw the one word answer as him not really wanting to touch the subject. Maybe he's just saying that to please people, but has no real intentions of doing anything about it.

[Touchdown]

12. Because he didn't qualify it with excessive verbiage.

He could've easily said that he would call in the joint chiefs of staff to explore the issue, run it by the Senate, and work on a timeline for a "feasability test" and other such obfuscating language which would tell me he isn't really serious. Instead of all that, he said "YES", which tells me that he doesn't want to talk about it, explore the feasability, go for limited test runs, or confer with Congress. He'll be the Commander in Chief, and "yes" means that he'll just do it, and those who don't like it can pound sand. There is no other way to interpret that.

[Smirnoff]

13. hmm..

You make an excellent point. I'm glad I heard your opinion because I took it a totally different way. :yourock: