Democratic Candidates on LGBT Equality

I don't 'support' any of them

since none of them (except Kucinich) 'support' me.

We all know Kucinich isn't a 'serious' candidate - in the sense that he doesn't have a chance of gtting the nomination.

The serious contenders - including Obama - are all basically the same, and all oppose full equality for gay folk, so it's really insulting that they would even expect the support of the people that they oppress.

When it's time to vote, at the moment I think I would vote for Edwards, and any Democrat is better than any Republican by definition.

But as far as campaigning for, or contributing to, any of the candidates, the idea that any politician would say "I oppose your equal rights, please send money" is insulting.

---

by: tiponeill @ Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 13:15:01 PM CDT

So Whaddaya Gonna Do?

Vote for a Republican? Stay home?

The perfect is the enemy of the good. Yes, I'd like to see all of them with Kucinich's perfect score. And, yes, I'll keep pushing Democrats toward perfection while there's breath left in my tired old body.

But I won't have a perfect Democrat to vote for in 2008, and I know that full well. So will I throw a fit and sit out the election, or will I work my ass off for the eventual Democratic nominee?

I think you can figure out the answer to that one, given that the worst Democrat in the bunch is still ten times more favorable to gay Americans than the "best" (i.e., least awful) Republican.

---

by: S1 @ Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 14:56:44 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Vote "against" a Republican

  And that is the way it is for me.  I am not voting "for" any of these Candidates, except Kucinich.

  I do feel a vote for a third party would be a waste.  Sure it might send a message to the two parties, but that is about all, and they wont listen anyway.

If I make sense? it was quite by accident.

---

by: HappyCat @ Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 15:42:36 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Not good enough anymore

Ive heard that "perfect being the enemy of the good" line too much the past 10 years....and being chastised for sitting out an election is old...the worst Dem is better than the best Rep is too tired to bother with considering anymore.

Our democracy is a an enormous f*ing mess.  Continuing to participate in the same ways that we have been for (at least) the past ten years isn't good enough anymore.

Early primaries are going to make this worse.  The entire system is being run like (another cliche) the tail wagging the dog.  Fund raising and constant elections do not give us solutions to problems or allow for real debate on important issues.  All we get are millionaire candidates jockeying for their chance in the seat of power with no real conviction about ideology. 

Voting for Clinton, Obama, et al is only pushing the same rock up the hill waiting for it to roll back down over us so we can just start all over again.  By "us" I mean LGBT people as well as anyone opposed to war and the influence of money and greed on our govt policies foreign and domestic.

We need a third party.  We need to start talking more about it, and becoming threatening about it, and taking action towards the creation of one against all the odds and the bitching and conformity and the resistance of the staunch 2 party control freaks.  As long as we continue to accept the 2 party crap, they will continue to operate exactly as they have been. 

---

by: Patrick @ Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 16:08:29 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

HRC and HRC

HRC is so in the pocket of HRC...why didn't they ask the candidates their position on DOMA? it's because Hillary isn't for repealing it and Edwards is. Both HRC's are a joke when it comes to the LGBT community

---

by: francis @ Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 14:15:13 PM CDT

Yes...

...there's something pretty disappointing about a candidate questionaire with unanimous answers on (nearly) all the questions.

"Our Liberties We Prize and Our Rights We Will Maintain" -- Iowa state motto

---

by: Sportin' Life @ Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 22:16:37 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

HRC raising big money in the desert for Harry Reid

I would like to know Harry Reid's answers to the HRC survey questions, because the HRC is raising big bucks this weekend in the California desert for Harry Reid.  Access fundraising or principled fundraising? -- you be the judge:
http://www.thedesert...
.
.
The night ends with a more intimate cocktail party in Palm Springs in honor of Reid, a Nevada Democrat. Tickets to that fund raiser, hosted by the Human Rights Campaign, are going for $2,500 each.
.
.
Andy Linsky, a realtor, philanthropist and gay activist, is hosting the Reid fund raiser at his modern Palm Springs mansion, which affords guests views of Mount San Jacinto and the Salton Sea.

---

by: TeddySanFran @ Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 15:14:38 PM CDT

Its Not About Reid, Its About Smart Politics

Raising money to help the leader of the Senate who will be crucial to our efforts to pass ENDA and hate crimes legislation is just smart politics. Reid may not support us on every single issue, but he is definitely with us on ENDA and hate crimes. He was also key in the fight to defeat the Federal Marriage Amendment

And no, I am not settling for half a loaf or selling out the community's interests. I just get that we need Reid's help to move our agenda forward.

---

by: Bloggernista @ Mon Jun 04, 2007 at 05:44:30 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

My point exactly

If you don't have enough money to buy a political party in this country, the odds of having favorable legislation passed is slim. 

It is not a new problem, of course, but it has become such an ingrained practice that attention is barely paid to it anymore. 

What are you gonna do - give to the Republicans?  The worst Dem is better than the best Rep.  yadda yadda....

Fund raisers like the one described for Reid make me want to puke.  This is precisely what we should stop doing.  Contributing to these campaigns helps politicians continue to fund pointless wars that they said they will end and it rewards them for producing no results on the behalf of LGBT citizens.

Keep doing the same thing...keep getting the same results.

---

by: Patrick @ Mon Jun 04, 2007 at 09:19:55 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Democratic Candidates on LGBT Equality

Gay rights come from the state house and the court house, not the White House.  Most anti-gay measures orginate in state legislatures. No president - even a Democratic one, is going to magically fix everything (remember Bill ?Don?t Ask, Don?t Tell/Defense of Marriage Act? Clinton?). The recent events here in Massachusetts show the importance of state politics. Boycott the national election. Give your money and time to the friendly local candidate - the state rep, the alderman, the school committee contender.  Your support means far more to them then the nationals. And, eventually, when it?s safe, the big dogs will really support us.

---

by: swbremer @ Sun Jun 03, 2007 at 15:32:06 PM CDT

Not Either Or

The fight for LGBT equality will take many forms and will cover a wide range of locations. We have to fight at the federal level, in the statehouse, at the local school board meeting and anywhere else that we must to ensure that we are treated equally under the law.

At what point do we politically sophisticated enough to realize that its going to take a multiplicity of organizations, engaging in a multplicity of tactics in multiple locations to achieve equality?

---

by: Bloggernista @ Mon Jun 04, 2007 at 05:37:11 AM CDT

Dem Candidates

Right now I am not giving my support to any, I am still waiting to hear a lot from my party candidates. CitizenCrain talks about candidates statements on immigration equality and notices a lack of wholehearted support by some, candidate Hillary mentions the possibility of fraud and abuse as well as additional cost, seeming to put budget concerns above equality; Obama also voices concern over fraud and abuse. Perhaps to avoid this, we should repeal the rights of straights to bring in partners or spouses, since there is probably fraud and abuse there, also. The NYTimes has a twofer: Sunday's magazine article on Hillary's War raises concerns with me about her rigidity and need to be right at the expense of admitting to being human; Monday's coverage of the debate mentions in the last paragraph how more time was given to the front runners. Who has decided to keep the nominations and election a horse race, focusing on who is running well (bringing in the $) and looking only at potential win, place and show positions when it is much more important?

---

by: gleeindc @ Mon Jun 04, 2007 at 06:26:53 AM CDT

None of the above

It appears that this poll might be a bit more accurate if a NOTA option were included.  And maybe put in ALL the declared candidates, not just the ones that HRC thinks are OK.  Where's Mike Gravel, for instance?

---

by: Jami @ Mon Jun 04, 2007 at 11:45:30 AM CDT

DADT

At least they all support getting rid of this.  That should at least give me some amount of security in my life if it can be done.  So yeah.  I'll vote for any of them.

---

by: Anactoria @ Tue Jun 05, 2007 at 05:37:25 AM CDT