Started By
Message
locked post

Social Conservatives and LGBT Community Team Up to Defeat Gay Republican

Posted on 10/31/14 at 3:55 am
Posted by Sentrius
Fort Rozz
Member since Jun 2011
64757 posts
Posted on 10/31/14 at 3:55 am
quote:

The right thinks he’s a gay rights activist, but the LGBT community don’t think he’s supportive enough.
The only thing social conservatives and LGBT activists in San Diego’s 52nd congressional district agree on is that they don’t want Carl DeMaio, the openly gay Republican candidate, to be their next congressman.

Social conservatives have made a deal with the devil, urging voters to support incumbent Democratic Representative Scott Peters over DeMaio. Meanwhile, the candidate never managed to convince the local LGBT community that he was a strong advocate for gay rights.

This week the National Organization for Marriage, an anti-gay rights/pro-traditional marriage group, joined Republicans and Independents for Scott Peters, a coalition of religious leaders and individuals who would rather see a straight Democrat in office than a gay Republican.

“We’re excited about what we’re doing.” said Brian S. Brown, president of NOM

The idea is to suffer through Peters for two years, until “we can work together to elect a true conservative in two years to replace him,” Brian S. Brown, the president of NOM, wrote in a message to “marriage supporters.”

Brown also lent his voice to a robocall urging San Diego voters not to vote for “fake Republican Carl DeMaio,” because it would give him a platform to advance his “flawed ideas.” In the message he asks voters to “consider” voting for Peters.


quote:

If electing a Democrat you don’t agree with at all to keep out a Republican you only disagree with sometimes sounds like a dumb idea, then you don’t understand how willing California’s far right are to cut off its nose to spite its face, especially when the GOP has a shot of picking up a House seat in the district. 

San Diego is, more-or-less, equal parts Democratic, Republican and Independent, meaning De Maio had a legitimate shot of winning. The San Diego Union-Tribune released a poll conducted from Oct. 17 to 20 that showed the De Maio and Peters  statistically tied. And that was after a former DeMaio staffer accused him sexual harassment. (He’s since been cleared of the charges.)

“We’re excited about what we’re doing,” Brown told Bloomberg Politics over the phone Thursday, referring to the anti-DeMaio campaign. “We think we’re making a difference.”

While Peters is just as bad, Brown said, social conservatives are “not going to be taken advantage of by the Republican Party," and criticized Speaker John Boehner and the National Republican Congressional Committee for fundraising for DeMaio and “kicking social conservatives to the back of the bus.”

And while Peters could win reelection in two years, at least he won’t be “featured by the leftist media as a ‘new Republican’ to be [sic] role model for young people,” as Brown wrote in a message to “marriage supporters.”

The DeMaio campaign has been diplomatic on the issue. DeMaio has “always been trying to push for a more inclusive Republican party,” said DeMaio spokesman Dave McCulloch. 


LINK



Bigots and partisans on both sides clearly demonstrating themselves as the lowest common denominators.

The reasoning and statements from the "social conservatives" are nothing short of amusing and so short sighted and bigoted and it's for that reason I'm gonna laugh long and hard at these "social conservatives" when they lose again in two years and they're wondering why the democrat won again when they passed up a solid republican that just happened to be gay. Backwards as hell.

And shame on the LGBT community disowning him just because he has an R behind his name and they're cearly the partisans here that have no honor and put party over what they fight for but this is the same party that defended Obama when he was anti gay marriage, go figure.
Posted by chesty
Flap City C.C.
Member since Oct 2012
12731 posts
Posted on 10/31/14 at 4:23 am to
Very interesting voting behavior, thanks for sharing this. I'm gonna bring this up in one of my Poli Sci classes on interest groups.
Posted by bhtigerfan
Baton Rouge
Member since Sep 2008
29405 posts
Posted on 10/31/14 at 5:13 am to
That's just sad. I don't know who is worse, the social conservatives who'd rather elect a Democrat or the LGBT's who don't think he's "gay enough".
Posted by StraightCashHomey21
Aberdeen,NC
Member since Jul 2009
125386 posts
Posted on 10/31/14 at 5:20 am to
Just shows people are sheep who can't think for themselves.
Posted by Ace Midnight
Between sanity and madness
Member since Dec 2006
89462 posts
Posted on 10/31/14 at 6:05 am to
All I can say is that - if Richard Simmons was running as a Republican against Mary Landrieu, he would have my unqualified support.
Posted by LSUGrrrl
Frisco, TX
Member since Jul 2007
32796 posts
Posted on 10/31/14 at 6:40 am to
I'd campaign for Richards Simmons just to enjoy the show.

ETA Disgusting behaviour on both sides.
This post was edited on 10/31/14 at 6:41 am
Posted by jamboybarry
Member since Feb 2011
32640 posts
Posted on 10/31/14 at 6:47 am to
quote:

And there’s no love lost between the two communities. In April, DeMaio told Fox News that, actually, social conservatives have been more accepting of his candidacy than gay rights groups. “I’ve found more tolerance, acceptance and inclusion from social conservative groups who have to reconcile that I’m a Republican who happens to be gay...versus the intolerance [of] the LGBT leaders [who] see me as a gay man who happens to be a Republican,” DeMaio said.


Eventually, the Repub party won't do bullshite like this. It will take time for the turds to die off but it will happen.

But as long as dem's see the LGBT voting block as a victims group they will never allow a gay Repub to go with out the "uncle tom" treatment
Posted by TheGasMan
Member since Oct 2014
3136 posts
Posted on 10/31/14 at 7:12 am to
Social conservatives are fgts
Posted by Ace Midnight
Between sanity and madness
Member since Dec 2006
89462 posts
Posted on 10/31/14 at 7:18 am to
quote:

But as long as dem's see the LGBT voting block as a victims group they will never allow a gay Repub to go with out the "uncle tom" treatment


That's going to be tougher, though. Gays and lesbians tend to be better educated, more solidly middle class, and more open to hearing opposing viewpoints than the traditional Dem ethnic constituentcies. Plus - "gay marriage" isn't the dog whistle issue for gays and lesbians that many think it is. In any event, the growing libertarian wing of the Republican party is going to have more to offer that group - over time, than the Democrat party of the past 20 or 30 years.

Again, IMHO.

ETA: And, it appears that the breaking of ranks from some in the African American community appears to be led by middle class blacks who see their shared values are more in line with the Republican platform than the Democrat one, for many of the same reasons. Middle class Latinos have long been more split than the monolithic urban Democrat voting blocs have been for a generation.
This post was edited on 10/31/14 at 7:21 am
Posted by jamboybarry
Member since Feb 2011
32640 posts
Posted on 10/31/14 at 7:21 am to
quote:

That's going to be tougher, though. Gays and lesbians tend to be better educated, more solidly middle class, and more open to hearing opposing viewpoints than the traditional Dem ethnic constituentcies. Plus - "gay marriage" isn't the dog whistle issue for gays and lesbians that many think it is. In any event, the growing libertarian wing of the Republican party is going to have more to offer that group - over time, than the Democrat party of the past 20 or 30 years.


That was the gist of my first comment re: Repubs eventually being a more "open tent" party of limited government with libertarian influences.

Dems are going the complete opposite direction. My point was just as you see in the OP, they will absolutely get nasty on anyone (LGBT, black, woman, dog fricker.... whatever) who goes off plantation.
Posted by navy
Parts Unknown, LA
Member since Sep 2010
29023 posts
Posted on 10/31/14 at 7:28 am to


How come one group gets deemed "bigots" and the other group gets to be alphabet soup ... simply because the conservative folks want to back conservative candidates?
Posted by son of arlo
State of Innocence
Member since Sep 2013
4577 posts
Posted on 10/31/14 at 7:58 am to
quote:

If electing a Democrat you don’t agree with at all to keep out a Republican you only disagree with sometimes sounds like a dumb idea, then you don’t understand how willing California’s far right are to cut off its nose to spite its face, especially when the GOP has a shot of picking up a House seat in the district. 


See Florida Ralph Nader voters in 2000.
Posted by 3nOut
Central Texas, TX
Member since Jan 2013
28799 posts
Posted on 10/31/14 at 8:21 am to
i'm in the "being in a gay sexual relationship is sin, but who cares what people do, it's none of my business, let them marry" camp, but this severely pisses me off. complete idiots. the lot of them.
This post was edited on 10/31/14 at 8:25 am
Posted by ragincajun03
Member since Nov 2007
21143 posts
Posted on 10/31/14 at 8:32 am to
Wouldn't surprise me to see some of these Tony Perkins types to be caught toe-tapping in a men's room.
Posted by FT
REDACTED
Member since Oct 2003
26925 posts
Posted on 10/31/14 at 8:35 am to
quote:

Repubs eventually being a more "open tent" party of limited government with libertarian influences.
If the libertarian influences are mostly social, with some involvement in financial issues and the republican influences lead to center right economic reforms, I'll be very, very in favor of this party.
Posted by FT
REDACTED
Member since Oct 2003
26925 posts
Posted on 10/31/14 at 8:36 am to
quote:

Wouldn't surprise me to see some of these Tony Perkins types to be caught toe-tapping in a men's room.
There are very few people in Washington I have more disdain for than Tony Perkins.
Posted by Meauxjeaux
98836 posts including my alters
Member since Jun 2005
39839 posts
Posted on 10/31/14 at 8:42 am to
If any of those social conservatives make it to heaven, they are gonna be flabbergasted at the fact there are gays up there with them.

Posted by FT
REDACTED
Member since Oct 2003
26925 posts
Posted on 10/31/14 at 8:46 am to
Have an upvote. I think LAT will be part of the welcoming committee.
Posted by Crimson1st
Birmingham, AL
Member since Nov 2010
20186 posts
Posted on 10/31/14 at 8:49 am to
quote:

How come one group gets deemed "bigots" and the other group gets to be alphabet soup ... simply because the conservative folks want to back conservative candidates?


Yeah I am with you on this. I think that if a candidate is acting in a manner that goes against the moral compass of someone, they should be able to oppose them in a free society and not be labeled "bigots". In a way, that is being judgmental and somewhat bigoted toward the people who wish to vote based upon their morals. We do know in today's society some groups are protected while it is open season on other groups when they express their convictions.

That said, I morally can't support Democrats as a whole even if there are some candidates in the Republican party that I don't particularly care to vote for on an individual basis. The Republican party as a whole best represents my interests thus the gay candidate would get my vote.
This post was edited on 10/31/14 at 8:51 am
Posted by udtiger
Over your left shoulder
Member since Nov 2006
98396 posts
Posted on 10/31/14 at 8:53 am to
I don't know why anyone is surprised by this...

Social conservatives are against the guy because his lifestyle violates their religious beliefs.

LGBT is against the guy because his politics violate their religious beliefs (liberalism).
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 3Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram