Replies

If someone could make an intellectual argument that there are millions of homosexuals out there dying to vote Republican if only they'd change their position on homosexual marriage, then perhaps that's an argument to make. It wouldn't sway my position, but I'd understand the argument.

But, that's not the case. Even if the GOP wrote into its platform a celebration of homosexual marriage and even performed one at the convention, we still wouldn't get any more of the homo vote than we get now - which is squat, bupkis, nada none. So, I say ignore them. We have nothing to gain and everything to lose. JMHO.

which is squat, bupkis, nada none. So, I say ignore them.

Hang around GOP activists, you would be shocked how many of them are homosexual.

I am no fan of "the homosexual lifestyle" but I think we would be much better off advancing broad agendas of less government and individual freedom that that vast majority of people share common ground on then worrying about what people do in their bedrooms.

If the “gay vote” depended on the GOP reversing its position on gay marriage, they’re probably not Republicans, or at least not conservative. I am inclined to believe that a gay conservative would take a more libertarian stance on the issue of gay marriage: either keep it at the state level or have the government get out of the business of issuing marriage licenses altogether.

That being said, I am disheartened how one could be for smaller government, low taxes, and strong defense, and be called still be called a RINO if they don’t believe it’s the government’s job to promote social conservative values.

It’s not really about the gays, but the people who like to think of themselves as supporters of “gay rights.” If we project disdain for gays, we’re not just losing them, but their “supporters” as well.

We don’t have to change our position on gay marriage, but we need to consider their friends.

Even if the GOP wrote into its platform a celebration of homosexual marriage and even performed one at the convention, we still wouldn't get any more of the homo vote than we get now

This is just completely untrue. Lots of gay men are conservatively inclined on economic questions, and on a surprising measure of social questions, as well. Gay men who are educated and successful are just as likely to have a problem with taxes and regulation as anyone else. Every gay man and lesbian knows precisely where he would stand in the Caliphate and while some are sufficiently blinded by ideology not to recognize, many do manage to recognize that Western victory in the War on Terror is critical to their basic self interest.

Are we ever going to get the majority of gay vote? Probably not, just like legacy and cultural reasons keep up from getting the majority of Jewish vote or the Irish Catholic vote even though in some sense we "should." However, we are far more likely to get better minorities among gay voters than we are among African American or Hispanics or unmarried women, who have much stronger pragmatic ties to Democrats than gays do.

(This is to say nothing about the simple fact that a whole heck of a lot of the Republican and Conservative activists, office holders, and advisers you think are straight are, in fact, gay men of some greater or lesser degree of closeting.)

All of this said, though, I'd still think that we need to spend more energy wondering why we are losing the Asian vote, which is going to be a disaster of tremendous proportions for us if not reversed, given the increasing percentage of Asians in the population and the fact that Asians are going to comprise a very sizable share of the economic and intellectual elite of this country in not very long at all.