Nobody here claimed gays were 0.1% of the population. The paragraph in context is below:
Go back and read the post I was responding to again.
It didn't include any of the convoluted rationale and number crunching nonsense from the paragraph you quote. It presented the gay male population at 0.1%. It isn't my job to correct another's poster's arguments before I respond to them.
"...the idea that the GOP would be offending 80% of their constituents is just plain ridiculous."
Gay marriage, gays in the military, forcing the Scouts to accept homosexual Scoutmasters is opposed by nearly 80% of the general voting population. It is far from ridiculous to figure that 80% of Republicans oppose these measures.
Funny, Racicot didn't bring up any of these issues nor did he claim to be promoting them...but simply wanted to open up a dialogue with gays, many of which happen to agree with conservatives on other important issues.
Once again, you choose to add your own words to other's statements to promote your own points. Not very convincing.
I was convinced. Still am.
Convoluted? What could be more linear? Use your own numbers, and see what huge shifts in voting can be expected:
1. % of lesbian population that can be converted to Republican: _____ (i.e. 0%)
2. % of male population that is gay:______
3. % of gay males who are receptive to becoming Republican:____
4. Multiply #2 above by #3 and divide by 2, and you'll arrive at the monumental percentage total Racicot is supposedly chasing.
There is undoubtedly a population that is sympathetic to gays, and feels more comfortable with the GOP if the GOP is more comfortable with homosexuals. This population includes just about all the media, and it is for the media that these overtures are likely being made.
If Racicot is saying that Republicans welcome gay voters, and will pursue policies that leave them alone, no one on the Right will object. But the homosexual organizations will likely press for gay marriage at the least, and there the Republicans would be fools to go.