Comments on: The electoral ramifications of marriage equality and LGBT rights http://equalityontrial.com/2012/04/19/the-electoral-ramifications-of-marriage-equality-and-lgbt-rights/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=the-electoral-ramifications-of-marriage-equality-and-lgbt-rights Sun, 26 May 2013 03:20:44 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1 By: Derek Williams http://equalityontrial.com/2012/04/19/the-electoral-ramifications-of-marriage-equality-and-lgbt-rights/#comment-278208 Derek Williams Fri, 20 Apr 2012 15:32:23 +0000 http://www.prop8trialtracker.com/?p=16763#comment-278208 In answer to my question above, what hard evidence of LGBT sackings by President Obama do you have please?

]]> By: Eric http://equalityontrial.com/2012/04/19/the-electoral-ramifications-of-marriage-equality-and-lgbt-rights/#comment-278207 Eric Fri, 20 Apr 2012 15:27:12 +0000 http://www.prop8trialtracker.com/?p=16763#comment-278207 The commander-in-chief has the authority to issue stop loss orders, pardons, and defer discharges until after the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan have concluded.

]]> By: Jacob Combs http://equalityontrial.com/2012/04/19/the-electoral-ramifications-of-marriage-equality-and-lgbt-rights/#comment-278199 Jacob Combs Fri, 20 Apr 2012 13:23:30 +0000 http://www.prop8trialtracker.com/?p=16763#comment-278199 Oops–not intentional at all, of course. Just fixed it. Thanks.

]]> By: Derek Williams http://equalityontrial.com/2012/04/19/the-electoral-ramifications-of-marriage-equality-and-lgbt-rights/#comment-278149 Derek Williams Thu, 19 Apr 2012 21:18:29 +0000 http://www.prop8trialtracker.com/?p=16763#comment-278149 What evidence do you have of this? I can't locate anything about this anywhere. Was this after DADT Repeal, and solely because the servicemen and women were lesbian or gay?

That makes no sense to me for the President to dismiss people for no other reason than that they are homosexual, while at the same time he is spectacularly repealing DADT.

Please post a link to your evidence that the President personally sacked 435 military personnel in the full knowledge of and solely because of their homosexual orientation.

]]> By: Eric http://equalityontrial.com/2012/04/19/the-electoral-ramifications-of-marriage-equality-and-lgbt-rights/#comment-278146 Eric Thu, 19 Apr 2012 19:46:04 +0000 http://www.prop8trialtracker.com/?p=16763#comment-278146 That should read lesbian and gay troups.

]]> By: Eric http://equalityontrial.com/2012/04/19/the-electoral-ramifications-of-marriage-equality-and-lgbt-rights/#comment-278145 Eric Thu, 19 Apr 2012 19:44:39 +0000 http://www.prop8trialtracker.com/?p=16763#comment-278145 Let's not forget that Obama had no problem firing 435 lesbian and gay groups, because of their sexual orientation.

He also has no problem issuing executive orders to execute American citizens on foreign soil, without any judicial review.

]]> By: Glenn I http://equalityontrial.com/2012/04/19/the-electoral-ramifications-of-marriage-equality-and-lgbt-rights/#comment-278138 Glenn I Thu, 19 Apr 2012 18:39:23 +0000 http://www.prop8trialtracker.com/?p=16763#comment-278138 "On marriage equality, only 28 percent stated that it was be 'very important' in deciding who they vote for"

I don't recall that number ever being very high, even in the midst of the biggest anti-equality ballot fights. Does anybody else?

My point is, hating the gay doesn't have to be your top priority; if it's the 10th priority of you & 70% of the rest of the voters, the hate will still win out.

]]> By: bayareajohn http://equalityontrial.com/2012/04/19/the-electoral-ramifications-of-marriage-equality-and-lgbt-rights/#comment-278129 bayareajohn Thu, 19 Apr 2012 17:50:30 +0000 http://www.prop8trialtracker.com/?p=16763#comment-278129 I know he's not our guy, but it's still good form to spell the Republican Nominee's name right in articles.See graph 4, "(or Romeny)"

]]> By: nightshayde http://equalityontrial.com/2012/04/19/the-electoral-ramifications-of-marriage-equality-and-lgbt-rights/#comment-278123 nightshayde Thu, 19 Apr 2012 16:51:01 +0000 http://www.prop8trialtracker.com/?p=16763#comment-278123 "…that kind of caution may not be necessary." "MAY" is a very significant word there. It may not be necessary, but it may be necessary. I think erring on the side of caution right now is probably the safest bet even though we progressives may feel as if our wants are being put on the back burner. Just as Romney has to shake his etch-a-sketch to appeal to more moderate voters, Obama has to have the same concerns. He was fortunate in that he didn't have to make a shift to the left in the primary season before moving back to the middle to court moderates. As always happens in the general election, both sides are backing away from the more polarized base (since Dems know they'll get the progressive votes & Republicans know they'll get the conservative votes) and trying to appear as moderate as possible in order to claim a majority of independents.

One thing I'm hoping for is that the wingnut evangelicals who were so rabidly pro-Santorum (which still floors me since he's Catholic – but whatever) will stay away from the voting booth entirely this November rather than holding their noses & voting for Romney. If they stay away, it's good news for Democrats running for offices other than the Presidency. I've heard the theory (possibly even on this site) that Santorum being out of the race is good news for the pro-equality side in North Carolina. Perhaps some of the most rabid pro-discrimination forces won't bother coming out to vote at all since they know their guy isn't gonna be the Republican nominee & because they won't bother to come out to vote for Romney.

]]> By: Jim http://equalityontrial.com/2012/04/19/the-electoral-ramifications-of-marriage-equality-and-lgbt-rights/#comment-278122 Jim Thu, 19 Apr 2012 16:33:57 +0000 http://www.prop8trialtracker.com/?p=16763#comment-278122 Actually Ray, most of the American voting public is stupid and uniformed. By becoming silent, hoping that the American public will forget has worked in the past and I'm sorry to say will continue to work with the majority of uniformed, not directly affected americans.

]]>