Even before he signed the (possibility to) repeal Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, queers loved Barack Obama more than the general public, according to Democratic polling firm Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research, which found 64 percent of gays approving of Obama’s presidential performance back in October. As for gays who felt the country was headed in the “right direction,” 46 percent of respondents thought so, while just 30 percent of the general population did. But if gays approving of Obama’s do-nothing approach to LGBT equality doesn’t scare you, how and why the data was released should. The Huffington Post‘s Sam Stein relays the “poll numbers, which had not been previously released, were sent to The Huffington Post on the condition that the full survey not be published. The high-ranking LBGT operative who passed the numbers along cited them as evidence that the gay community was not disaffected with the president prior to November’s midterm elections and that they would not lose patience with Obama even if he fails to persuade Congress to move major agenda items in the years ahead.” Which translates as this: A top member of Gay Inc., or one of its sympathizers, is attempting to convince America and the pundit class that even if Obama did nothing for LGBTs, we’d still have his back. That is, the very people responsible for pressuring the Obama administration into advancing equality efforts is working diligently to show that even if he fails to do so, he can still count on the gay vote. Which, if these poll numbers are to be believed, could be true. But shouldn’t “high-ranking LBGT operatives” be working to show that unless Obama works for the gays, he cannot count on our votes? And should LGBT Americans be willing to say as much?
K in VA
Well, hell, it’s true we’re not moving ahead much with Obama in the White House (excepting DADT heading toward an end).
But it’s guaranteed we’d be moving backwards had McCain-Pain won in 2008 (remember George Bush pushing anti-gay state constitution amendments in 2004? remember Republicans voting for the FMA back when they ran both houses of Congress?).
So, yeah, all things being relative, I’m sure as hell glad O’s in the White House.
Do I think things could be better? Of course! Do I get down that we’re not moving ahead faster? Hell, yes — until I think about McCain and Palin, and realize how much worse things could have been.
Meanwhile, instead of spending so much time and energy grousing against Obama for what hasn’t been done, we ought to exert more effort to pushing Obama and other Democrats to do more in the future.
Or do we want Republicans also running the Senate after the 2012 elections, and a Republican in the White House? Think that would be better than where we are today? Seriously, do you think that would be better?
Kieran
Gays should be damned grateful for the crumbs the democrats occassionally toss their way. Gays have no other political party to vote for anyway. Gays have no where else to turn but to democrats. Gays are totally dependent on the charity of democrats. Democrats don’t have to worry about the gay vote.
Spike
And the alternative was Grandpa McCain, who repeatedly denied that the military aggressively went after gays/lesbians to out them, why is gay support of Obama even being discussed? Because of marriage equality? Gays are worse then the teapublicans when it comes to making it all out them, them and them!
randy
Let’s get off the “Obama is better than McCain” — that election ended three years ago. The question NOW is what will Obama do for us? He hasn’t done much, and DADT was repealed mostly without his help or planning.
I agree with Queerty — our gay leaders and us little people should be pressuring Obama to use his bully pulpit to shame the homophobes and to pass the legislation we need.
Enough excuses about McCain, okay?
reason
@randy: The majority of GBLT Americans know that Organizing for America did an overwhelming amount of work towards helping to get DADT passed. They are also aware of the hate crimes bill and all of the other federal changes that have happened. They are also cognizant of the climate and the difficulty to get legislation passed, they understand political nuisance.
It is not the presidents job to get down in the mud and wrestle with people that are beneath him, that would be undignified of the office. He set policy goals and manages the infrastructure that he puts in place to accomplish those goals, the advocacy groups are the ones responsible for getting into the mud. He is the president, not a civil rights activist. He is not going to be out their arguing with Rush from the press room, if you expected Obama to be an MLK in the White House you are sorrowful mistaken.
Some in this community have spoken when they voted in the republicans, this past elections, that they want to make sure that no more pro-gay legislation is passed in the next two years. Even so, this has been the most productive president on GBLT rights in the history of this country.
disco lives
a stunningly high 28 percent of gays voted for anti-gay bigot John McCain in 2008…
nuff said.
SteamPunk
Well, that’s an interesting revelation. I figured more gays would be dissatisfied with President O, too. (Just like so much of the rest of the country.) To be fair, I’d argue that Obama probably has done a lot for gay people in two years compared to the last five presidents, though it’d be nice to have a couple more key things gone. Everyone wants their priorities first, though: A better economy, stricter environmental legislation, gay rights, education reform…
Maybe there are a lot of gay people in this country who are more the “Glass Half Full” type. Or maybe they realize that as much as the president has done for gay people in two years, we could likely count on none of them being done if there was a conservative in office. The fact that many incoming Republicans vowed to spend the next two years undoing much of what Obama has done in the past two years, and Mitch McConnell has vowed to work to “make Obama a one-term president” – instead of fixing the economy or enacting civil rights legislation, I think we made the right choice.
Cam
If gays were so happy then why did donations to the Dems from gays and gay organizations drop by somewhere around 85% in the last election. Gee, that wouldn’t have had anything to do with the mad rush to pass a DADT repeal now would it?
As for the 64% of gays that approved of Obama…yeah, down from around 90% after he first won.
But again, the nameless gay official is just Joe Solomnase doing what his real job is, to be a lapdog for the party and the president.
I’ve got major goodwill right now because of the DADT repeal, but not to go too old school, but Janet Jackson had it right, and not too long from now the theme will start becoming “What have you done for me lately”.
If they want my enthusiastic vote 2 years from now, I better here ENDA or DOMA or both mentioned.
jackieohboy
this seems to be a pretty pointless story. It is not as if there are any alternatives to choose from, we essentially have a two party system. When reelection time comes gays will vote for Obama because who will the alternative be? Sarah Palin, Rand Paul? I’d sooner cut off my arm than vote for either of them.
MistressTalia
What will be effected is not votes, per se, but fundraising and volunteer efforts.
Cause it’s true that gays and other liberal folks have no one else to vote for, and that was pretty much known before any poll.
But lukewarm votes are worth a lot less to O and other Dem candidates than what enthusiasm evokes – both money and volunteer hours – the needed stuff to win the “undecideds” – which are the folks whose votes win or lose every campaign.
O largely won the presidency based on grassroots enthusiasm winning over more undecideds than McCain.
Disappointing all those enthusiastic people is a stupid political move on his part.