Dennis Kucinich and Mike Gravel are the only Democratic presidential candidates that support gay marriage. Then why aren’t these men garnering more pink partners? We’d say “pragmatism”.
Kucinich disagrees: a vote for him is not “wasted”.
The 61-year old Ohio native tells The Advocate:
People have to know that they can win. It’s not about what candidate wins. Will LGBT people be winners in this election? The only way you can win is to have the courage to vote for what you want. A courageous vote is the only vote worth casting. As a community of people with courage, the LGBT community has been able to demonstrate a great deal of courage and authenticity. So why would politics represent something different than what our lives represent?
Kucinich goes on to say that voting for a more visible – predictable? – candidate is “antithetical” to the gay movement. He goes on, “[It’s] counterproductive to the point of being worrisome.”
We’d like to remind readers that just yesterday Kucinich told his Iowa supporters that if he doesn’t get the necessary 15% of today’s vote, they should back Barack Obama. Obama does not support gay marriage.
How about we take this to the next level?
Our newsletter is like a refreshing cocktail (or mocktail) of LGBTQ+ entertainment and pop culture, served up with a side of eye-candy.
[Image]
Alexa
I am SO disappointed in Kucinich for supporting Obama. The obvious mainstream choice for any Kucinich supporter is Edwards, and I can only imagine what kind of deal Obama offered Kucinich to get his support. So very disappointing.
ousslander
So you will only back or vote for a candidate who is a sure thing? Why bother trying anything new or entering any contest if winning is not guaranteed. Such a sad existence.
None of the candidates, that i have heard support gay marriages.
ee.em.bee
True, ousslander, re none of the candidates supporting gay marriage. That’s a given, so we need to look beyond LGBT issues, at what creates a more positive cultural and political environment for LGBTs: four more years of neoconjobs and rightwing, flag-wrapped fear-mongerers and fundy nutcases running the nation, or putting as many dems (warts and all) back in the white house and congress. To me, the choice is obvious: Whoever is most likely to win in November. I’m done with repubs, I’m done with this administration, I’m done with a congress with too many republicans in it (in control or in a controlling minority). I just want a Dem to win.
So yeah, I’ll only back or vote for a candidate who’s as sure a thing as possible, cuz the alternative improves the odds of a ghastly horror slipping in. It’s totally indefensible on political-purity and and high-road grounds, but I’m unwilling to accept the smug satisfaction of another “moral victory.”
Alexa
ousslander, Kucinich urged his supporters in Iowa to change their support to Obama if and when he himself is eliminated. If Obama, Clinton and Edwards are the only candidates left, there should only be one choice for a Kucinich supporter, and it’s Edwards, not Obama.
Voter69
Before Obama was elected to the Senate, his plan for universal Health Care was very similar to Kucinich’s plan now. Also, Obama favors civil unions which provide the same right as a standard marriage. I don’t agree with this. It just seems like a way to offer gay marriage but act like your opposed to it. It will make him look better with the sheep, but gays and others who support equal rights and the constitution see it for what it really is — Segregation. Edwards has flat out said he does not agree with gay marriage although he will offer something like civil unions as well.
My guess is that Kucinich took what he figured was his most important issue, the war in Iraq, and offered his votes to the candidate who he figured would do more to end it. In my opinion, I could go either way. I am angered that Obama won’t support gay marriage. Also, his health care plan, although better than anything the republican candidates will offer, still keeps the insurance companies in the picture. Edwards’ health plan is better but he offers nothing better than Obama as far as gay marriage is concerned.
I will vote for Kucinich in the primary and, if I have to, I will go with Obama or Edwards for the election. I won’t be voting for any of the republicans or Hillary.
Charley
Two things a candidate can’t do or say and still be elected President. An atheist or change the traditional definition of marriage. As an atheist, I don’t care what my same-sex union is called, just so we get the same civil rights. I am endorsing Obama.
Obama Quote
“Today, New Hampshire has started a New Year by taking an important step forward that will make a meaningful difference in the lives of so many gay and lesbian couples.
As President, I’ll work for the day when all gay and lesbian couples in America can enjoy the same legal rights and privileges as straight couples. It’s time to stop using these issues to divide us; it’s time to embrace a future of tolerance, equality, and hope.”
ee.em.bee
Thanks, Charley. That’s interesting indeed. (And I totally agree with you regarding all the hand-wringing about nomenclature vs. the tangible realities of legal rights.)
todd
In Michigan, vote UNDECIDED! It’s our only option for our vote to count.
Voter69
There is the possibility Kucinich is using his “recommendation” (he says it is NOT an endorsement and is for Iowa only) of Obama in order to knock Hillery down enough to make voters reconsider their confidence in her. So, maybe it is not a matter of supporting a candidate, but strategically hitting another.
One thing it did was give Kucinich some publicity and maybe make some undecided voters who were interested in Obama turn and give Kucinich a look.
Just a thought.
FarmerJean
In Michigan on Jan. 15, vote for Kucinich!
Obama is not on the ballot in Michigan. Neither is Edwards, Biden or Richardson. They bought the DNC line that Michigan should not move up its primary, and candidates should take their names off the ballot in protest. Those four did, Kucinich tried but a paperwork snafu kept him on. Clinton never tried to get off, same for Dodd and Gravel.
So in Michigan, the face-off is between war hawk Hillary “can you say Bill’s NAFTA” Clinton, and Dennis “yes to gay marriage, yes to not-for-profit universal health care, get out of NAFTA, get out of Iraq” Kucinich, plus Chris Dodd and Mike Gravel.
In Iowa, if (and only if)Kucinich is not viable with 15% at a local precinct caucus, he suggests that his folks go with Obama. Coincidentally, Obama is not viable at all in Michigan simply because he’s not on the ballot.
I’m hoping there’s a trade-off in the works — Kucinich’s folks’ second round choice to Obama in Iowa, Obama’s folks to Kucinich in Michigan. That would really show where people stand on the real issues.
In Michigan, vote Kucinich!