“Sixty-eight percent of [LGBT voters] polled between August 1 and 7 prefer Obama. 10 percent favor McCain, while three percent prefer the Green Party’s Ralph Nader and one percent back Libertarian candidate and Georgia Congressman Bob Barr. Three percent chose “Other,” while 15 percent remain undecided.” McCain’s ten percent’s far less than President Bush’s 2000 and 2004 numbers, when he had 23% of the gay vote. That’s sad for McCain. [POQ]
Lovin’ Obama…
Help make sure LGBTQ+ stories are being told...
We can't rely on mainstream media to tell our stories. That's why we don't lock Queerty articles behind a paywall. Will you support our mission with a contribution today?
Cancel anytime · Proudly LGBTQ+ owned and operated
Emily
Weird – Nader isn’t running for the Green Party, Cynthia McKinney is. Nader is running as an independent. (I know, nit-picky)
bobito
It may be sad for McCain, but sadder still are the 10% of the LGBT voters who would vote for him. Saddest of all, however, are the 23% of the LGBT who voted for Bush. Stockholm syndrome, much?
Charles J. Mueller
Not nit-picky at all, Emily. Accuracy in reporting the news seems to have degenerated into sloppy journalism, unfortunately. No one’s doing their homework anymore.
CHURCHILL-Y
What a lie those numbers have to be far less for Obama. Perhaps they’re basing their numbers on polls taken before people knew far less about him and his stances on our issues.
As far as “Stockholm syndrome” goes the definition of it is as follows:
A phenomenon in which a hostage/victim begins to identify with and grows sympathetic to his or her captor/oppressor.
From what Obama has himself said about our rights and equality(second class citizenship) to other American citizens it seems to me that if that Stockholm line is gonna be used it needs to be applied to both candidates since their views on us don’t differ so much.
GoodBuddy
About the factual errors it was PageOneQ that did the sloppy reporting. Queerty just rips stuff off. The PDF that PageOneQ references has it right.
I have been wondering why Obama is so worried about the election. After all, with a 6% lead in the polls this would be and overwhelming victory.
http://www.witeckcombs.com/news/releases/20080819_harris.pdf
Of course, this is an on-line poll. That is why they have this disclaimer “Because the sample is based on those who agreed to participate in the Harris Interactive panel, no estimates of theoretical sampling error can be calculated. ” I would say that means this is mostly useless information.
emb
I’m amused by the response that the numbers MUST be wrong because they disagree with the poster’s opinion. Obama’s and the Democrat’s positions on LGBT issues are not perfect, certainly; they are, however, orders of magnitude better than any viable (i.e., realistically electable) alternative. In anticipation of the obvious retort, that we should vote our highest and best values and not worry about silly things like “electability” or “reality”, it is equally valid to take a short-term view that a continuation of neocon rule in this country (which would result from liberals engaging in mass idealism) is more of a threat to us than a wishy-washy moderate Democratic administration would be.
I’m heartened by the poll results, statistically questionable as they may be; it’s that 10% for mccain that I join others in furrowing my brow over. Talk about not voting self-interest!
Dan
I reject your reality and substitute my own, indeed…
Watching these last few PUMA holdouts self-destruct is certainly providing for an amusing show.
seitan-on-a-stick
Thanks Emily. The Green Party now knows never to link themselves to the bloviated Nader. Cynthia McKinney actually introduced “Articles of Impeachment of Bush, Cheney and Rice” while the New York Media Mafia had her defeated in Georgia in 2006. This was her final Act for Democracy.
Rep. McKinney’s floor statement on the impeachment of George W. Bush:
By Cynthia McKinney, December 8, 2006
Mr. Speaker:
I come before this body today as a proud American and as a servant of the American people, sworn to uphold the Constitution of the United States.
Throughout my tenure, I’ve always tried to speak the truth. It’s that commitment that brings me here today.
We have a President who has misgoverned and a Congress that has refused to hold him accountable. It is a grave situation and I believe the stakes for our country are high.
No American is above the law, and if we allow a President to violate, at the most basic and fundamental level, the trust of the people and then continue to govern, without a process for holding him accountable—what does that say about our commitment to the truth? To the Constitution? To our democracy?
The trust of the American people has been broken. And a process must be undertaken to repair this trust. This process must begin with honesty and accountability.
Leading up to our invasion of Iraq, the American people supported this Administration’s actions because they believed in our President. They believed he was acting in good faith. They believed that American laws and American values would be respected. That in the weightiness of everything being considered, two values were rock solid—trust and truth.
From mushroom clouds to African yellow cake to aluminum tubes, the American people and this Congress were not presented the facts, but rather were presented a string of untruths, to justify the invasion of Iraq.
President Bush, along with Vice President Cheney and then-National Security Advisor Rice, portrayed to the Congress and to the American people that Iraq represented an imminent threat, culminating with President Bush’s claim that Iraq was six months away from developing a nuclear weapon. Having used false fear to buy consent—the President then took our country to war.
This has grave consequences for the health of our democracy, for our standing with our allies, and most of all, for the lives of our men and women in the military and their families—who have been asked to make sacrifices—including the ultimate sacrifice—to keep us safe.
Just as we expect our leaders to be truthful, we expect them to abide by the law and respect our courts and judges. Here again, the President failed the American people.
When President Bush signed an executive order authorizing unlawful spying on American citizens, he circumvented the courts, the law, and he violated the separation of powers provided by the Constitution. Once the program was revealed, he then tried to hide the scope of his offense from the American people by making contradictory, untrue statements.
President George W. Bush has failed to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States; he has failed to ensure that senior members of his administration do the same; and he has betrayed the trust of the American people.
With a heavy heart and in the deepest spirit of patriotism, I exercise my duty and responsibility to speak truthfully about what is before us. To shy away from this responsibility would be easier. But I have not been one to travel the easy road. I believe in this country, and in the power of our democracy. I feel the steely conviction of one who will not let the country I love descend into shame; for the fabric of our democracy is at stake.
Some will call this a partisan vendetta, others will say this is an unimportant distraction to the plans of the incoming Congress. But this is not about political gamesmanship.
I am not willing to put any political party before my principles.
This, instead, is about beginning the long road back to regaining the high standards of truth and democracy upon which our great country was founded.
Mr. Speaker:
Under the standards set by the United States Constitution, President Bush—along with Vice President Cheney, and Secretary of State Rice—should be subject to the process of impeachment, and I have filed H. Res. _ in the House of Representatives.
To my fellow Americans, as I leave this Congress, it is in your hands—to hold your representatives accountable, and to show those with the courage to stand for what is right, that they do not stand alone.
Thank you.
End Statement.
Clearly, the choice is between two African-American candidates in states with wide Democrat-leaning margins but not advisable if you live in a Swing State (we still remember Nader in 2000!) Some of us luckily have that choice and can choose with our conscience and not throw the election to McDeath.
http://www.greenparty.org
Doug
10% for McCain? Have those folks been under a rock for an extended time? Actually, i hate to admit this, but I have had more than 1 homo friend tell me they will vote for McCain because they will never vote for a black man. Sigh, it’s not easy living in the South sometimes. Rest assured, I do my best to properly educate the ignorant.
ChristopherM
Doug, can you start with Churchilly? Please?!
Bill Perdue
Those numbers will change as more and more people realize that Obama has the same program as McCain in terms of continuing the genocide in Iraq and Afghanistan, and extending it to Iran and or Pakistan. They also have the same shamelessly subservient attitude towards taxing the rich, NAFTA, cutting welfare and entitlements and are perfectly happy to play the fiddle while our standard of living crashes and burns.
In the GLBT communities the truth is beginning to sink in that Obama may not be the lesser of two bigots after all and this poll shows it. Obama’s bigot lovefest in Orange County is the latest in a string of incessant reminders that he opposes same sex marriage because of his christist ‘faith’ (read superstitious bigotry). Plus there’s his history of camouflaging southern-style christist revival meetings featuring swine like Donnie McClurkin and Mary Mary as campaign rallies. And there’s his infamous endorsement of bribing pulpit pimps with donations to their faith based ‘charities (read new manse, a luxocar, lots of drugs and a hustler or two.)
The angry reaction to the bigot lovefest in Lake Forrest, broadcast by CNN, in the GLBT communities frightened Obama’s shills. They hastily called a press conference repeating that he happy to have us as cannon fodder (read, he’s against DADT.) They’re afraid of the dawning realization that these aren’t isolated events they’re a strategy of pandering to bigot voters.
He needs bigot votes to counter the increasing effects of Republican swiftboating and racism and the one hand and the growing disgust with his cynical opportunism on the other. Luckily for him he’s pretty damn good at pandering: according to the Barma Group, a christer polling organization he leads McCain 43% to 34%, reversing a decade of Republican domination in that sector.
If bigots elect Obama they’ll own him. Ask George Bush. Ask Bill Clinton. But don’t be stupid enough to ask any of them to do us any favors. That’s not going to happen, Not now, not ever.
Mr C
Bill as much as I like many of your post for some of the information it does deliver.
Can we give Donnie McClurkin and Mary May a REST. These people have been long gone for a while.
I know you’re not prejudice at all. But what Presidential Candidate is there in any party (GOP, DEM, GREEN, PINK, and PSYCHODELIC)
Accepts all things GAY? Please I want to know.
And Doug that is a lost cause for you to educate the ignorant that HATE is embedded and has been taught in their homes by their parents. So those voting for McCain……All you can say Good Luck to them as they plan their own destruction as they live a Gay life.
They ask for it and if he wins they’ll GET IT!
Bill Perdue
Mister C – I think the point is that Obamas campaigm began with Donnie McClurkin and Mary Mary and it’s continued in that theme, because pandering is not a tactic for him, it’s a strategy.
The Republicans are going to swiftboat him, hard, and play the racist card, hard, and his reaction has been to appeal to christist bigots for votes. He’s got them so far, and if he wins with their vote they’ve got him.
If you think voting is important then vote for you friends not your enemies. But none of the candidates who support us can win because of rigged election laws.
I happen to think that our best hope lies not in voting but in creating mass sentiment for our agenda, reaching out to allies and building the kind of mass movements that will compel judges and legislators to do what we want. Watch for that to start in a big way for the antiwar movement on January 20th.
Mass action worked for unions. It won widespread desegregation, and for what they’re worth, voting rights, abortion rights and it ended the war in Vietnam and as a little bonus, the slimy careers of LBJ and Nixon. It built the unions.
I understand why people are excited about Obama, but voting for either of the twin parties is a trap with no way out. The war in Iraq, Katrina, a standard of living that’s going down in flames and the unending appeasment of bigots is the price we pay for falling into that trap. After the election all this will get very real again and the illusions will be blown away.
Mr C
Bill,
I agree with you on this:
Hopefully no war will begin on Jan 20 or never in that regard.
However,I appreciate your posts.
Joeb1212
I’m not here to dispute that 68% of the LGBT community supports BHO. The numbers are what they are for THAT poll. I don’t understand why, but since we don’t have the polling questions, who knows?
I do know that regardless of the question, I’m definitely in the 32% that would rather vote for ANYONE but that asshole Obama. And by ANYONE, I do mean John McCain.
Mr C
Who gives a fuck if you vote for that OLD FUCK TART McCain!