Six Things Hillary Clinton Has To Do To Prove She Really Values Our Vote

HillaryClinton_2326613bHillary Clinton is announcing that she’s running for president, which is a surprise of a magnitude unsurpassed since Barry Manilow wed another man. Clinton has been considered a candidate since Election Night 2012, and in the absence of any declared rivals, enters the race as the inevitable nominee.

Things can always go sideways for her, but no one else has the campaign apparatus, name recognition and resume to match hers. There is Vice President Joe Biden, but he hasn’t put together the team necessary for a campaign. There’s Martin O’Malley, and if you said, who’s that?, you just identified the main problem the former Maryland governor faces.

But just because Hillary is inevitable doesn’t mean she should take the LGBT vote for granted. Granted, the Republican alternative is too grim to imagine. Still, that doesn’t mean that Hillary should just expect us to line up at the polls for her. Here are five things that Clinton needs to do to prove that she is serious about wanting our vote.

1. Explain why she was so late to embrace marriage equality. Clinton didn’t get around to announcing her support for marriage equality until March 2013, just three months before the Supreme Court’s DOMA decision, six months after the Democratic party included it in its platform and ten months after President Obama announced his support for it. What took so long? Republican Sen. Rob Portman announced his support for gay marriage three days before. It’s kind of sad that Clinton was so tardy that she was upstaged by a Republican, and a conservative one at that.

2. Prove she’s not defensive about LGBT issues. One of the low-lights of Hillary’s pre-announcement tour was her disastrous interview with Terry Gross on NPR. What should have been a simple question about whether Clinton felt constrained in her support for marriage equality because of politics turned into a defensive crouch by the candidate. Clinton felt insulted by the suggestion and her response boiled down to “I’m proud of what I’ve done.” And that was not in a hostile interview. It’s worrisome that a thoughtful question somehow leads to an unnecessary outburst. Hillary is going to have to prove that that’s an exception, not the rule.

3. Get personal. Who are the gay and lesbian people in Hillary’s life? Who educated her about LGBT issues? What are the stories that changed her mind about gay rights? Right now, the answer is, who knows? One of Clinton’s flaws as a candidate is that she’s so cautious that she doesn’t get personal the way that Joe Biden does. But it also suggests–fairly or not–that Clinton isn’t entirely comfortable talking about the issue. Getting personal would put that problem to rest.

4. Make it clear she doesn’t share Bill’s tactics. Clinton is her own person, but she came into politics as the wife of Bill Clinton, the man who signed DOMA into law and then advertised it on Christian radio stations. Sad to say, such shamelessness worked for the first President Clinton. Did Hillary learn that same lesson? She needs to explain to us how she loves Bill, but she will follow her own path. That means not selling us out if it’s convenient.

5. Address the lesbian rumors. The right-wing has long speculated (or perhaps fantasized is the appropriate word) that Clinton is a closeted lesbian. Clinton has never really addressed the rumors head on. She should. But how she should will be revealing. If she’s defensive and treats the accusation as a slur, that would be a bad sign. If she uses it as an opportunity to educate the public while poking some fun at her foes, that would be a good sign. She should start practicing now, because someone is bound to ask that question on the campaign trail.

6. Tell us how she’s going to extend President Obama’s legacy. The country is a better (but not perfect) place for LGBT citizens because of Barack Obama’s presidency. Marriage equality, the repeal of DADT, an nondiscrimination executive order–each is a major accomplishment, but put them altogether into a single presidency, and it’s a remarkable legacy. How will Clinton extend that legacy? She needs to come up with specific goals, not just platitudes. Will it be expanding the Clinton Doctrine that she outlined as Secretary of State? Will it be taking on transgender issues?

Clinton has big shoes to fill. She has to say how she’s going to do it.


Get Queerty Daily

Subscribe to Queerty for a daily dose of #politics #2016election #barackobama stories and more


  • Giancarlo85

    She has my vote… because in contrast the opposing party has only pushed extremists. Clinton isn’t the ideal candidate, but she is a lot stronger than Obama. As far as gay rights, what Bill Clinton did in the 90s is different than now. Those were different times.

    She does support us, and does so genuinely. And she could be strong enough to oppose republicans on a variety of issues. Obama has tried compromise with the republicans way too many times on other issues.

  • twoguysbrooklyn

    She has to PROVE something to “us”? Kidding, right? We should otherwise vote for the Republican? Or sit on our hands, with the same result? A Republican Congress and a Republican President is disaster for us.

  • Giancarlo85

    @twoguysbrooklyn: A republican would not just be a disaster for us. It would be a disaster for this entire country.

  • I am Gay (just like you), Black, HIV-Positive, and Back Bitches!!!

    She probably does care a great deal about our vote, but she should care more about the Democratic party itself, and NOT RUN! Her ahead-of-it’s-time, Lesbian chique look isn’t working anymore, and was really just an inside joke amongst the LGBT actually when we first said it way back in the 90’s… over 20 years ago!!! She’s just a woman now looking for power, and legacy; disgusting! I don’t trust it!

    A sitting woman-president could seriously just be a nightmare waiting to happen!!!

  • onthemark

    In April 2007, how many Democrats planned to vote in the 2008 primaries for Obama instead of Hillary Clinton? If not for her support of the Iraq war in ’03, she’d have sailed right into the nomination.

    If you’re a Democrat who considers yourself politically aware, and you don’t know yet who Martin O’Malley is, maybe you should find out before making fun of his lack of name recognition.

    Agree that Biden almost certainly is not running.

    Agree #6 – she shouldn’t distance herself from the Obama legacy.

  • tampaed

    I can understand why you think she “needs” to prove something but seriously even if she doesn’t what are you going to do sit home on election day and risk letting a republican win? That’s just Insanity! Even with all Hillary’s faults and No one is FCking Perfect. She’s still ten Bazillion times better than anything else that stands any chance of winning. There is no such thing a Perfect human being Much less a perfect politician we just choose the best from the pack and hope for the best.

  • crowebobby

    Going by my gut reaction to all I absorb by osmosis about our government and our politicians (I find it all too repugnant to follow too closely) I think we’re going to be forced to chose between Hitler and Stalin in this coming election (one being bad doesn’t necessarily make the other one good). As gays, I guess we’ll have to go with Hilary (Stalin) for sheer self-preservation, but I think America is in for an ugly four years whoever wins. (Hitler and Stalin are extreme comparisons — I don’t foresee gulags or death camps in either case — but the strive for near-absolute power is going to be the same.

  • Giancarlo85

    @onthemark: O’MAlley? Is this the best name you have? Ridiculous. If we wanted a real potent name you could name the California Governor. But he’s a bit too old this time around.

    Hillary will be running and there isn’t another potent enough democrat out there to take it from her.

    I’m with Tampaed, she is far from perfect and she has quite a few faults. Some I find objectionable. But I will take Hillary over any republican any day.

  • tampaed

    Martin Mallory? Seriously???? Ok 1st of all WHO? and second 2nd WHO???
    No way in hell this guy ever stands a chance. He’ll never get the Support or $$$$ to run a real campaign at this date. He should have been working on getting his name out LONG before now if he even thought about running. He could be the absolute perfect candidate and right for all of America but That doesn’t mean Squat in Real politics and its a little too late at this point when you’re up against Names like Clinton. Sorry but Yes it is a Names game just as much as anything else.

  • petensfo

    Clinton just named a gay man to manage her campaign, btw.

    I think it’s important that people don’t get lost in the media-circus that demands constant new material. We probably haven’t had a candidate in decades that has been as well qualified as Clinton.

    The Marriage Equality stuff has been frustrating for years & by many more people than Clinton, but don’t forget her UN quote in 2011, “gay rights are human rights and human rights are gay rights.” That’s pretty unequivocal support on the world stage.

    If I have a concern with Clinton, I think she’s too hawkish.

  • onthemark

    @Giancarlo85: “But I will take Hillary over any republican any day.”

    Me too!

  • derp

    The Democratic Party is a disgusting failure. There’s no organization, no spine and barely even a clue.

    President Obama’s organization and leadership is sadly the exception to the rule. We’ve had over 6 years to prospect and field worthy candidates and the next generation of leaders. Yet, here we are stuck with Clinton. But for small handful of issues she, like her husband, is really just a moderate Republican.

  • downtownla

    The problem with Hillary is not her terrible positions (which are very center-right, pro-war and pro-big business), but the fact she is a terrible campaigner. She doesn’t connect with voters and she makes the worst political decisions. Just look at the past six months and her soft rollout – how she was broke and the email scandal. Wait until the campaign starts to get nasty. If she makes it out of the Democratic Party, I actually think the Republicans have a very good shot at beating her. Let’s find someone who can truly inspire voters and win the presidency.

  • Giancarlo85

    @derp: First off, wrong. Hillary is the one that is going to be a worthy candidate, and there are a handful of names that are also potent (and certainly not O’Malley).

    And as far as terrible campaigners, she isn’t one. The republicans don’t have anyone that even stands a chance.

  • onthemark

    Elizabeth Warren – doesn’t want to run and has said so many, many, many times. Is great IMO on domestic, economic issues, but little experience (or interest, really) in foreign policy. Believes she can have more long-term impact on economic policy in the Senate.

    Joe Biden – doesn’t want to run. (Leave aside how old he is.)

    Bernie Sanders – nice guy, probably not interested. (Leave aside how old he is.)

    Jerry Brown – too old, as Giancarlo points out.

    Andrew Cuomo – spiteful, vindictive f*ck who wouldn’t sell well outside of NY. The skinny Chris Christie of the Democratic Party! Fortunately, probably not interested.

    I’m glad that O’Malley is at least an available back-up, just in case Hillary stumbles or implodes somehow.

  • Giancarlo85

    @onthemark: Warren could be a good VP.

    Biden is too old.

    Jerry Brown would be an exceptional candidate, but the Presidency tends to age someone. This might be of concern for Hillary too.

    But O’Malley is NOT a back-up and isn’t even a VIABLE candidate. Sorry, but you might say “who cares about name recognition”… well that’s a big part of a campaign. And O’Malley simply isn’t viable.

  • martinbakman

    Sometimes I wonder if the Repubs want to win it, when they have so many crackpots in the hunt.

    I can’t think of any scenario voting for a Repub candidate for President unless he was an out gay many or woman. So yeah, not likely.

    H.C. will say almost anything to get our vote. She’s as shady as her husband. But what she cares most about like any politician is how much of our money is being deposited in her campaign account each day.

  • polarisfashion

    @martinbakman: I agree, the Republican Presidential candidates are a bunch of clowns. The more they talk, the dumber the sound. They might as well just hand the election to Hillary. Maybe they are counting on us to stay home on election day. That is the only reason that John Boehner and Mitch McConnell got reelected.

  • Desert Boy

    Hillary Clinton voted YES on Bush’s Iraq War.

    Largely considered the worst foreign policy disaster in the history of the USA. The question for me and many others is, why did Hillary lack the courage to stand with the courageous members of the U.S. Congress who voted NO?

    People like:

    Sen. Ted Kennedy
    Sen. Barbara Boxer
    Sen. Dick Durbin
    Sen. Lincoln Chaffee

    to name a few. But alas, Hillary got onboard the Cheney train with her eye on a future presidential run.

  • Ryan Friesner

    Continue to lie, lie, lie, lie, lie and LIE.

  • hyhybt

    Not 2012. It’s been clear since the 2008 election she’d be running now.

  • lauraspencer

    I would love a female president and hope to live long enough to see one. I DO NOT want our first female president to be Hillary though.

    As for age being an issue in the election and many on here saying Biden is too old (not that he is going to run), you are aware he is 72 and Hillary is 67? Not much of a difference. If she were to win she would be 69 in November 2016.

    Her age coupled with her past health issues with the blood clot in her brain makes me think she isn’t the strongest candidate.

  • Mack

    If you don’t support Hillary who would you vote for? Cruz? Bush? Santorum? Rubio? Any of the Republican Clown Car? Face it without Hillary it could be a disaster waiting to happen for Gays. Everyone of those mentioned as an opponent will do everything in their power to make sure there is an Amendment put forth to take away SSM.

    No candidate is perfect and Hillary has made some mistakes. I think the Iraq war vote was because the Senate and House was lied to by the Bush Administration. I think the important thing is not whether it’s Hillary or not, it’s who would be her running mate. And someone has made some great suggestions. And none of them were a “Palin” moment.

  • schwma

    It’s either Clinton or Jeb Bush…end of story.

  • Giancarlo85

    @Mack: For running mate, I would hope she picks Julian Castro… he would be ideal… and a young face.

    As far as her health, I think that is overstated by the media. Her health is fine.

  • Ron King

    Everything opposite of Evangelical teabag/Klan GOP!

  • Desert Boy

    @lauraspencer: I think 69 was the age Saint Reagan was when he was elected.

  • Desert Boy

    @Giancarlo85: I agree 100%.

  • Realitycheck

    She doesn’t need to prove anything for two reasons:
    1) The Clinton and the Obama are the only presidential families that stood up for gay
    2) There is no other option, unless you guys prefer a republican.

  • Jonty Coppersmith


    1+ on Castro

  • Realitycheck

    @I am Gay (just like you), Black, HIV-Positive, and Back Bitches!!!:

    Do you have anybody better? Because it is easy to criticize but in reality,
    she is way ahead of the republican Jeb Bush in the polls, at least
    for now and the democratic camp doesn’t have any other strong contender.
    Last Hillary has 2 tremendous items on her resume, she has worked
    as a senator and secretary of state, and she is great in foreign policy.
    See how Obama screwed up when she left her job as secretary of state.
    You better hope she wins or gay rights will roll back big time with another
    Bush in the white house.

  • Desert Boy

    The other issue for me is, why has Hillary accepted $$$ for speeches from Sharia law Muslim nations that throw gays off building and bury us alive?

  • Desert Boy

    Putting Bush’s Iraq war aside, Hillary backs the USA Patriot Act, mass surveillance of us regular Americans, the 40-year old, failed drug war, and in the Senate, she teamed up with Rick “Frothy” Santorum to try and censor video games. Plus, she’s a Wall Street darling. Hillary has a lot of explaining to do.

  • Brad Krueger

    Mine too. She has already proven herself to me.

  • Paul Nadolski

    I did not vote for Hillary in 2008, and won’t support her in 2016. Not because I have a problem with a woman as President (I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party in 2012), but because she has ZERO chance of winning. America will not elect her President. Any other woman might stand a chance…but not Hillary. Since she will doubtless be the Democratic nominee, I will vote Green Party again…and bitch about whichever Republican is elected.

  • Blackceo

    I will vote for Hillary but I am not excited about her candidacy. It’s disgusting that a woman has not been elected President yet in this country, but there has always been something very smarmy about the Clintons. She ran a horrible campaign in 2008, ignoring the caucuses and considering herself entitled because her last name was Clinton. The Obama campaign outsmarted her in every facet of organization and mobilization and Im sure that will be part of what she has learned. I wish Elizabeth Warren would run to keep her pulled a little left. But, we’ll see. Having it a two person race late in 2008 made Obama a better candidate in the end, but I can’t see anyone stopping her this time. There is no Obama and Elizabeth Warren isn’t running. I live in MD and know all about OWEMalley and some of his skeletons. He doesn’t have a chance. I will be very happy for the historical aspect of electing apt he first female President if she wins, but overall Im meh. Lesser of two evils vote for me. Sure as hell am not voting Rethuglican.

  • Giancarlo85

    @Paul Nadolski: So you will vote for a party that has no chance and hasn’t made any impact in any election since Ralph Nader? Asinine. And I am sorry but you couldn’t me anymore wrong about her election chances. She has a very strong chance especially considering the extremely low quality of Republican candidates these days.

  • Chris

    Look at all your options and make your choice. If she ran, I’d vote for Warren; but since she’s not, …..

    We are hardly in a position to dictate what any candidate must do to win our loyalty. Wealthy gay donors are another matter altogether. And since many of them opposed the lawsuit that made it to the U.S. Supreme Court that propelled us along the path to marriage equality, I don’t see them lining up to force Hillary to do any one of these six things.

  • jwtraveler

    @Desert Boy: McCain was 72 when he ran.

    Barring some catastrophe, Hillary will be the nominee, whether we like it or not. Most of us will vote for her because the Republican alternative (Paul, Cruz, Bush 3, Carson, Walker, Sanotorum!) is too terrifying to imagine. That said, I really can’t get too excited about her; I don’t really care that she’d be the first female president.

  • IcarusD

    I can address issue #1: Explain why she was so late to embrace marriage equality.

    She wasn’t.

    In 2008, when she last ran for office, almost no political leaders of either party outside of the most liberal enclaves like San Francisco were publicly in favor of marriage equality for same sex couples. Not Obama, not Biden, not Kerry, not Edwards, not anyone. Not Martin O’Malley (he came out in favor in 2011). She was, however, like President (then candidate) Obama, public in her opposition to the Defense of Marriage Act. If you blame her for not supporting it in 2008, you’ll have to point the same finger at probably every other candidate now running for the presidential nomination for either major party (with the possible exception of Bernie Sanders).

    In 2009, she could not speak about domestic issues. Period. It is customary that the Secretary of State not speak on domestic issues, and like her predecessors, she didn’t. She did speak about LGBT issues in an international context, like human rights abuses, including famously saying, “And that is why gay rights are human rights, and human rights are gay rights.” But marriage equality was an issue before the states. It was a domestic issue. It would not have been appropriate for her to speak about it, and blaming her for not holds her to an improper standard.

    She served as Secretary of State until February 1, 2013. If you’ll recall, she then pretty much went underground to rest and recuperate, giving no public speeches or comments for more than a month.

    She announced her support for same-sex marriage on March 18, 2013. It was one of her first public statements on domestic issues since retiring as Secretary of State. So I would argue that her announcement of support essentially couldn’t have been any earlier (other than by a few days or weeks).

  • MarionPaige

    to all of you sane commenters who wonder what is the gay communities’ alternative to voting for Hilary …

    You have to realize how gay media and gay .orgs think. I you look at how “some idiot” actually came out and DECLARED that the gay community was dissatisfied with Obama, and the THREATS to not vote for Obama if he didn’t come out in favor of gayfuckingmarriage, you can only conclude that gay activists and gay .orgs are convinced that Republican Control of the White House and Congress will not absolutely no effect on them. How else do you rationalize RISKING ALL over gayfuckingmarriage (something essentially no one in the gay community cares about)?

  • jimontp

    @Paul Nadolski: voters like you in Florida in 2000, who were too “pure” to vote for Gore gave us Bush, the most destructive, most stupid, dumb president in US history, the needless Iraq War, the worst economy in 80 years, and you are willing to make the same ignorant decision again? My god, don’t you ever learn? Vote Green, get a Republican bigot. What don’t you get about how elections work?

  • lauraspencer

    @Desert Boy:

    And look how that turned out with Reagan. Historians now suggest that he might have had early stages of Alzheimer’s in his last few years in the White House. Hillary’s blood clot/possible brain aneurysm back in 2013 and her age is concern enough to question her ability to perform the role of President.

    Back in 2008 so many voters were concerned about McCain’s age and rightfully so. We also need to be concerned about Hillary’s age and her health.

    She has served her country well. It is Hillary’s time to relax with her family. She shouldn’t out herself through a crazy campaign.

  • Giancarlo85

    @IcarusD: Exactly. The Secretary of State is not supposed to discuss domestic issues, and she could not make a statement regarding the matter. She was going after nations that had a history of abusing LGBT people in several remarks.

    @lauraspencer: Her health isn’t an issue and it checks out more than Reagan did. And as far as Hillary’s time to relax with her family, that isn’t up TO YOU to decide. That is a personal decision she made… to start this campaign.

    @MarionPaige: Risking it all for gay marriage? That would be true for a democrat in some republican state… but on the national stage, a majority of voters support same sex marriage.

  • jason smeds

    What has Hillary ever done for gay rights? She stood by and failed to stop her husband enacting DADT. She stood by and failed to stop her husband enacting DOMA. I don’t think she’s comfortable with gay rights.

  • Giancarlo85

    I find it funny that some claim they know more about Hillary’s health than she does herself. Her health is fine. And brain aneurysm? Where did you get that tid-bit? Fox News?

  • Giancarlo85

    @jason smeds: What have you ever done for equal rights? Absolutely nothing. You’re the one that isn’t comfortable with EQUAL rights. You’re always on here supporting right wingers and making bullshit statements. You’re just upset because she is a woman. I bet you’d vote for Jeb Bush before you vote for Hillary because she is a female. You don’t like women in a position of power lol.

  • charwegl

    @jason smeds: failed to stop her husband? Tell me how a woman who is not elected to office could have stopped her husband from a law being enacted. Since you don’t know much about politics, here’s a lesson. Even if Clinton vetoed the bill, he would have been overridden by congress. Republicans pretty much controlled congress and several democrats at the time were pretty conservative on gay marriage. They would’ve given their voice to override a veto and where does that leave the president? With a terrible political defeat and infighting in his own party. Tell me: how could Hillary Clinton stop that?

  • charwegl

    Ask yourselves this: are you prepared to vote for a republican? Name one GOPer on the national ticket that you would vote for that would help LGBT rights? I say that bc Hilary is winning the Democratic nomination. She is crushing it in polls. If you’re prepared to risk having someone who despises the idea of gay rights then check R on the ballot. Instead you have someone who supports gay rights now! Forget what happened 20 years ago. Hilary supports the LGBT community NOW. She is winning that nomination whether you like it or not. That’s reality. And at the end of the day it’s going to be her against a man who is lukewarm to us at best. If you’re prepared to risk having someone in office who has evolved (I don’t care how it happened, but she’s with us now) simply bc you can’t get over stuff that’s long gone, then by all means vote for Jeb fuc688$ Bush. The brother of the man who championed all kinds of legislation against gay rights sounds like a swell way to go. If not, then shape up, get in line and let’s get the only democratic candidate that can defeat them elected. That’s reality. It’s not checked with glitter. It’s fact.

  • sfhally

    Seriously? Was this article written by some Log Cabin cretin? Because that’s just the type of smarmy,oozing with concern thing they’d pull. Do you want her to tap dance and bake a cake at the same time, as well?
    God you people make me tired at times.
    And for the “why’d you take money from Sharia nations?” queens. I hope that you can prove you never use gasoline. Or that it’s ‘pure’.

  • Clark35

    I’m not going to vote for her or support her since she’s a politician and like all of them they say one thing and do another, and lie to get your vote.

  • Giancarlo85

    @sfhally: Certainly sounds like it doesn’t it? Seems like this article was written by a fool who is willing to vote republican because he hates Hillary. Hillary doesn’t have to prove anything to us. She has already proved she has the background and experience for the office.

    And yeah, Jeb Bush. The guy who is still talking crap about us.

  • Giancarlo85

    @Clark35: Awesome. So don’t be complaining if republicans take over everything and start enacting numerous anti-equality laws.

  • AxelDC

    Gimme a break! You have two choices in 2016: elect a Democrat, who will most likely be Hillary Clinton, or hand the Supreme Court to conservatives for 20 years. There are 4 Justices who are 80 or close to 80 and they will all be likely gone in 8 years. We could either have a court that is 6-3 Democratic nominees, or 7-2 Republican. Which would you rather face for the next 20-30 years?

  • AxelDC

    @Clark35: Your nihilism is what hands our government to corporations. You think politicians care if you vote or not? Conservatives want you to sit on your hands and whine. Then they can run the country while ignoring you.

    Gay rights have advanced largely because we decided we had to get out and vote. Our voices are louder and more powerful than our numbers, because we vote!

  • Mark Schweitzer

    If it’s not Hillary, it’s Jeb Bush. End of story.

  • lauraspencer


    Hillary’s health and blood clot in her brain is well documented by every news outlet and yes FOX was one of them. So was the NY TIMES, CBS, WALL ST. JOURNAL, CNN….and so on.

    If people considered McCain too old and he didn’t have brain surgery then Hillary with her age and health issues should be considered to be problematic.

    I wish her the best. I would hope for her to be happy and healthy watching her grandchild grow up. She has given so many years of public service. She deserves to enjoy her golden years.

  • Giancarlo85

    @lauraspencer: Actually this is where you’re mistaken. Her health is fine. Hillary did NOT have a life threatening condition. The media, especially Fox News, grossly exaggerated her condition.

    She is making her own decision to run for office, and you ought to respect that decision as do I. It is HER decision to make!

  • Giancarlo85

    “If people considered McCain too old and he didn’t have brain surgery then Hillary with her age and health issues should be considered to be problematic.”

    This is an absolutely false statement to make, considering Hillary is in better health than McCain.

  • machuffin

    Why shouldn’t she take the gay vote for granted? There’s nobody else in the Dem side and NOTHING promising on the Rep side! What else are we going to do (not that I don’t think she’s a great candidate, anyway). To the issue of her not embracing gay marriage before– are you all morons? She just did what Obama did (and a version of what Repubs do) by playing it down the middle until she gets in office. Of course she is for gay marriage. And to the idiot who criticized her “lesbian chic”, a grasp at power and whatever nonsense you were spewing. Shut the f— up. I never realized how little men think of women until the subject of Hillary Clinton comes up. Maybe her confidence and power ar frightening to some, but they are reassuring to those who know she will be the next president.

  • tjr101

    Any gay person that says they will not vote for Hillary or simply sit out the 2016 elections are either a gay republican or just an idiot. And it is quite obvious there are a lot of gay republicans playing devil’s advocate on this thread.

    Obama will always be my favorite democrat but of course he can’t run for a 3rd term (and he’d probably win again too). Hillary is the best we’ve got.

  • Zachary Noriega

    Look at the ages of the Supreme Court justices. It’s almost a guarantee the next President will be picking at least one, if not more, justices. An LGBTQQIAAP person not voting for Mrs. Clinton would be frankly foolish given that fact alone!

  • Will L

    @derp: I think you’ve hit the nail on the head. I’m disappointed that Hillary is the best we, as a party, can do. I really don’t think she would be a good President. We need to somehow keep a Democrat in office and somehow convince Obama to make a come-back after that.

  • northwest

    Sigh. I’m not ready for Hillary. I’m ready for eight MORE years of President Obama, but sadly it can’t be.

  • Billy Budd

    I am not an american but I would definitely vote for Hillary. Damage Control. We must choose the least damaging option.

  • Giancarlo85

    @Will L: And who would be better than her? I think she would actually make a very good President. She has flaws, but she is powerful and confrontational. Obama has compromised way too much with Republicans. That needs to end.

  • 1EqualityUSA

    The Republicans would unearth another Scalia for a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court. Mmmm, no thanks.

  • IvanPH

    Quit your whining, Queerty. Hillary does NOT need to prove or explain anything. The fact that she is NOT a REPUBLICAN is reason enough why she should get the LGBTs’ votes and be the next person in the White House.

    A GOP president plus GOP congress has ‘disaster’ written all over it since they will be replacing retiring justices of the Supreme Court. A mainly conservative SC can undo what the current SC has done and, hopefully, will do for the LGBTs.

  • Nicolas Wysocki

    You lost me at #5 Queerty but I agree with about everything else.

  • chaddyboy6

    What has she ever done that makes her worthy of being President. Are most of you saying that just because she is a democrat that makes her worthy? That she has nothing to prove? I just don’t understand that. Do any of you remember Bengazi or how conveniently she erased her server with all her emails(which is a federal offense since she was using it for Federal business) or do you even know or do you even care? You can overlook these things but a republican does one little thing (no matter what) and you never let go? Is your morality that fluid? have you blinded yourself that much? Is all you care about are gay matters? And the ignorance sputtered about the republicans shows that most of you just feed into what you are told and do not do any objective investigating. Very sad indeed.

  • Cam

    Is this article a joke?

    Address the lesbian rumors? So the right wing floats rumors and you are saying that not only should she buy into it, but that she should not talk about issues, and instead address rumors. That is RIGHT out of the Karl Rove playbook.

    Rove said, if you can get them responding to your rumors and accusations instead of talking about issues, then you’ve beaten them.

    Then you mention that she came late to gay rights, AND needs to continue Obama’s legacy.

    What you seem to forget is that Clinton lifted restrictions at the state department on benefits to gay partners and spouses BEFORE Obama moved forward on the issue.

    Both were late, but she was earlier.

    Who wrote this article? Either somebody from Log Cabin, or somebody who wants Martin O’Malley to win and is taking shots at Clinton for being the presumptive nominee at this point.

    Here is a good way to let LGBT’s know she wants our vote. Not belong to a party that has attacking LGBT civil rights built into it’s Platform. Done!

  • Cam

    @chaddyboy6: said..
    “Do any of you remember Bengazi or how conveniently she erased her server with all her emails(which is a federal offense since she was using it for Federal business) or do you even know or do you even care?”

    Yes, Chaddy, we also remember you on other posts defending right wingers.

    Benghazi? Please detail out exactly what was supposed to have happened that 11 Congressional investigations didn’t find.

    And as for her e-mails. Isn’t it interesting that the controversy over those e-mails disappeared THE SECOND people started asking about Colin Powell’s e-mails, Condoleeza Rice’s e-mails, AND it was discovered that Jeb Bush’s e-mails from when he was governor had been erased as were Scott Walkers.

    But nice attempt at parroting Rush Limbaugh’s talking points.

  • BJ McFrisky

    Is this aging, hyper-divisive has-been really the best the Democrats can do?

  • Cam

    @BJ McFrisky:

    Notice how BJ can’t say anything specific?

  • Captain Obvious

    Who cares about any of that? This psycho wants to go to war as soon as she hits office and not just any war but the type of war that could become the next world war.

    I swear people will talk about the fact that she’s a woman or random things that only benefit them while ignoring the major reason we should never vote for her: SHE’S ALREADY PLANNING A WAR AND HAS BEEN FOR THE PAST 15 YEARS(or more)!

    The only reason people are even paying attention to her as a candidate is because she’s a woman. If she was a man none of her angry and vicious war mongering comments would be ignored. She’s made it clear she’s going to war.

    She’s just another Bush. And just because someone is in a particular party doesn’t mean they’re all the same. She’s fully rocking republican values, just like there are some republicans who are more democratic.

    People need to look at all sides and not just the ones that benefit them… Marriage will be the least of your concerns if we’re at war yet again at the command of another crazed president out for blood.

  • o.codone

    People don’t vote according to the issues, they vote as if it’s a celebrity contest. So, that said, Hillary wins. It seems like her time has passed and that perhaps she’s staying in the room too long. There is a time to leave graciously, and it feels like her time has come … and gone. It doesn’t matter though, she will win anyway because American voters want a celebrity, and she certainly is a celebrity. The only possible challenger might be Rand Paul. He’s also a celebrity.

  • Cam

    @Captain Obvious:

    It’s odd, you put up several paragraphs, and yet never specified what you are talking about.

    Exactly what war is it she wants to engage in? If you can’t even provide the details your post comes off suspect.

  • Cam

    For those of you Log Cabin folks coming in pretending you give a crap about anything gay, remember, in the next two terms a minimum of 3 Supreme Court justices will likely retire.

    So if you want Ted Cruz, or Jeb, Bush, or Scott Walker picking the Supreme Court for the next 20 years, please stop pretending you care at all about any gay issues.

  • GayEGO

    Hillary has my vote as she did in 2008. I don’t know any GOP candidate that supports Marriage Equality and I find most of what the GOPs say is repulsive.

  • onthemark

    @BJ McFrisky: “Is this aging, hyper-divisive has-been really the best the Democrats can do?”


    Now get packed, BJ, to go fight ISIS in Syria. Hillary wants to send you off to fight for… oh well, is it oil, or Israel, or whatever the f*ck it is. Something like that. Anyway, it’s something important no doubt. And we have your gay camo outfit all ready for you, BJ, you’ll look really cool in it!

    Btw, how are your new reading glasses?

  • Saint Law

    Poor yanks: a choice between another right-wing technocrat or actual fascists.

    Actually here in America Junior (Great Britain) it’s pretty much the same choice.

    Of course I’ll vote for the right-wing technocrat over the fascist, but it would be nice to have a candidate – and a party – one could vote for, for a reason other than that that are the lesser of two evils.

  • onthemark

    @Saint Law: Oh cheer up!

    UKIP seems almost social!st compared to the Republican Party!

  • Cam

    @Saint Law: said… “but it would be nice to have a candidate – and a party – one could vote for, for a reason other than that that are the lesser of two evils.”

    You ask for FAR too much! ;)

  • robho3

    Can’t we have someone besides a Clinton or a Bush as President. Hilary will say anything to get elected. I don’t trust her at all. We need a new fresh face in the Democratic party. I’d vote for Rand Paul over her.

  • Ryan Bradley

    Good to see Queerty “liking” their own reporting ??

  • Blackceo


    Yeah that’s kind of my feeling minus the voting for Rand Paul thing. Hillary is more than qualified to be President but I just can’t get excited about her candidacy. In 2008 I was all for it until Obama emerged. Perhaps my meh attitude will change and it would be great to elect the first female President (long overdue) but I hope someone else steps in to make it a challenge for her. I want a more progressive message on some issues. Once she starts talking about her vision and policy plans hopefully it will excite me. I like that income inequality is going to be a focus on her. That’s the Elizabeth Warren type of thing we need to hear. Still wish Warren would jump in the race; not so much to win because I don’t think she’s ready, but to keep Hillary someone left of center. Of course, once the winner emerges they tend to go back to the center these days to appeal to independents. If she emerges she will definitely have my vote and money but I’m kind of tired of the Clintons and the Bushes.

  • Selma Newforest

    5. Address the lesbian rumours. Really? With that statement, you take LG rights back decades. The whole point of gay liberation was to be seen as fully human and capable without being judged on sexual orientation.

  • Sandra Michele

    seriously?! address the constant use of misogynistic slurs here first. “5. Address the lesbian rumors. The right-wing has long speculated (or perhaps fantasized is the appropriate word) that Clinton is a closeted lesbian. Clinton has never really addressed the rumors head on. She should. But how she should will be revealing. If she??s defensive and treats the accusation as a slur, that would be a bad sign. If she uses it as an opportunity to educate the public while poking some fun at her foes, that would be a good sign. She should start practicing now, because someone is bound to ask that question on the campaign trail.”.

  • Giancarlo85

    @BJ McFrisky: Hyper divisive? Have you taken a look at the mirror lately? Look at the republiturd party and get back to me. They divide this entire nation and try to incite idiots like you into spewing bullshit.

    @Captain Obvious: Wow you’ve been full of shit in the past and here you are again. Full of shit again. What war is she planning? She was Secretary of State and she certainly wasn’t pushing for any war.

    And what republican values is she supporting? START NAMING THEM. I want to hear it. Obama is the one that seems more like a republican to be honest… all he can do is compromise, compromise, compromise and compromise… he was viewed as weak and they took advantage of that. Now, I still like Obama, but he’s a weak President. Hillary is a strong democrat, and not a republican.

    @robho3: You’d vote for that gay bashing anti-woman lunatic? Rand Paul? Are you LCR types serious? Go and crawl under a rock please. We don’t need you voting. Seriously I can’t stand these backstabbing self hating fools who vote republican… and republicans are BAD FOR EVERYONE! They are BAD FOR THIS ENTIRE FUCKING COUNTRY.

  • Giancarlo85

    @Blackceo: Bill was a good president, barring the DOMA issue (which really was a product of his time and he HAD NO CHOICE in the matter as Congress had a veto override ability). I don’t see why we should be tired of the Clintons. I’m tired of the Bush’s though. Bill left this country with a surplus, and the last Bush left us with an economic mess and a possible depression that was narrowly averted.

    Republicans are always bad. Anyone who votes republican has no clue. If you think you’re voting for the wellbeing of the economy, go get a reality check. The last 4 republican presidencies have ended in a bad recession. One of those recessions cost one of those his re-election.

    Tell me, LCR types… what’s so good about republicans? What do they have to offer? I want to hear it!

  • Giancarlo85

    @chaddyboy6: You’re a blithering fool. Benghazi? What about Benghazi? What about the 60 attacks on US Embassies during the Bush administration? Or the numerous terrorist attacks? Or the 2,000 dead Americans on American soil? Or how about the 4,000 dead Americans in Iraq because of a lie? Freaking liar.

    “how conveniently she erased her server with all her emails(which is a federal offense since she was using it for Federal business) or do you even know or do you even care? ”

    Oh puh-lease. It isn’t a federal offense. In fact what she did was NOT against rules. They didn’t update the rules to include disclosing emails until a YEAR AFTER SHE LEFT being Secretary of State. LEarn the rules first before you make stupid comments.

    “Is your morality that fluid? have you blinded yourself that much? Is all you care about are gay matters?”

    If you cared so much about morality, why are you supporting republicans? I care about the economy, international relations, healthcare, education, the environment… and these are reasons why I support the democrats (even though I’m not even a registered democrat). Republicans are horrendous for the economy, have slashed health care and education in their last joke of a budget… do you lack a brain?

    “And the ignorance sputtered about the republicans shows that most of you just feed into what you are told and do not do any objective investigating. Very sad indeed.”

    Funny, where is your OBJECTIVE investigating? What have you posted to show us republicans are so good and not bad? I posted several relevant facts. But I take it you won’t tell us, peanut. You probably won’t follow up with a reply.

  • hellogorgeous

    7. Get rid of those godawful pantsuits!

  • onthemark

    Selena Meyer for president!

    If only Hillary were more like Julia Louis-Dreyfus.

  • Jess Lopez

    Quit your whining, Queerty. Hillary does NOT need to prove or explain anything. The fact that she is NOT a REPUBLICAN is reason enough why she should get the LGBTs?? votes and be the next person in the White House.

    A GOP president plus GOP congress has ??disaster?? written all over it since they will be replacing retiring justices of the Supreme Court. A mainly conservative SC can undo what the current SC has done and, hopefully, will do for the LGBTs.

  • I am Gay (just like you), Black, HIV-Positive, and Back Bitches!!!

    @Realitycheck: Are you honestly reading that I’m endorsing a fucking Republican candidate? I said she should think about the party, and a woman president could be more headache than your young, Millennial brain can fathom!

    She’ll probably take the take to make an overture on behalf of some dumb women’s equal pay initiative, like there aren’t very legitimate reasons why women have lower wages! Namely the fact that women take time off to get pregnant! That can’t be changed, but you’re gonna put a woman in there (with all of her woman issues), and we’re just gonna have to hear about for the next 4 years! That honestly spells nightmare to me!

    And yes I know how practiced she is everywhere else in politics, but politically women have just shot themselves in the foot for me! I’m clearly not saying vote Republican! This party needs to stop being a bunch of pushovers, and step up, and show their true colors, not their rascist, coward ones while talking heads like you want to be so quick to say, “Look how Obama fucked up!” That doesn’t make anyone look any better for not wanting the job, just because it’s Hillary!

    Are you serious, because if that needs to be clarified then there is no end to what else you all are misunderstanding, and about politics! Fuck Jeb, and his 2-faced, rascist, filling-out-government-forms-as-a-Hispanic-because-he-married-a-Mexican ass!

  • James Hart

    #1: She’s got to stop lying.

  • Giancarlo85

    @James Hart: Lying? About what?

    How about you tell republicans to stop lying?

    Do you have anymore stupid one line posts to share with us? Capable of any more thoughts? I didn’t think so. Just another troll!

Comments are closed.