When You Shouldn't Vote Republican

  • GQjock

    Posts: 11649

    Feb 20, 2011 8:13 PM GMT
    To me there are a whole lotta reasons

    But let's break them down shall we?
    You shouldn't vote republican when you're

    1. Gay
    GOP's anti-gay trifecta ensures marriage will be an issue in 2012
    by Joe Sudbay (DC) on 1/27/2011
    http://www.americablog.com/2011/01/gops-anti-gay-trifecta-insures-marriage.html
    The republican history scapegoating of homosexuals has been a long one and for them because they've tapped into the latent homophobia of the average American seems to be the gift that keeps giving

    2. a Female who still retains the ability to produce Estrogen
    House passes Pence plan to defund Planned Parenthood
    * February 18th, 2011 4:28 pm ET
    http://www.examiner.com/democrat-in-national/house-passes-pence-plan-to-defund-planned-parenthood
    The funding anti-abortion House Republicans want to deny Planned Parenthood provides for family planning, birth control, medical and preventive services. The sad irony is that if successful in their attempt to deny family planning funding, anti-abortion proponents will actually be contributing to an increase in the number of abortions.

    3. A Parent with a Child in Public School
    Governor Rick Perry Urges Republican Voters to Abandon Public Schools
    by Libby Shaw
    When asked by a participant about budget cut's impact on High School Advanced Placement Programs the Governor responded:

    I really don't see why high schools should have to teach college level courses like calculus, economics, physics, chemistry or biology. Not all children go to college anyway. Texas has plenty of on the job training programs that teach skills and trades. Oil field workers need to know how to operate machines that extract oil. They don't need calculus to do their job.

    4. Someone Interested in the Environment
    Republicans Want To Ax Renewable Energy and Environment
    2/11/11
    http://www.sustainablebusiness.com/index.cfm/go/news.display/id/21871
    Congressional Republicans on Wednesday released a budget plan that would impose deep cuts on energy efficiency and renewable energy, scientific research and environmental protection.
    Better stated a republican who gives a rat's ass about anything environmental ....... wouldn't get elected in a primary if he handed each and every republican voter a bill with Benjamin Franklin on it

    So unless you're a white male without a union job .... not gay
    and without a child under 18 ?
    You really shouldn't be voting republican
    Oh and if you're not a fetus also ....................
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19129

    Feb 21, 2011 3:42 AM GMT
    Why We Absolutely MUST Vote Democrat...

























    I'm thinking....




















    Still thinking....






















    Hmmmmmm.....















    Ummmmmmmm,,,,,,,














    Nevermind... icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 21, 2011 3:46 AM GMT
    CuriousJockAZ saidWhy We Absolutely MUST Vote Democrat..
    I'm thinking....
    Still thinking....
    Hmmmmmm....
    Ummmmmmmm,,,,,,,
    Nevermind... icon_rolleyes.gif



    Don't be silly CJAZ---we all know that we MUST vote Democrat because Art Deco said we should! icon_lol.gif
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19129

    Feb 21, 2011 3:50 AM GMT
    This is true...we would be very bad "Anti-Gays" if we don't. Art_Deco says so icon_lol.gif
  • HndsmKansan

    Posts: 16311

    Feb 21, 2011 3:52 AM GMT
    CuriousJockAZ saidWhy We Absolutely MUST Vote Democrat...

    Nevermind... icon_rolleyes.gif



    Thats "democratic" Todd.... and you disappoint me, I'm quite sure you have the capacity to be more articulate that that....
  • HndsmKansan

    Posts: 16311

    Feb 21, 2011 3:53 AM GMT
    CuriousJockAZ saidThis is true...we would be very bad "Anti-Gays" if we don't. Art_Deco says so icon_lol.gif


    Well thats a hell of a lot better reason than voting republican...

    icon_mad.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 21, 2011 3:53 AM GMT
    CuriousJockAZ saidThis is true...we would be very bad "Anti-Gays" if we don't. Art_Deco says so icon_lol.gif

    I'm so glad we all agree. icon_biggrin.gif
  • tongun18

    Posts: 593

    Feb 21, 2011 4:00 AM GMT
    I think it's time both sides stop trying to campaign on fear and garner success by sandbagging the other side. I'm getting tired of the bar constantly being lowered and simply having to choose between the better of two evils.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 21, 2011 4:12 AM GMT
    On Tuesdays.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 21, 2011 4:16 AM GMT
    A big part of me wishes we could get away from the two party, bipolar first-past-the-post system we have in the US and develop a true multi-party representation in both the Congress and in state legislatures.

    There would be plenty of sausage-making as there is now (i.e. bipartisan compromise)... but much less of the sort of "OMG! A gay who didn't vote liberal democrat across the board... a traitor to all gaydom!!" that gets rendered to the sky in the shrillest tones whenever some gay guy doesn't vote the far left party line along with the rest of the hive mind.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 21, 2011 4:27 AM GMT
    alphatrigger saidA big part of me wishes we could get away from the two party, bipolar first-past-the-post system we have in the US and develop a true multi-party representation in both the Congress and in state legislatures.

    There would be plenty of sausage-making as there is now (i.e. bipartisan compromise)... but much less of the sort of "OMG! A gay who didn't vote liberal democrat across the board... a traitor to all gaydom!!" that gets rendered to the sky in the shrillest tones whenever some gay guy doesn't vote the far left party line along with the rest of the hive mind.


    Completely agree with you on the need for additional parties.

    I'm less interested in which senator or rep votes for/against gay rights than I am with those who are interested in issues of basic justice, poverty relief, etc.
  • tongun18

    Posts: 593

    Feb 21, 2011 4:41 AM GMT
    alphatrigger saidA big part of me wishes we could get away from the two party, bipolar first-past-the-post system we have in the US and develop a true multi-party representation in both the Congress and in state legislatures.

    There would be plenty of sausage-making as there is now (i.e. bipartisan compromise)... but much less of the sort of "OMG! A gay who didn't vote liberal democrat across the board... a traitor to all gaydom!!" that gets rendered to the sky in the shrillest tones whenever some gay guy doesn't vote the far left party line along with the rest of the hive mind.


    I'd like to see that as well but we would need some major campaign reform to get to those ends. I don't see Republicans or Democrats ceding even an iota of power to make those changes.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 21, 2011 5:01 AM GMT
    tongun18 said
    alphatrigger saidA big part of me wishes we could get away from the two party, bipolar first-past-the-post system we have in the US and develop a true multi-party representation in both the Congress and in state legislatures.

    There would be plenty of sausage-making as there is now (i.e. bipartisan compromise)... but much less of the sort of "OMG! A gay who didn't vote liberal democrat across the board... a traitor to all gaydom!!" that gets rendered to the sky in the shrillest tones whenever some gay guy doesn't vote the far left party line along with the rest of the hive mind.


    I'd like to see that as well but we would need some major campaign reform to get to those ends. I don't see Republicans or Democrats ceding even an iota of power to make those changes.


    Agreed. There's far to many benefits on both sides of the aisle. They will have to be forced to do it by citizen action.
  • mke_bt

    Posts: 707

    Feb 21, 2011 5:40 AM GMT
    alphatrigger saidA big part of me wishes we could get away from the two party, bipolar first-past-the-post system we have in the US and develop a true multi-party representation in both the Congress and in state legislatures.

    There would be plenty of sausage-making as there is now (i.e. bipartisan compromise)... but much less of the sort of "OMG! A gay who didn't vote liberal democrat across the board... a traitor to all gaydom!!" that gets rendered to the sky in the shrillest tones whenever some gay guy doesn't vote the far left party line along with the rest of the hive mind.


    A two party system that includes a far left party? Would that that were true.
    I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and not assume that was a personal bias slipping out.
  • GQjock

    Posts: 11649

    Feb 21, 2011 10:40 AM GMT
    Why We Absolutely MUST Vote Democrat...

    I didn't say vote Democratic ....... you see there is an "ic" at the end when you use that term
    I was just pointing out that many people who vote republican are voting against their self-interest
    Now you can say that isn't true ..... but really? You'd be lying
    History over the last ten years is clear as day

    Again ... I didn't say to vote for a democrat
  • creature

    Posts: 5197

    Feb 21, 2011 1:29 PM GMT
    It's okay, CuriousJockAZ,

    Vote for whichever candidate you like. You and the other conservatives can continue to ride piggyback.
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19129

    Feb 21, 2011 4:02 PM GMT
    GQjock saidWhy We Absolutely MUST Vote Democrat...

    I didn't say vote Democratic ....... you see there is an "ic" at the end when you use that term
    I was just pointing out that many people who vote republican are voting against their self-interest
    Now you can say that isn't true ..... but really? You'd be lying
    History over the last ten years is clear as day

    Again ... I didn't say to vote for a democrat




    Technically, neither did I icon_lol.gif

    Bottomline: I think people should vote for whatever candidate they personally believe in -- regardless of the party -- and we should not have to apologize for that regardless of how we vote. We all get ONE vote, and we are entitled to cast that vote however we choose. This idea that "Voting Republican" means "You are Voting against your self-interest" is a crock. That's liberal speak for "Your Gay self is all that matters in your Gay world". There are many gays who do not consider "The Gay Agenda" the most important thing in their daily lives...they have a different, and more important set of priorities --- and that is okay. I get that some here can't seem to fathom this, but it IS reality.
  • creature

    Posts: 5197

    Feb 21, 2011 5:44 PM GMT
    CuriousJockAZ,

    So you have stooped to their low level by using the term "Gay Agenda" too?

    I have other priorities in my life. We all do. We all care about the economy, jobs, and other similar interests. But that liberal speak you spoke of is not about the aspect of our being gay as the most important thing, it is about declaring what ought to be no longer promoted in our political system.

    I happen to be black. That is just one aspect about me. But I'll be damned if I am going to vote for a candidate whose campaign hinges on anti-black sentiments. I don't care if the candidate favors other issues that I care about too. Given how far we have come, it is inexcusable for me, and I would like to think for any of you, to support a politician or candidate with a racist ideology.

    I am saddened to see that you, and others here, are making the excuses for homophobic politicians and candidates. If you want to know what I truly cannot fathom, it is that with all the progress over the years that has been made to set homosexuality on equal footing, you are excusing bigoted politicians.

    It is 2011. Don't Ask Don't Tell has been repealed. Some states and the District of Columbia have gay marriage. Others have civil unions. In some states gays are allowed to adopt. Hospitals that receive federal funding cannot bar gays from electing who they designate to make medical decisions and for visitation rights.

    But yet you and others on this site find it acceptable to continue to vote for and support a politician who spew anti-gay rhetoric and use their legislative power to ban gays from adopting, veto gay marriage bills, and other actions that discriminate against gays.

  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19129

    Feb 21, 2011 6:04 PM GMT
    creature said
    But yet you and others on this site find it acceptable to continue to vote for and support a politician who spew anti-gay rhetoric and use their legislative power to ban gays from adopting, veto gay marriage bills, and other actions that discriminate against gays.



    Who would that politician be? You like to criticize who we vote for -- like you know my voting record -- but you never name any names. icon_rolleyes.gif
  • creature

    Posts: 5197

    Feb 21, 2011 6:46 PM GMT
    CuriousJockAZ said
    creature said
    But yet you and others on this site find it acceptable to continue to vote for and support a politician who spew anti-gay rhetoric and use their legislative power to ban gays from adopting, veto gay marriage bills, and other actions that discriminate against gays.



    Who would that politician be? You like to criticize who we vote for -- like you know my voting record -- but you never name any names. icon_rolleyes.gif


    John McCain

    And for mocktwinkie, Governor Scott Walker

    If you tell me who you voted for in the Arizona state legislature, I'm sure I could find some anti-gay rhetoric.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 21, 2011 7:01 PM GMT

    CuriousjockAZ you should really look at this :

    http://www.realjock.com/gayforums/1395315


  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19129

    Feb 21, 2011 7:35 PM GMT
    creature said
    CuriousJockAZ said
    creature said
    But yet you and others on this site find it acceptable to continue to vote for and support a politician who spew anti-gay rhetoric and use their legislative power to ban gays from adopting, veto gay marriage bills, and other actions that discriminate against gays.



    Who would that politician be? You like to criticize who we vote for -- like you know my voting record -- but you never name any names. icon_rolleyes.gif


    John McCain




    Actually, in the 2010 election I did not vote for John McCain, but rather the democrat Rodney Glassman though, ironically, while Glassman supported the repeal of DADT, he does not support "Gay Marriage" --- but then neither does Obama. Regardless, my vote had little if anything to do with gay issues. I just think John McCain needs to retire.
  • creature

    Posts: 5197

    Feb 21, 2011 8:04 PM GMT
    I was referring to the 2008 election, because I didn't know who you voted for in 2010. I know that you and mocktwinkie often bring Obama for not being a supporter of gay marriage (and you can add Glassman to this too), But I prefer to look at action. If a pro gay marriage bill passes through both houses, I doubt, even with his current position, that Obama will veto the measure.

    As I said, I understand that other issues concern you, not just "gay issues." But considering what progress has been made, there is no reasonable excuse to continue voting for candidates with anti-gay measures at part of their platform. This is not just directed to you, but other conservatives on this site.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 21, 2011 8:29 PM GMT
    creature saidI was referring to the 2008 election, because I didn't know who you voted for in 2010. I know that you and mocktwinkie often bring Obama for not being a supporter of gay marriage (and you can add Glassman to this too), But I prefer to look at action. If a pro gay marriage bill passes through both houses, I doubt, even with his current position, that Obama will veto the measure.

    As I said, I understand that other issues concern you, not just "gay issues." But considering what progress has been made, there is no reasonable excuse to continue voting for candidates with anti-gay measures at part of their platform. This is not just directed to you, but other conservatives on this site.




    And, speaking of the 2008 election - if the RJ right-wingers who voted for McCain had had their way, and McCain had become president - DADT would STILL be in place, because President McCain would've vetoed it.
    He was the bitterest Repub opponent of the push to repeal DADT.

    Voting Republican not only is a vote for the failed economic policies of the Repub party and for recession (since every recession of the past 30 years has hit under Republican presidencies) - it has real consequences for our own interests as gay Americans.
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19129

    Feb 21, 2011 9:03 PM GMT
    creature saidconsidering what progress has been made, there is no reasonable excuse to continue voting for candidates with anti-gay measures at part of their platform.


    I know you and others think that, but what YOU may not consider a "reasonable excuse", others may consider is a reasonable excuse. As I said before, everyone has a different set of personal priorities when voting, and not ALL gays place "gay issues" at or near the top of their priority list...I know I don't.