Today's thought provoking political question has to do with the "gay vote", what do you know?

Every time there's another primary we see polls come out for days, even weeks on end, and at the end of it we get exit polling, and all of it parses down the vote into population segments...by gender, race, religious affiliation, income level, education level, etc. But NOT ONE poll I've seen yet tries to segment the vote by sexual preference/identity (x% homosexuals voted for Clinton, y% voted for Obama). So, I'm not really sure where that demographic stands, except for the anecdotal evidence I have which seems to point that they break towards Clinton. From Elton John who thinks we're mysoginistic if we don't vote for a woman, to my brother in law's boyfriend who thinks America's not ready to elect a black candidate.

But that seems so counterintuitive when Clinton's husband signed in don't ask/don't tell and DOMA (defense of marriage act), both of which were hugely unpopular in the gay community. Plus, might one also expect a repressed minority group to favor a minority candidate? Asked by dalepetrie_is_gone 44 months ago Similar questions: Today's thought provoking political question gay vote Politics & Law > Politics.

Similar questions: Today's thought provoking political question gay vote.

All I can do is speculate, but I can do it at length. The polls support your anecdotal evidence. Llary won the gay vote 63 percent to 29 percent in California and 59 percent to 36 percent in New York, according to exit polls (or rather, according to that article's account of the exit polls, because it didn't cite its sources.) One might expect minorities to stick together, but unfortunately minorities tend to hate each other just as much as majorities do.

Another key demographic in this race is the hispanic vs black vote, which break in opposite ways, and there is considerable antipathy between the two groups socially. In some ways they compete for jobs; in some ways each sees the same negative traits in the others that whites see in both. Getting minorities together to try to overcome a majority is like herding cats.

But since Clinton and Obama are each identified with a "minority" group (women aren't really a minority, of course, but they act like one in many ways), why are gays siding with Clinton rather than Obama, by such substantial margins? I think part of it has to do with Don't Ask/Don't Tell. Although Bill Clinton failed to achieve full equality, it was an advance over old "We're Asking/You're Telling, and we throw you in jail (not just out) if we catch you" plan.

It was his very first thing as President, and the rest of the Democratic party betrayed him over it. For years, I've heard rumors from the gay community that Mrs. Clinton is herself a lesbian. The rumors cite her distant relationship from Bill and his many affairs; is it perhaps a sham marriage for political gain?

Rumors like that, like the foolish "Obama isn't patriotic" rumors, have the ability to tinge people's minds even if they reject it outright. Yet another possibility: Obama has more strongly identified himself with his church than Mrs. Clinton has. Gays are often suspicious of highly religious people.

Reverend Wright himself has actually backed gay rights initiatives, but I don't think that's widely known. (I had to look it up.) I do get the impression Mrs. Clinton has sought out the gay vote; the article cited above claims she marched in a gay pride parade as First Lady. Some minority groups are very appreciative of any attempts to help them be more mainstream, especially ones like homosexuals, who think of themselves as unfairly ostracized.

Obama's plan on DA/DT plan is much the same as Clinton's, he hasn't made it a cornerstone of his campaign. He doesn't talk about it much, perhaps because of the conflict between blacks and gays. Black voters often belong to religious groups that don't support gay rights, despite Reverend Wright's example.

And when it comes down to votes, Obama would rather appeal to the black minority (12%) than the gay one (about 5%, depending on who's counting)..

Here's what I think..... I don't recall seeing polling results breaking it down by sexual preference either. Now, I don't have any expert opinion or data to support my theory, but here's my theory anyhow. In general, political polls involve two distinct choices, Democratic candidate or Republican candidate (however, I realize this isn't always the case, especially in situations like this where candidates from the same party are the choices).

With that in mind, there is a general trend that homosexuals support Democratic candidates (once again, I realize this isn't always the case) due to certain issues that Republicans generally oppose, so I don't think that they are figured in as a demographic of interest when it comes to predicting what percentage of a given demographic a politician and/or political party will carry. Also, and perhaps more revelant, is the fact that the percentage of voters that are gay is smaller than the percentage of voters that are women/men, black/white/latino, lower/middle/upper class, etc. Therefore, knowing whether more homosexuals support Clinton or Obama (or any other candidates) isn't as revelant when it comes to the numbers as it is with the other demographics.As a side note, I find it interesting that your personal experience is that Clinton has more of the homosexual populations support, where as, my personal experience is that Obama has more of their support.

Not a surprise Polls are usually taken in person or on the phone. The problem with polling gays is that so many of them are still in the closet and wouldn’t admit their preference to a pollster. What you’d actually end up getting in your poll is the opinions of people who have come out, particularly the activists, and there’s really no way to tell how that relates to the opinions of gays in general.

Add to that the people who won’t take polls to start with (like me), or who don’t have land line phones (’bout everybody under 30) and those who don’t care to share their sexual preferences with strangers, no matter what they are (pretty near everybody), and you get a pretty skewed sample. So it’s not really very surprising that the pollsters don’t try. Even if they did, the results would be wildly inaccurate..

I can only speak for this one gay woman but No I don't think you can say that gays will vote for a minority just because we are also oppressed. I voted in my state primaries for llary and if I get the chance to vote for again in November, I will certainly do it. While I at first thought that Obama was charismatic and considered voting for him if he wins the primary, I now find him to be very arrogant and am not sure who I will vote for if he beats llary for the Democratic nomination.

The longer this election goes on the more arrogant he appears to be.

" "Do I ask thought provoking/fun questions, or am I just annoying?'cause I am having fun,you guys are GREAT! " "Controversial Political Question" "How about a politics question "truce"?

I found another article I thought was thought provoking...

Are people afraid any more to ask those controversial, thought-provoking political questions on here because -MORE-" (14 answers).

I cant really gove you an answer,but what I can give you is a way to a solution, that is you have to find the anglde that you relate to or peaks your interest. A good paper is one that people get drawn into because it reaches them ln some way.As for me WW11 to me, I think of the holocaust and the effect it had on the survivors, their families and those who stood by and did nothing until it was too late.