The right needs the votes of 2.7% of America desperately enough to cuck to it.
Do you think before you type Bacle? Or is that too difficult for you?
Do you think before you type Bacle? Or is that too difficult for you?
LGBT and the US Conservative Movement
- Thread starter FriedCFour
- Start date
King Arts
Well-known member
But that’s just the thing yes hypothetically you could be a out and proud homo in the US and support the US helping anti gay nations against other foreign pro gay nations but how many of them are like that? There are some conservatives who are gay most are in the closet the out and proud gay pride types are liberal already the numbers show. Gays don’t vote Democrat at the same level as Latinos oh no it’s much worse Latinos can be saved(lol religious joke) they are at the level of blacks or even worse when it comes to supporting democrats, vast majority are liberals. They can’t be converted. The groups that the right should try to peel away from the left are Latinos and Asians. And maybe people with college debt, though that last one is tricky.
Well if they want to support the right, they can support it no matter the nuances of its opinions on that one area of policy.
But if there is so much flippancy on that, based on optics and such minutia, i would consider the term "want" a bit excessive here. More like considering it.
Vast majority of people who "support LGBs" would yell at you or worse for forgetting the T. As such, we are talking a small subsection of an already small section of voters.
If the minutia of attitudes towards their lobby are decisive over who to vote for rather than things like economic interests, national security or patriotism, why would the right want the voices of such a self-interested group that claims to share their outlook on the world, but... would throw it all to the crazy commies just because the other guys look like they don't like the idea of gay marriage enough and some may even start thinking of abolishing it.
You wonder why you don't sound like one of their fellows to the rest of the right wingers?
That's big talk for a tiny group of voters who can't be relied upon.
Largo
Well-known member
......Are you seriously arguing that we can't tolerate gays because it prevents us from allying with African shithole states?
The 2:1 and shrinking percentage. And given 7% of voters identified as LGBT (which is the same group who had the 2:1 percentage), R's could definitely do well there.
Also, the idea that you need to win a majority or it's not worth appealing to them simply isn't true. Recall that if republicans win about 20% of the black vote, they win in a landslide. It's not as drastic for the LGBTs, but alignments are shifting. The only people who swung Democrat in 2020 are whites. You aren't going to get them back by doubling down on anti LGB stuff, just lose the LGBT votes you got in exchange.
Peer pressure induces fad identities aren't something you should ever cater too given their transitory nature.
It is an utterly irrational position to assume the soup has an above 2.7 percent figure and any polls that say otherwise should be dismissed
The only reason I could be convinced to vote GOP at all was because Trump was not engaging in 'old-style' GOP talking points/views on LGBs, and had seemed like he would be a change in the wind on the issue for the GOP.
If he turns out to be a temporary aberration, and the GOP backslides...well, then pox on both houses.
I never claimed to be like the other parts of the Right that are around here or in the old SB PM.
I'm a Registered Independent for a reason; no party is 'owed' anyone's vote, they must be worthy of it and prove it.
this is the problem with parts of the Right and Left; they act like they are 'owed' people's votes, instead of having to show they are worth voting for.
On their own yes; but you forget how it factors into the views and votes of straight people who do not have problems with the LGBs.
You have the Right wing brainbug of thinking how LGBs are treated only matters to LGB alone, and not their family or friends, who also may vote with LGB interests in mind.
Yes, yes he is.
Because that's how little value LGB life has to a lot of the Right; they want us back in the closet, at best.
The 7% and the 1:2 ratio came from the same survey, so I think it's important to keep both of the numbers linked. My guess is that the fad people are in the biden voters, so it might be closer, but IDK.
King Arts
Well-known member
I’d rather we not blind ourselves like idiot neocons. Tell me did you think gender studies classes were a worthwhile investment for us to pour into Afghanistan? It did not change the peoples minds they’re and just caused resentment and instability. So if you want that then instead of being with the right you might want to go left and be ridin with Biden.
StormEagle
Well-known member
You are less than six percent of the population nationwide and barely break four percent of any given state population. Homesexuals are also predominantly concentrated in Democrat strongholds, with negligible impact on any given red state or district.
I think you’re inflating LGB importance to the right wing coalition somewhat.
It’d make much more sense to try to peel off more of the Latino and black population from the Democrat plantation, and neither of those groups is particularly well known for their tolerance or love for LGB stuff.
I don’t particularly care one way or the other about the LGB shit as long as the degeneracy is kept somewhat under control. Shit like open bdsm shows at pride parades can fuck right off.
But stop acting like it’s an overwhelmingly important demographic to shoot for when there are much larger and potentially more sympathetic groups we could be going for.
Largo
Well-known member
I am going to go out on a neck here and presume that America's stance on gay rights was as about relevant to the Afghan war as climate change or gun rights. I'm pretty disinterested in LGBT issues one way or the other and frankly don't really understand what a trans person is, but I just find this argument to be hilarious.
In my experience theyre all over the place politically. TBH the loudest voices on the alt right used to be LGBT. I dunno if you remember those guys from 2025/2016/2017 who were hardcore right wing and nativistic. Part of that was "I don't want habeeb bringing Sharia to America because I don't want to be thrown off the nearest building".
Then the Trad movement sort of overtook those guys...though I'm convinced most of those are closeted men any way.
Point though is that I wonder if we are looking at a social pressure type deal or the extinction of our species as huge swaths of fertile people suddenly collapse into orientations and mentalities that reject families and family life.
Ok, you want to take the tact of 'we need to sacrifice LGBs to get more latino/black vote', let me remind you that it's not just LGBs who vote with LGB interests in mind. Their family and friends often do to.
And if the GOP can backslide on LGB stuff, they can backslide on things that latino's and black's want as well, and WE WILL REMIND THE BLACKS AND LATINOS OF THAT.
If the GOP backslides on LGB stuff, remember those LGBs and their family/friends will still be there, but now with no incentive to help the Right in any way, regardless of how insane the left gets. What they will have is incentive to remind other demographics about the GOP duplicity and warn them the GOP could 'backslide' on them too.
So 2.7 becomes 3.7 okay.
The GOP would take 25% of the black Vote and 70% of the Latino vote if they went full "remove the groomers right now."
My people don't like you guys, I'm considered a political cuck by some of my Cuban neighbors because I don't advocate for state mandated conversion therapy.
Play this game Bacle...see where it gets you. Remind us Spics all you want.
90% of us think you deserve to be in a cage for who you are and the zoomers amongst my kind get suspended from their high schools all the time for calling for RWDS to be deployed against their own trans relatives.
We won't care...your words will fall on deaf ears, followed by jeers and cheers.
What will you do then?
Last edited:
The obvious question is, what appeal to them, and how much will it cost in support lost in other groups?
That sounds more like neutrality than support, which is a wholly different animal, and far more platable to the right than support. Overall, i think the issue gets way more airtime in politics than it should be getting, good or bad.
Obviously people who don't care much about LGBs one way or another aren't going to base their decision on who to vote for on their attitude towards them, especially if that attitude is not truly extreme. I know because i'm one of such people.
If you meant voters who:
-Aren't LGBs but consider themselves allies of them
-Are trans exclusionary
-Would vote GOP
-But lack of LGB support is a dealbreaker for them
You would end up with an insanely tiny group of people who are certainly very interesting, but not representative of any major demographic at all. Let's be honest, the whole "ally" thing is something progressives do, and such dedicated progressives won't vote for GOP either way.
Or do the very opposite. The LGBT media love to parade around stories of that.
And if they do support them, what are the chances they are just simply democrats, and in terms of friends a lot of self-selection happens there?
Imagine thinking two of the almost militantly anti LGBT demographics this side of Muslims in America will care what you have to say lol
"We are gonna remind you chabones that the GOP will backslide".
Y vos quein sos? Un degenerado? Cslllaatteeee!
"We are gonna remind you chabones that the GOP will backslide".
Y vos quein sos? Un degenerado? Cslllaatteeee!
King Arts
Well-known member
Do you think that was helpful in any way? That’s my question don’t deflect yes in this instance it did not lose us the war directly but it certainly did not help and would have caused headaches and problems for our guys.
So it sounds like you are trying to take the right not just the right but the entire political process hostage because your small group isn’t getting its ass kissed? Also duplicity? Lol the right has never been pro gay it would be duplicity or lying to pretend we were, and again there is the fact that the right would not be “betraying” the lgbt movement since it was never a part of it. Latinos Asians, whites, Christians can be a right wing coalition.
You know, I want to thank you all for reminding me that however much I do not like Ts and Dems, at least with them there is no danger of them trying to force me back into the closet.
I mean Manchin and other moderate Dems seem to have more power than most of the GOP, and actually restrain the Far-Left more than anyone, so votes for moderate Dems would actually be more effective against the Far-Left than votes on the Right.
Just food for thought.
I mean Manchin and other moderate Dems seem to have more power than most of the GOP, and actually restrain the Far-Left more than anyone, so votes for moderate Dems would actually be more effective against the Far-Left than votes on the Right.
Just food for thought.
Morphic Tide
Well-known member
Do you really want to turn into the very same purity-spiraling nonsense as the Intersectional crowd? Where being out of line on any one thing is cause to be thrown out entirely? Do you seriously want to just flip the table on Pit Politics that are giving the Republicans their first breath of fresh air in decades because you can't stand that the United States never was an explicitly Christian nation?
One of the first things the Federal government did was assume power over what a valid marriage was, because the varied denominations sequestered in the colonies refused to recognize eachother. This is also why Freedom of Religion is in the Bill of Rights, because quite simply the "good Christians" of the time were split between denominations that had literally waged wars against eachother and led to states refusing to accept marriages conducted by other denominations in other states.
There is no one "true" Christianity anymore, and the founding laws of the nation specifically demand the exclusion of such. Because they needed only look a mere few decades back to see active warfare over such things. Do not try to cast LGB into a pit. This space exists entirely because of us being on the receiving end of such ideological hegemonizing, and the Bill of Rights specifically tries to disallow such being public policy for very good reason.
US conservatism is founded on a secular practice. The ethics are founded in Christianity, but could not be tied to it because there wasn't a usable definition of "Christian" at the time without defeating many of the points by establishing Catholicism or spinning off the Anglican Church. It was only with the "Moral Majority" phase of the Republican machines that "Christian" actually became a determinant in the US. Bitter shitflinging between Protestants and Catholics is still in living memory in the US, as we have seen on this very board.
Before that push for big-tenting religious views, people considered their denomination quite important and regularly argued over the details that separated them, leading to "Christians" being utterly politically irrelevant for decades. If you want to go back to that by pushing for adherence to doctrine that is already quite spotty with trying to backtrack to the Stonewall days, then have fun rapidly returning to the sectarian pit responsible for the feds being able to tell you to fuck right off on marriage.
One of the first things the Federal government did was assume power over what a valid marriage was, because the varied denominations sequestered in the colonies refused to recognize eachother. This is also why Freedom of Religion is in the Bill of Rights, because quite simply the "good Christians" of the time were split between denominations that had literally waged wars against eachother and led to states refusing to accept marriages conducted by other denominations in other states.
There is no one "true" Christianity anymore, and the founding laws of the nation specifically demand the exclusion of such. Because they needed only look a mere few decades back to see active warfare over such things. Do not try to cast LGB into a pit. This space exists entirely because of us being on the receiving end of such ideological hegemonizing, and the Bill of Rights specifically tries to disallow such being public policy for very good reason.
US conservatism is founded on a secular practice. The ethics are founded in Christianity, but could not be tied to it because there wasn't a usable definition of "Christian" at the time without defeating many of the points by establishing Catholicism or spinning off the Anglican Church. It was only with the "Moral Majority" phase of the Republican machines that "Christian" actually became a determinant in the US. Bitter shitflinging between Protestants and Catholics is still in living memory in the US, as we have seen on this very board.
Before that push for big-tenting religious views, people considered their denomination quite important and regularly argued over the details that separated them, leading to "Christians" being utterly politically irrelevant for decades. If you want to go back to that by pushing for adherence to doctrine that is already quite spotty with trying to backtrack to the Stonewall days, then have fun rapidly returning to the sectarian pit responsible for the feds being able to tell you to fuck right off on marriage.
StormEagle
Well-known member
*rolls eyes*
Very few of us here care that you want the dick, Bacle. I certainly couldn’t give less of a shit, as long as you do it behind closed doors like a civilized human being.
What we are saying is that the right is never going to have this wellspring of LGB love and acceptance that you seem to want us to have. The best you’re going to get from us, or at least those of us not particularly concerned about what bits go with what other bits, is a certain level of tolerance.
Conservatives aren’t, by and large, going to be waving the rainbow flag. Especially because the LGB are an inherently unreliable demographic and its extremely vocal political arm are basically sworn enemies of what we understand to be traditional American society and values.