Gay/Lesbian vote historically

[Thunderbird is the word]

Obviously there's probably very little information about how gay people might have voted prior to stonewall and gay issues even being on the table. Could there have been any biases in favor of one party or the other or would they likely have been divided on the same basis as the larger population with working class gays likely to vote Democrat and those in business likely to vote Repulican?

[Crumpets]

I also think it would be interesting to see the in the closet/out of the closet breakdown. Openly gay voters have probably always voted to the left, but I wouldn't be surprised if closeted gays were/are significantly farther to the right.

[Thunderbird is the word]

I also think it would be interesting to see the in the closet/out of the closet breakdown. Openly gay voters have probably always voted to the left, but I wouldn't be surprised if closeted gays were/are significantly farther to the right.

probably, I do know that Harvey Milk was originally a Republican. He may have been a "Goldwater/McGovern" voter.

[DavidB.]

I also think it would be interesting to see the in the closet/out of the closet breakdown. Openly gay voters have probably always voted to the left, but I wouldn't be surprised if closeted gays were/are significantly farther to the right.

That might be very hard to measure. Many closeted people might also be "closeted" while filling out surveys.

[Thunderbird is the word]

I also think it would be interesting to see the in the closet/out of the closet breakdown. Openly gay voters have probably always voted to the left, but I wouldn't be surprised if closeted gays were/are significantly farther to the right.

That might be very hard to measure. Many closeted people might also be "closeted" while filling out surveys.

almost certainly

[Adam Griffin]

As best I can tell, the question didn't appear until 1992. It's possible that it was asked in the Voter News Service polls that were conducted during the mid-terms between 1994-2002 (and maybe even before that, if they provided them then), but you need a Roper Center membership in order to access those. Remarkably, or perhaps unremarkably, the gay vote has been relatively static for the past 20-something years.

1992: 72% Clinton
1996: 66% Clinton
2000: 71% Gore
2004: 77% Kerry
2006: 75% Democratic
2008: 70% Obama
2010: 69% Democratic
2012: 77% Obama
2014: 76% Democratic

Temporarily racist gays!?



Source: 1992 ( Page 8 )
Source: 1996
Source: 2000
Source: 2004-2012
Source: 2014

[Sumner 1868]

As best I can tell, the question didn't appear until 1992. It's possible that it was asked in the Voter News Service polls that were conducted during the mid-terms between 1994-2002 (and maybe even before that, if they provided them then), but you need a Roper Center membership in order to access those. Remarkably, or perhaps unremarkably, the gay vote has been relatively static for the past 20-something years.

1992: 72% Clinton
1996: 66% Clinton
2000: 71% Gore
2004: 77% Kerry
2006: 75% Democratic
2008: 70% Obama
2010: 69% Democratic
2012: 77% Obama
2014: 76% Democratic

Temporarily racist gays!?



Source: 1992 ( Page 8 )
Source: 1996
Source: 2000
Source: 2004-2012
Source: 2014

Kerry probably overperformed due to Bush's support of the Federal Marriage Amendment and the gay marriage ban referenda in several states that year.

[Hydera]

As best I can tell, the question didn't appear until 1992. It's possible that it was asked in the Voter News Service polls that were conducted during the mid-terms between 1994-2002 (and maybe even before that, if they provided them then), but you need a Roper Center membership in order to access those. Remarkably, or perhaps unremarkably, the gay vote has been relatively static for the past 20-something years.

1992: 72% Clinton
1996: 66% Clinton
2000: 71% Gore
2004: 77% Kerry
2006: 75% Democratic
2008: 70% Obama
2010: 69% Democratic
2012: 77% Obama
2014: 76% Democratic

Temporarily racist gays!?



Source: 1992 ( Page 8 )
Source: 1996
Source: 2000
Source: 2004-2012
Source: 2014

I wonder whats the demographic profile of those 30% of gays who vote for the GOP candidate. My guess is that some of it is trolling/checked the box by mistake. While the rest are probably either wealthy gays OR gays that are quite religious.

[Thunderbird is the word]

As best I can tell, the question didn't appear until 1992. It's possible that it was asked in the Voter News Service polls that were conducted during the mid-terms between 1994-2002 (and maybe even before that, if they provided them then), but you need a Roper Center membership in order to access those. Remarkably, or perhaps unremarkably, the gay vote has been relatively static for the past 20-something years.

1992: 72% Clinton
1996: 66% Clinton
2000: 71% Gore
2004: 77% Kerry
2006: 75% Democratic
2008: 70% Obama
2010: 69% Democratic
2012: 77% Obama
2014: 76% Democratic

Temporarily racist gays!?



Source: 1992 ( Page 8 )
Source: 1996
Source: 2000
Source: 2004-2012
Source: 2014

I wonder whats the demographic profile of those 30% of gays who vote for the GOP candidate. My guess is that some of it is trolling/checked the box by mistake. While the rest are probably either wealthy gays OR gays that are quite religious.

My guess is that most are fiscally conservative. While there are plenty of religious gay people most of them tend to be religiously liberal. I think that it's probably because a lot of gay people are small business owners and might have fiscally conservative or anti-regulation views for that reason might vote Republican, and be even more likely to at the state level vote for a socially liberal Charlie Baker or Neal Kashkari type.

[Clarko95 📚💰📈]

As best I can tell, the question didn't appear until 1992. It's possible that it was asked in the Voter News Service polls that were conducted during the mid-terms between 1994-2002 (and maybe even before that, if they provided them then), but you need a Roper Center membership in order to access those. Remarkably, or perhaps unremarkably, the gay vote has been relatively static for the past 20-something years.

1992: 72% Clinton
1996: 66% Clinton
2000: 71% Gore
2004: 77% Kerry
2006: 75% Democratic
2008: 70% Obama
2010: 69% Democratic
2012: 77% Obama
2014: 76% Democratic

Temporarily racist gays!?



Source: 1992 ( Page 8 )
Source: 1996
Source: 2000
Source: 2004-2012
Source: 2014

I wonder whats the demographic profile of those 30% of gays who vote for the GOP candidate. My guess is that some of it is trolling/checked the box by mistake. While the rest are probably either wealthy gays OR gays that are quite religious.

More issues factor into LGBT peoples' voting habits other than just gay rights. You can think that Republican economic and defense policies are the best, and most of their social issues other than gay rights.

I voted Republican in the 2014 elections, mostly county-level officials and for U.S. Representative, because Lake County, Indiana has a serious corruption issue as a Safe-D county. If I lived a few hundred feet more to the west, in Illinois, I would've voted for Rauner because the IL Democratic Party is just plain awful. Protections for same-sex marriage and anti-discrimination laws are fine and good, but if I can't find a job or build wealth, then I might as well just move to some sunbelt hellhole where I'd be discriminated against either way.

1996, 2004, and 2012 are understandable because of Bill Clinton's signing of DOMA, GW Bush's and the broader Republican Party's crusade against the gays that year, and Obama's endorsement of SSM, respectively (though I'm a smidge surprised Romney's avoidance of the issue didn't cancel some of that out).

If President Griffin's numbers above are for LGBT people, well I've come to know a lot of bisexual Republicans (see this forum as well).

Also, be sure to factor in the margins of error for such a small subset.

[Adam Griffin]

My guess is that most are fiscally conservative. While there are plenty of religious gay people most of them tend to be religiously liberal. I think that it's probably because a lot of gay people are small business owners and might have fiscally conservative or anti-regulation views for that reason might vote Republican, and be even more likely to at the state level vote for a socially liberal Charlie Baker or Neal Kashkari type.

Yes, I know the type. Utterly intolerable. Pretentious snobs who have gobs of money because they never had kids, have good careers, and are just "mee mee mee mee" all the way home! They're arguably less religious on average than the bloc as a whole. Some of them actually lean Democratic at times due only to where they live, but if given a choice...they just want their civil rights, but don't want to contribute to the society that makes that and all of their highfalutin' possible. These are the libertarians (unlike the Paultard neckbeards) who can actually get things done, and that of course makes them dangerous as all get-out (at the municipal and county level in particular).

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

2008 can obviously be explained by Lindsey Graham getting John McCain some votes...no racism here

[DavidB.]

I wonder whats the demographic profile of those 30% of gays who vote for the GOP candidate. My guess is that some of it is trolling/checked the box by mistake. While the rest are probably either wealthy gays OR gays that are quite religious.

Why? There are LGBT people who don't think that's what primarily defines their political identity, you know.

Yes, I know the type. Utterly intolerable. Pretentious snobs who have gobs of money because they never had kids, have good careers, and are just "mee mee mee mee" all the way home! (...) they just want their civil rights, but don't want to contribute to the society that makes that and all of their highfalutin' possible.

The idea that LGBT people should automatically vote Democratic just because they are LGBT seems pretty offensive. Perhaps it doesn't work like that in the world of intersectionality, but LGBTs, too, have the right to define their politics themselves. Being LGBT and in favor of same-sex marriage doesn't mean one automatically has to make that a decisive factor when voting.

[DavidB.]

I think many of us came at this with the assumption that, all else being equal, we would expect gay people to have the same voting patterns as black people in the South or natives living on reservation land.  It's interesting that they don't view their historical oppression or need for government services as being anywhere near that level.

Because while it was bad, it wasn't actually anywhere near the level of discrimination and disenfranchisement of black people in the south or Native Americans.

Besides, I think you misunderstood my post. It is not the assumption that LGBTs would be inclined to vote Democratic that I find problematic -- on the contrary, this assumption seems perfectly reasonable. However, in my opinion, this assumption should remain something descriptive, as opposed to something prescriptive. The idea that LGBT people who don't vote Democratic (who could have all sorts of legitimate reasons to do so, most importantly the right not to primarily identify as LGBT or to deem other issues more important) are egotistical or "intolerable", to me, simply seems to effectively deny LGBT people the same "right to choose" -- without being judged negatively -- as non-LGBTs.

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

I wonder whats the demographic profile of those 30% of gays who vote for the GOP candidate. My guess is that some of it is trolling/checked the box by mistake. While the rest are probably either wealthy gays OR gays that are quite religious.

Why? There are LGBT people who don't think that's what primarily defines their political identity, you know.

Yes, I know the type. Utterly intolerable. Pretentious snobs who have gobs of money because they never had kids, have good careers, and are just "mee mee mee mee" all the way home! (...) they just want their civil rights, but don't want to contribute to the society that makes that and all of their highfalutin' possible.

The idea that LGBT people should automatically vote Democratic just because they are LGBT seems pretty offensive. Perhaps it doesn't work like that in the world of intersectionality, but LGBTs, too, have the right to define their politics themselves. Being LGBT and in favor of same-sex marriage doesn't mean one automatically has to make that a decisive factor when voting.

Of course someone of any sexual orientation is free to vote/donate/protest/lobby as the please.  I think many of us came at this with the assumption that, all else being equal, we would expect gay people to have the same voting patterns as black people in the South or natives living on reservation land.  It's interesting that they don't view their historical oppression or need for government services as being anywhere near that level.

Who would be need government services anymore than others. We're not completely helpless, unable to fend for ourselves.

A+, response btw, David. For once, we are in complete agreement.

[TDAS04]

Obama getting less of the gay vote in 2008 than Kerry was probably mostly due to Bush actively campaigning to constitutionally ban gay marriage, which McCain voted against.

However, I'm not quite sure what explains the gay vote going to Hillary in the primaries.  California exit polls showed Hillary winning them 63-29 over Obama.  I think the vote in West Hollywood was something like that.  And Hillary received 63% in Provincetown in the Massachusetts primary.

Can anyone explain the gay vote in the 2008 primaries?

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

That is also pretty easy to explain in that she is (was?) somehow a gay icon even though she doesn't seek to be. That image has most likely collapsed among younger voter who were not in high school/college during the 90s. These voters actually care about policy to an obscene degree and are offended by DADT, etc while Bernie was "fully supportive"!

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/09/23/hillary-is-no-gay-icon.html

[Adam Griffin]

There is a certain affinity for powerful, ball-busting women as LGBT cultural icons, so Clinton's dominance in that regard is not surprising.

Yes, I know the type. Utterly intolerable. Pretentious snobs who have gobs of money because they never had kids, have good careers, and are just "mee mee mee mee" all the way home! (...) they just want their civil rights, but don't want to contribute to the society that makes that and all of their highfalutin' possible.

The idea that LGBT people should automatically vote Democratic just because they are LGBT seems pretty offensive. Perhaps it doesn't work like that in the world of intersectionality, but LGBTs, too, have the right to define their politics themselves. Being LGBT and in favor of same-sex marriage doesn't mean one automatically has to make that a decisive factor when voting.

Yeah, I didn't say they "should automatically vote Democratic just because they are LGBT". I implied that they're terrible people for putting their individual experiences ahead of the collective due to a variety of concepts. Rich, poor or otherwise, they'd be in the gulags right alongside the rest of us if one party had its way at various points throughout history (maybe still), but because they find themselves in a relatively affluent financial situation alongside a social situation that was made possible by those who don't act as they do politically, they can afford to not care about tangible matters of discrimination, bigotry and overall regression.

Even worse is that many of them did have the power to affect the discourse, but they were merely too busy, as you said, "defining their politics themselves", all the while living life in the very same ways with regards to their sexualities as the rest of the people not voting as they do (pray tell: how many LGBT Democratic voters do you think make their sexual/gender identity their sole political identity?).

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

Saying they are terrible people if they don't vote Democrat is the same exact thing as saying they should automatically vote Democrat since it's the only way they can act good...

Many people rationalize Republican economics as something beneficial for everyone. You and I may not view it like that but plenty do, and there is a lot of good reasoning behind that. Certainly a lot better than social democracy in the long run.

And once again, it seems that this board needs to be reminded that making money and protecting it is not a bad thing. Of course. - Everyone is greedy in any economic system. Don't know why we should demonize people who act as such.

[Adam Griffin]

Saying they are terrible people if they don't vote Democrat is the same exact thing as saying they should automatically vote Democrat since it's the only way they can act good...

Well yes, I did say that; those two statements are essentially the same thing. What I didn't say was that they "should automatically vote Democratic just because they are LGBT". Technicalities, for sure, but it matters in this context. Obviously no one is automatically good or guaranteed to do one thing or another. Coming to the right conclusion based naturally on one's experiences is what actually makes someone good (or in the opposite case, terrible).

At any rate, my apologies: we really shouldn't be making this about how terrible R-voting gays are; this is a thread presumably for more abstract polling discussion about LGBT voting habits.

[Kingpoleon]

I think this is the best place for such a discussion. What about a gay libertarian who opposes anti-discrimination law? Are they terrible for being different politically?

[DavidB.]

I think this is the best place for such a discussion. What about a gay libertarian who opposes anti-discrimination law? Are they terrible for being different politically?

It is an interesting discussion in which I'd love to engage, but to me the US Presidential Election Results subforum doesn't seem to be the right place for it.

[GOP732]

Saying they are terrible people if they don't vote Democrat is the same exact thing as saying they should automatically vote Democrat since it's the only way they can act good...

Well yes, I did say that; those two statements are essentially the same thing. What I didn't say was that they "should automatically vote Democratic just because they are LGBT". Technicalities, for sure, but it matters in this context. Obviously no one is automatically good or guaranteed to do one thing or another. Coming to the right conclusion based naturally on one's experiences is what actually makes someone good (or in the opposite case, terrible).

At any rate, my apologies: we really shouldn't be making this about how terrible R-voting gays are; this is a thread presumably for more abstract polling discussion about LGBT voting habits.

As a Log Cabin Republican... eh I'm tired of explaining it.

[SATW]

As a another Log Cabin Republican, I must say that I am so amused that the far-left gets so riled up about some LGBT people voting R.

[Bojack Horseman]

As a another Log Cabin Republican, I must say that I am so amused that the far-left gets so riled up about some LGBT people voting R.

I must say that the Log Cabin Republicans are like the puppy with an abusive owner who wants to be petted, but instead he gets kicked. I cannot in good conscience vote for a member of a political party whose candidates for President went palling around with religious leaders who openly say they want us executed.

Now as for me personally, the 2010 election was when I started following politics closely and the rabid whack jobs that resulted are what have inspired my future run for elected office as a pragmatic, progressive Democrat.