At this stage, could the GOP nominate an openly gay candidate as President?

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Not a specific gay (there isn't any notable non-closeted gays in the party from my knowledge, Wainwright Park escapades aside), but could the GOP voter base choose a hypothetical gay candidate if they were doctrinaire conservative on non-gay related issues?

[bagelman]

yes in many contexts

[Make My Bank Account Great Again]

Yes.

They just nominated a thrice married, pussy grabbing, foul mouthed, ask God for no forgiveness kind of guy.

By 2024 they could nominate a gay person. This person just needs to really ramp up the xenophobia and economic populism and they good!

[RFayette]

Peter Thiel could easily have won the 2016 nomination, so yes. 

[LLR]

They'd have to be a really good fit for New Hampshire

[ReaganLimbaugh]

No chance at all.

[ElectionsGuy]

Of course they can, they just need to respond to all their grievances effectively, like any other candidate. This is not a major issue anymore, and the Republicans use minorities that they are accused of being against as a way of proving they are not bigoted.

[Heisenberg]

Peter Thiel could easily have won the 2016 nomination, so yes. 

No, he couldn't have. I like Thiel but he's a naturalized citizen who immigrated from Germany.

[MarkD]

The fact that a candidate IS gay is not what would be most important to the rank-and-file voters of the Republican party, but whether the gay candidate would support and help advance the cause of gay equality. Sometimes an openly gay person does not make any issue out of their desire for equal rights, and is accused by gay left-wingers of being a "lavender Uncle Tom" or even being like a Jew who helps Nazis. An openly gay candidate like that could be quite acceptable to Republican voters.
Also, what kind of people would the gay candidate intend to appoint to the Supreme Court? Advocates for original intent? That would be another reason for Republican voters to support such a candidate, and for gay lefties to loathe the candidate.

[Coolface Sock #42069]

Not yet, but give us another 6-8 years, and probably.

The candidate would have to be pro-religious freedom when it comes to not using the federal government to force Christian business owners to violate sincerely-held religious beliefs.

The candidate would have to hold sincere conservative (or whatever the Republican Party is by then) views, but no more so than any other candidate except for the above.

The candidate would also have to embrace his homosexuality (not be a closeted gay) but not run on it. Should be a fairly easy balance. Also, dress and act mostly conventionally, no flamboyant stuff, and be monogamous but not necessarily married, although being married may be preferable (although not having the first lady be female may scare away some conservatives).

I'm not sure what the candidate would need to be as far as religion goes. While all 44 of our presidents so far have been some degree of deist or Christian, I think it might be better if the gay candidate is an avowed atheist. He could maybe even charge that several of our previous presidents were only Christian in name and didn't attend church and that at least he says he's an atheist.

The sheer amount of hate that such a candidate would field from the left would probably move him up the primary ladder fairly well by itself.

[justfollowingtheelections]

I would be pleasantly surprised if this was possible, but no I don't believe so. 

[hopper]

Peter Thiel could easily have won the 2016 nomination, so yes. 

He's basically a friendlier version of Trump albeit a little more libertarian than Trump.

[Kingpoleon]

Perhaps. If they opposed all federal anti-discrimination laws, it would help immensely.

[America Needs R'hllor]

No. He can't win the South and most of the west for the forseeable future in a primary.

[SingingAnalyst]

Peter Thiel could easily have won the 2016 nomination, so yes. 

He's basically a friendlier version of Trump albeit a little more libertarian than Trump.

By 2024, for sure.

[Chunk Yogurt for President!]

If Milo was an American, I could see him win the nomination in the future.

[Bones]

Yes, definitely.

[5280]

Of course. Ever heard of Milo Yiannopoulos?

[America Needs R'hllor]

Of course. Ever heard of Milo Yiannopoulos?

While Yiannopoulos is gay, he has stated that gay rights are detrimental to humanity, and that gay men should "get back in the closet".[102] He has described being gay as "aberrant" and "a lifestyle choice guaranteed to bring [gay people] pain and unhappiness".[103] He has also appraised conversion therapy as a "cure" for homosexuality, stating that "I've tried to pray the gay away... most gay people if they were honest, would not choose to have been born homosexual. I'd love to experiment with some of these therapies".[104] He also said that "Gays have been told for 30 years that they were 'born this way'. That's a lie. 'Born this way' was invented by the gay lobby as a run-around of the religious right. ... it really has no basis in science at all. The most we can say is that it is a mixture of nature and nurture and it may have some epigenetic component. Nobody really knows."[105]

If THIS is the only homosexual they can nominate, this party disgusts me to the core.

[progressive85]

No.  Never.  A gay Republican candidate would never ever win the general election.  Governor of a state?  Probably.

[Kingpoleon]

No.  Never.  A gay Republican candidate would never ever win the general election.  Governor of a state?  Probably.

Richard Tisei could become Governor in 2018(if Baker retired or ran for Senate) or 2022, and David Cantania could become D. C. Mayor in 2018 or 202.