http://wisconsingazette.com/2016/03/30/states-largest-lgbt-group-endorses-clinton/
...and?
>>5955465
LGBT folk, must like African American, tend to support Hillary Clinton over Bernie Sanders.
>>5955472
*much like
>>5955454
>an organization that receives donations from democrats endorses a morally corrupt, war mongering, rape apologist cunt
>>5955472
>fags and kangs are idiots
and?
>>5955482
>an organization that receives donations from democrats
Because Democrats are the party of LGBT folk.
>endorses a morally corrupt,
Morally corrupt? She's the least corrupt person running.
>war mongering,
Like being the mastermind behind the Iran deal?
>rape apologist
Liar
>cunt
Sexist pig.
>>5955472
I haven't met any lgbt people that like hillary. She has a very poor track record with gays. I'm starting to think she's just paying people to vote for her lol
Probably this place is only supporting her because of some slimy back door deal she made with them.
>>5955590
Shut the fuck up kike
>>5955472
>LGBT folk, must like African American, tend to support Hillary Clinton over Bernie Sanders.
Fuck Clinton, she's a liar and a shill.
Sanders voted against DOMA before it was cool.
Sanders was rallying along with MLK for black rights before the democrats cared.
In fact, he did all the things the Dems now claim to stand for back when they didn't.
No idea why "LGBT folk" or blacks would prefer Hillary.
Only person I've met who is going to vote for Hillary is training to be a lobbyist.
I live in SF Bay Area and I've seen more posters accusing Hillary of being a commie than Hillary posters. I'm starting to suspect the people who shill Hillary online are paid for it or just mentally retarded.
>>5955590
>Because Democrats are the party of LGBT folk.
Nonsense.
Democrats are prostitutes.
All nice and flirty but without feelings and only in it for the money, or votes in this case.
They don't actually care about our issues and never have, never will.
>>5955590
>Morally corrupt? She's the least corrupt person running.
No, Sanders is.
>>5955597
Even when they're not the best candidate, it still makes sense for activist organizations to cozy up with establishment politicians. Because if you don't have inroads and favors with powerful people you're not going to be as effective an organization; quid pro quo and all that.
>>5955590
>Like being the mastermind behind the Iran deal?
I would be more concerned with her supporting the Iraq war, and worried about her emails detailing the Saudi Arabian government's donation to the Clinton foundation during a weapons deal as a quid pro quo.
If we really want to talk about Hillary's mastermind at work we can point to her consistently hawkish policies like constant advocacy for no fly zones.
>Because Democrats are the party of LGBT folk.
That's nothing to brag about. When we forced democrat politicians, like the Clintons, that were our staunchest opponents to switch their positions, and besides the other party is the party of Homo/Trans-phobes.
>>5955608
Ditto on that; I live in the LA area, and it's pretty much the same here. The only person I've run into that's voting Hillary is my sister, because she's an anti-gun ideologue, and aside from her everyone else I know is voting Bernie or Republican.
The thing that worries me most is Hillary's unfavorability rating. Because it's going to be a huge liability in a general election against any candidate, even Trump.
>>5955454
>endorsing a neo-con
idk why people keep doing this
>>5955454
TRUMP 2016
>>5956196
>The thing that worries me most is Hillary's unfavorability rating. Because it's going to be a huge liability in a general election against any candidate, even Trump.
yeah it'll be interesting certainly.
Bernie/Republican would be interesting.
Hillary/Republican would be laughable
>>5955597
>She has a very poor track record with gays.
Such as?
>>5956765
http://www.deathandtaxesmag.com/278350/hillary-clinton-chris-matthews-gay-marriage-2002/
http://www.slate.com/blogs/outward/2015/10/01/hillary_clinton_on_gay_rights_a_new_email_is_troubling.html
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/jun/17/hillary-clinton/hillary-clinton-change-position-same-sex-marriage/
http://www.buzzfeed.com/meganapper/emcee-of-african-americans-for-hillary-event-used-anti-gay-s#.tfaGv8D8a
That's just the first page of a quick google search lol
Hillary is such an awful fucking candidate
she's bought and fucking paid for by Wall Street
she loves zionist wars
she didn't give a rats ass about gays until it was politically dangerous for her to oppose gay rights
If Hill the Shill is the nominee, I'll vote Green Party
>>5955454
Reminder that the Clintons enacted DADT and DOMA and are not the LGBT candidate unless it gets them votes.
>>5955590
>She's the least corrupt person running.
This is bait
Why do people assume Hillary is an honest or competent candidate when this recent spaghetti spill:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dC4Pvm6Oj4A
is how she reacts to a Greenpeace activist's question about Hillary's acceptance of fossil fuel lobbyists' campaign donations.
>>5956765
Have you been living under a rock?
>>5955454
so? are you one of those "berniebros" who can't accept that there is nobody who has done more for equal rights and nobody who would be more qualified than Hillary? fuck off
>>5957396
>who can't accept that there is nobody who has done more for equal rights and nobody who would be more qualified than Hillary?
Please retract, qualify or explain exactly how Hillary Clinton (the politician that advocated for DADT and DOMA until they were no longer popular) has done more than Sylvia Rivera, Harvey Bernard Milk, Leonard Matlovich or Harry Hay for "equal rights."
>>5957396
>more qualified
How is Clinton more qualified than Sanders?
And I've got a hard time thinking her qualifications are an issue when she couldn't even overcome the significantly less qualified Obama the last time she ran and lost her race for President.
>>5957396
hillary superpac shill
>These degenerates are in my state
>>5957396
This so much. Thank you, it's refreshing to see something that isn't just more Bernie echochamber noise.
>I believe marriage is not just a bond but a sacred bond between a man and a woman. I have had occasion in my life to defend marriage, to stand up for marriage, to believe in the hard work and challenge of marriage. So I take umbrage at anyone who might suggest that those of us who worry about amending the Constitution are less committed to the sanctity of marriage, or to the fundamental bedrock principle that it exists between a man and a woman, going back into the midst of history as one of the founding, foundational institutions of history and humanity and civilization, and that its primary, principal role during those millennia has been the raising and socializing of children for the society into which they are to become adults.
What did she mean by this?
>>5957966
Trump is against gay marriage as well. Bernie is the only one.
>>5955454
Why u no vote bernie!?
>>5957931
lol are you fucking joking?
>>5958061
explain
>>5955590
>Like being the mastermind behind the Iran deal?
The Iran deal was the most disastrous deal to ever happen for America. Letting a country enrich uranium that routinely has death to America parades and threates to nuke Israel and USA. They just test fired rockets in the gulf a week ago. Blood will be on her hands but what are a few million more innocent lives to such an evil woman.
>Morally corrupt? She's the least corrupt person running.
This is laughable, she sold HALF of us uranium to Russia and continues to do so. She sold satellite photos of our assets to China on an unsecured personal server. The list of shit her and her husband have done is endless. It's criminal.
>rape apologist
Guess you haven't heard the audio tape of Clinton laughing about a court case were she helped a child rapist get off scott free.
>>5958114
anyone who would ask that question is fucking trolling
>>5958138
>>anyone who would ask that question is fucking trolling
come on earn your wage.
>>5957859
>Billy May
BILLY MAYS HERE
>>5958130
>The Iran deal was the most disastrous deal to ever happen for America.
>>5956787
You can legally be fired for being gay in half of the US states and you care about gay marriage? It's 2016! Nobody gives a shit about gay marriage anymore. Now we need a US Supreme Court that will protect LGBT folk from discrimination. That's why we need to elect Hillary, a proven leader.
> Wisconsin
Who cares about this state, they are basically the northern version of Florida or Arizona, They are so backwards and retarded there, i have met some of the LGBT community, they are almost all trashy faggy niggers
>>5958783
>they are almost all trashy faggy niggers
Why are there so many gay black folk from Wisconsin?
>>5958787
because Milwaukee, and its cheep as shit to live there because its a shithole, many also come over to chicago to work and stuff
>>5958130
>Guess you haven't heard the audio tape of Clinton laughing about a court case were she helped a child rapist get off scott free.
Not to mention that multiple women are accusing Bill of rape. Kind of odd that a woman who claims to be a feminist hero and has said that all women who are accusing a man of rape should be believed until a court proves otherwise is calling these women liars
>>5955590
>She's the least corrupt person running
>>5957803
that pic
>"i don't like the clap so i'll chose ebola"
>>5958956
The sad thing is there are a lot of people with that mentality. She's seen as a surefire thing so she uses that to scare people about Trump.
>You can take the chance and go for Sanders or you can make sure Trump loses by voting for me
Fear mongering always works in politics
>>5958956
there is a reason her fans only talk about trump, they want to ignore that currently we are selecting who goes up against the repulicans. if just want to switch the convo because she doesn't actually gain anywhere. they just want to run out the clock by switching the convo to fighting trump.
>>5958061
No I am not joking; why is it so absurd to ask you to justify a Hillary Clinton vote based on her support of "equal rights?"
Jesus Christ. I am not a bernieorbust douche, but it's as if Hillary supporters want me to be one.
>>5958027
trumps isnt against gay marriage
>trump isnt against abortions either
>>5959206
I'm with this guy. Hillary doesnt do shit for equal rights, she just want to pander to the /lgbt/ vote because LOL liberal constituancy.
>she was totally against marriage equality in the 90's. She's two faced. Cant tell what she believes, does she believe the lies she was telling in the 90's or the lie's she tells today.
>she also DGAF about the middle class. She is so god damn rich, i fucking hate when she claims to be "one of us"
>she said being first lady was "like being a sinlge mother"
WHAT AN ASSHOLE
>your husband was the presidnet, you are in NO WAY a single mother, you dont know their stuggle and fuck you for trying to empathize with them you cunt.
>>5958138
serious WTF has she ever done for equality.
>she actievly campaigned AGAINST marriage equality in the 90's
>>5955590
>>5955590
>>endorses a morally corrupt,
>Morally corrupt? She's the least corrupt person running.
She is BY FAR the most corrupt of all the candidates.
>She sold influence as secretary of state. She's so full of corrupt money her eyes are green.
She made $100,000,000 while secretary of state. Thats about 4x as much as she made in the 4 years before she was secretary of state.
>Whats that she sold american influence to the highest bidder. Who'd have thunk.... btw she's why obama failed at foreign policy in his first term.
>>5955454
Hillary is America's greatest mistake.
>>5959327
Sometimes, single Moms don't need a Man.
Hillary acts like being first Lady is inferiority.
She's a white privileged, cisfemale, heterosex bigot.
>>5959450
Too RW for me, I'm going to vote Bernie.
CA primaries 2 months away.
Bernie is a strong advocate for LGBT rights for 20-30-40 years.
>>5959563
Having another Clinton in the WH is like having another Bush. Bad for LGBT, bad for Americans.
>>5955454
>TFW my state supports Clinton
I'm more left sided but Clinton is just evil
She doesn't even support lgbt rights
>>5955590
Feel free to stay home and jingle some keys on Tuesday, you fucking moron. Hillary Clinton is a liar, a cockroach and a war criminal. She has continually changed her "opinion" based on what the current group she is talking to wants to hear. She is literally just a female Trump; a complete moron with no real plans and no real intelligence. Bernie Sanders is the least corrupt politician left in the race. He has managed to keep the same views and ideal for decades while Clinton struggles to maintain her "values" for an entire day.
Bisexual Wisconsinite here
All Kasich all day
>>5959721
Jeb would give everyone free guacamole though
>>5958799
>all women who are accusing a man of rape should be believed until a court proves otherwise
is this supposed to be a good thing?
>>5958981
and yet sanders has consistently had a significantly greater differential over trump, and he will be able to stand up to attacks with more than
>haha, now, let's get the facts straight. *lies*
>>5955607
this guy gets it
>Fucking hillary God damn the corrup democratic super delegates
>>5955607
>No idea why "LGBT folk" or blacks would prefer Hillary.
Seriously. Granted, the establishment left have been pushing in favor of LGBT rights for a while now as required to keep their base happy on social issues...but make no mistake, HRC is all about protecting the neoliberal status quo. Unless you're rich as balls this should scare the shit out of you.
Also, I read that southern African Americans are still quite antisemitic, which would explain the lack of enthusiasm for Sanders
>>5960537
>soros puppet
>>5955590
>>5960513
>Bernie Sanders is the least corrupt politician left in the race.
>a guy that was a leech and didnt have a job until he was 40
>a guy that says soviet style bread lines are a good thing
>a guy that honeymooned in the Soviet Union
>a guy that is a full fledge communist
>Hillary is just a female trump
Lol trump and Hillary are polar opposites in policies, how you came to that conclusion shows the mentally inept capacities of a typical Bernie supporter.
jesus the bernie supporters (or should I say cultists) are fucking retarded
>>5963027
Hillary is a flip-flopper, her platform policies mean absolutely nothing. She's historically shown she has no problem switching her ideologies. It's a risky vote.
It's sort of like Trump, except Trump has to actually earn his votes whereas Hillary can rely on uninformed voters that only see the Clinton name and don't delve any further. That's probably why Clinton will get decimated in the general election if she goes against Trump. Trump might be a flip-flopper and say horrible shit but for the entire primaries he has had to actually fight for votes to get where he is unlike Clinton.
Question: Why do LGBT folk tend to support Hillary Clinton so strongly? Even in 2008, a majority of LGBT folk voted for Clinton over Obama.
>>5963270
Because the basically see her as a fag hag
>>5963270
My guess it has to do with feminism ('the first woman president, yay!'), as wife of Bill Hillary has way more name recognition than 99% of everyone on the planet, party loyalty, and back in 08 Obama and Clinton were identical in their opposition to LGBT rights.
>>5963027
sanderes ia a socialist. Not a communist.
>but your too fucking stupid to understand the difference.
>you like social security? Socialism..
>you like subsidized health care? Socialism.
>you like welfare? Socialism
>you like public schools? Socialism.
>you like public transportation? Socialism
>you like soup kitchens and homeless shelters? Socialism.
Whats that? you hate the social safety net? Anyone who isnt rich should just die. Well then fuck you! Your an asshole anyway :)
>>5963027
gulag
>>5963119
Clinton can't debate. One of her greatest weaknesses is that she get frustrated Really easily. All it takes to throw her off her game is to ask her about one of her positions in the past and compare it to the bullshit she is spewing today
>she gets this "FUCK U IM HILL-DAWG" look on her face and tries to fight facts directly
Trump is going to annihilate her in a debate.
>Trump will ruin her in an election.
>basically its vote sanders or trump will win.
P.S. Hillary is more widely hated than trump. By a large margin
>>5963588
>and back in 08 Obama and Clinton were identical in their opposition to LGBT rights.
That's not really true anon.
>>5963722
>Clinton can't debate.
Actually she's a really good debater.
>>5963722
>P.S. Hillary is more widely hated than trump. By a large margin
That's also bs anon. Some like 70% of all women, 80% of all Latinos, and 70% of all African Americans hate Trump.
>>5963940
Not being argumentative but in what way was Obama and Clinton different. IIRC there wasn't any daylight between their positions on issues like marriage equality during the 08 race.
>>5963957
>Not being argumentative but in what way was Obama and Clinton different. IIRC there wasn't any daylight between their positions on issues like marriage equality during the 08 race.
There was. Obama supported repealing all of the Defense of Marriage Act, while Hillary support repealing only the section of the Defense of Marriage Act prohibiting federal recognition of gay marriage.
Also Hillary ran to the left of Obama on things like healthcare.
Also I didn't really care about Obama's position on gay marriage in 2008. I simply assumed he secretly supported it and since he came out against Prop 8, there was no reason for gay marriage supporters not to vote for him.
>>5964000
Interesting, I didn't know they were addressing DOMA at all during the 08 race. I was under the impression that Obama and Clinton were both pushing for civil-(but equal)-unions.
>>5964026
For the vast majority of democrats marriage equality is just a wedge issue that gets lip service, then forgotten about every year that's not an election year.
>>5964085
>Interesting, I didn't know they were addressing DOMA at all during the 08 race. I was under the impression that Obama and Clinton were both pushing for civil-(but equal)-unions.
DOMA, civil unions, gays (not trans) people in the military, etc. were big lgbt issues. There was an entire debate one time held by the Human Rights Campaign that covered nothing but LGBT issues.
I've noticed Hillary's new pitch to the LGBT community is "you can get married on Sunday and fired from your job for being gay on Monday." She's basically saying "gay marriage is a done deal, however you can still be discriminated against legally in a bunch of states." This is smart politics because she's right and she's been on record in the US senate as a NY senator supporting ENDA, which would have protect LGBT folks from discrimination.
>For the vast majority of democrats marriage equality is just a wedge issue that gets lip service, then forgotten about every year that's not an election year.
I like Hillary's stance that gay marriage isn't important issue anymore and we should be talking about LGBT employment discrimination. I really don't care about it now that the US Supreme Court has ruled on it.
>>5963956
100% of all men dont want to vote for her.
>even 30% of women hate her according to you.
>thats 65% of the population hating her right there.
Latino's are voting overwhelming for trump so ur statistic is horseshit.
>all blacks are voting for hillary.
I live in southern califronai and have not met a single person who claims to like hillary... at all.
Isnt Cali supposed to be very liberal? everyone hates her here.
>>5964160
>100% of all men dont want to vote for her.
Ehhhh that's not really true.
>Latino's are voting overwhelming for trump so ur statistic is horseshit.
WHAT? Latinos hate trump. He called them rapists and murders. He's a racist.
>I live in southern califronai and have not met a single person who claims to like hillary... at all.
I assume most of them are Sanders supporters, that doesn't mean they support Drumpf.
>>5964129
>"you can get married on Sunday and fired from your job for being gay on Monday."
I don't believe Clinton taking a ubiquitous democrat position that supports LGB employment protection is particularly smart or innovative. Sunday/Monday is a catchy way to change the subject from DOMA, but Sunday/Monday is not substantively different from her democratic opponent's position
After a google of "Sanders LGBT employment protection position" I got a:
>“We've got to end LGBT discrimination in the workplace
quote. She's also not alone in the current primary race for her support of ENDA.
>I like Hillary's stance that gay marriage isn't important issue anymore and we should be talking about LGBT employment discrimination.
I agree, but coming from Clinton her bringing up employment discrimination is a deflection from criticism aimed at her past support of DOMA.
>I really don't care about it now that the US Supreme Court has ruled on it.
For the most part I agree but we still have to handle the state level challenges, and wanna be martyrs like Kim Davis, etc.
tl;dr Well now I am more with >>5963270 than I was before. Why does Clinton get so much credit on these issues, and support from demographics that are apparently better catered to by other candidates?
>>5964160
>latino's are voting overwhelming for trump so ur statistic is horseshit.
wat?
Is your source for that claim pic related detailing the Nevada caucuses, because that fluke's been addressed
>"Nevada has a large Latino population, a substantial share of which is undocumented. Among those who are citizens and eligible to vote, the vast -- and we really do mean very, very vast -- majority of these Latino voters tend to cast ballots for Democrats. In fact, in 2008, President Obama won the Latino vote there 76 percent to 22 percent. He won it by nearly 50 points in 2012. And even that might undersell how much Nevada Latinos lean left."
>"So, like any election, only some share of this small share of the Latino electorate showed up and participated in the Wednesday Republican caucus to begin with. And, of those who did, Edison's resources and plans allowed them to check with with a grand total of 100 -- that is right, 100 -- Latino Republican voters inside of a very limited number of precincts around the state, before these individuals went in and cast a vote."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/02/24/donald-trump-apparently-won-the-latino-vote-in-nevada-it-doesnt-mean-latinos-suddenly-love-him/
>>5964230
>I don't believe Clinton taking a ubiquitous democrat position that supports LGB employment protection is particularly smart or innovative. Sunday/Monday is a catchy way to change the subject from DOMA, but Sunday/Monday is not substantively different from her democratic opponent's position
Doesn't matter if it's ubiquitous position or not. It's an issue she can't be claimed to be flip flopper on because she co-sponsored ENDA as New York Senator since 2001 when she became senator.
>“We've got to end LGBT discrimination in the workplace
But how often do you hear Sanders bring up LGBT issues? Not a lot really. Hillary on the other hands mentions LGBT folks in almost every debate she attended. Doesn't matter if they are both good on the issue, Hillary tends to pander more and has more support among the LGBT establishment (like the Human Rights Campaign) than Sanders. Sanders is from Vermont, he's not from New York like Hillary where there is a fairly significant LGBT population.
>I agree, but coming from Clinton her bringing up employment discrimination is a deflection from criticism aimed at her past support of DOMA.
I don't think the issue of DOMA or gay marriage really matters in this election. With things like HB 2 in North Carolina, it just high lights Clinton points that we need to forget the gay marriage distraction and start talking about federal LGBT civil rights laws.
>For the most part I agree but we still have to handle the state level challenges, and wanna be martyrs like Kim Davis, etc.
All the more important why we need federal laws.
>Why does Clinton get so much credit on these issues, and support from demographics that are apparently better catered to by other candidates?
Clinton have had a long history with the LGBT community. When Bill Clinton ran in 1992, he was the first president to pander to LGBT folk, and really was a massive relief for LGBT folk after the dark years of the Reagan admistraiotn and the AIDs crisis.
>>5964325
That long recent history with LGBT people is what informs my negative attitude of the Clintons.
Bill Clinton was marginally better than the administration that would be silent or laugh at hundreds of thousands of dead gay men, and because of that the Clintons are viewed as great LGBT advocates? To me lauding the Clintons as LGBT advocates seems like declaring Barrack Obama a pacifist because he's slightly less hawkish than the Bush administration he replaced.
I guess am probably at just the wrong age to be a Clinton lover. Too young to be impacted by the AIDS crisis in the eighties, but old enough to be impacted by Clinton policies like Don't ask Don't Tell.
>>5964166
there are plenty of trump voters here too.
>never met a hillary voter
>>5964377
>That long recent history with LGBT people is what informs my negative attitude of the Clintons.
Because your probably young. Older lgbt folk of the Stonewall generation know all to well the horrifies LGBT folks suffered under the Reagan administration in the 1980s, like one of Reagan's staff members saying people who have AIDs were "getting what was coming to them."
The same could be applied to another marginalized minority, African Americans, who also suffered heavily under the Reagan years.
>Bill Clinton was marginally better than the administration that would be silent or laugh at hundreds of thousands of dead gay men, and because of that the Clintons are viewed as great LGBT advocates? To me lauding the Clintons as LGBT advocates seems like declaring Barrack Obama a pacifist because he's slightly less hawkish than the Bush administration he replaced.
You can't look at the 1990s with a 2016 lens. Clinton in 1993 pushed heavily in his first year to repeal the BAN on LGBT people in the military. Sodomy was criminalized in the US military in the 1920s in USA and remained in place due to conservative opposition to LGBT folk. Congress refused to go along, Clinton planned to pass an executive order allowing lgb folk in the military, BUT Congress threaten to override him. DADT was simply a compromise at the time because of the anti-LGBT views of Congress at the time. Thankfully a good many of them are dead now.
The 1990s was FAR FAR different universe for LGBT people in the USA than 2016. Jesse Helms was threaten to overturn Washington D.C.'s repeal of it's sodomy law. A lot of young LGBT folk don't realize just how good they got it compared to the past hell even 20 years.
>>5964409
>there are plenty of trump voters here too.
Why would a LGBT person support a anti-gay, racist, sexist, bigot like Trump?
>>5964421
>You can't look at the 1990s with a 2016 lens.
Maybe I am just naive but I can't be that relativistic when it comes to LGBT rights issues. To me the Reagan admin being awful doesn't improve and excuse the Clinton admin.
>Clinton planned to pass an executive order allowing lgb folk in the military, BUT Congress threaten to override him.
I don't accept this line of thought. It's been a while since my last poli sci class; but how could congress override an executive order that a president makes for the military when he's the CiC? I thought there was no mechanism for Congress or the SCOTUS to intervene in executive orders the same way they can't do anything about executive agreements?
>Jesse Helms was threaten to overturn Washington D.C.'s repeal of it's sodomy law.
Part of me is skeptical that a senator could accomplish anything meaningful to reinstate a sodomy law, and another part of me sees running away from a sodomy ban fight as a huge failure in advocating for LGBT people. By making sodomy laws an issue they could've established more precedent for applying the due process and equal protection clauses of the constitution, so in that way if the Clinton admin had fought harder we'd be decades ahead of where we are now. Instead we get only half measures on top of more legislation to spend decades repealing.
>A lot of young LGBT folk don't realize just how good they got it compared to the past hell even 20 years.
Yup.
>>5964553
>Maybe I am just naive but I can't be that relativistic when it comes to LGBT rights issues. To me the Reagan admin being awful doesn't improve and excuse the Clinton admin.
So you'll be pleased to know it 2016 and Hillary will do everything in her power to fight for LGBT voters.
>Part of me is skeptical that a senator could accomplish anything meaningful to reinstate a sodomy law,
Look up 1981 when the US house repealed Washington D.C.'s sodomy repeal because Congress controlled the district of Columbia.
>By making sodomy laws an issue they could've established more precedent for applying the due process and equal protection clauses of the constitution,
Lawrence v Texas already covered this issue.
A lot of what Clinton wanted was simply because of Congress fucking him over. Hell Congress voted to even REPEAL Clinton's executive order banning discrimination for LGB federal workers. Clinton's prime LGBT legacy is appoint to the US Supermen Court Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer, two pro-LGBTQ justices.
Now there is a potential of not just one vacancy of the US supreme Court for he next president, but up to 4 new appointments on the court. We cannot risk that falling into the hands of the right wing. That's why we need to get Hillary elected president.
"I believe marriage is not just a bond but a sacred bond between a man and a woman. I have had occasion in my life to defend marriage, to stand up for marriage, to believe in the hard work and challenge of marriage. So I take umbrage at anyone who might suggest that those of us who worry about amending the Constitution are less committed to the sanctity of marriage, or to the fundamental bedrock principle that it exists between a man and a woman, going back into the midst of history as one of the founding, foundational institutions of history and humanity and civilization, and that its primary, principal role during those millennia has been the raising and socializing of children for the society into which they are to become adults."
Hillary Clinton
>>5964600
>I believe marriage is not just a bond but a sacred bond between a man and a woman.
Back when 70% of the US population believed that.
Also gay marriage is a non-issue in this election as I pointed out dozens of times now. LGBT civil rights laws are the next set for the LGBTQI community.
>>5964425
>Why would a LGBT person support a anti-gay, racist, sexist, bigot like Trump?
Shit bait/10 he has never been anti-gay, he has employed more women and minorities than Clinton ever has, and he's specifically refused to do business with people that denied blacks/minorities entry to their establishments until they changed their policy.
You're seriously delusional if you can't see Clinton is basically the john Kerry of this election, she does not are about LGBt people at all, she does not care about even her husband if it'll get her a few more votes and more money. The woman is pure evil and anyone that supports her is just as disgusting.
She is a war criminal and a crook.
>>5964594
>So you'll be pleased to know it 2016 and Hillary will do everything in her power to fight for LGBT voters.
I am not with you on this blanket statement. Because as the record shows she'll do everything in her power, only if there are no advantageous compromises on the rights of LGBT voters to be made with the bigots that hate us.
I agree with you that the SCOTUS nominations are probably going to be the most important LGBT issues going forward, and that's also one reason why I'll likely vote for her in the general election. Except I don't see how nominating an LGBT friendly SCOTUS justice is something only the HRC campaign can address.
This goes back to my ubiquitous democrat values comment earlier, because when the official party platform is pro-LGBT any democrat would be able to make those same SCOTUS nominations.
I think it's dangerous for a group like LGBT people to unquestioningly support any candidate. Because that gives the candidate a whole lot of political capital with that group to spend infringing and ignoring the rights and issues of that group.
As her advocate, what hypothetical thing would she have to do for you to stop supporting Hillary?
>>5964723
>and he's specifically refused to do business with people that denied blacks/minorities entry to their establishments until they changed their policy.
Not the anon you replied to, but what about "code No. 9" scandal?
>>5964885
>Because as the record shows she'll do everything in her power, only if there are no advantageous compromises on the rights of LGBT voters to be made with the bigots that hate us.
Anon which party do anti-gay people vote for? The Republicans. Which party is Hillary running for? The Democratic nomination. That means she's bound to us as a voting block because LGBT voters vote overwhelming for Democrats. 1 in 5 Democrat donors are gay.
>This goes back to my ubiquitous democrat values comment earlier, because when the official party platform is pro-LGBT any democrat would be able to make those same SCOTUS nominations.
Sanders cannot win the nomination. He's far to behind the delegate count. And there are other issues I have problem with him, such as his record on guns.
>I think it's dangerous for a group like LGBT people to unquestioningly support any candidate.
Why? Supporting one candidate who will do whatever we want, as opposed to Trump or Cruz who appeal to their radical lunatic fringe base and throw LGBT folks under the bus.
>Because that gives the candidate a whole lot of political capital with that group to spend infringing and ignoring the rights and issues of that group.
You could make this same argument for Latinos and African American voters, along with Asian Americans, who have all been voting more heavily Democratic lately. The problem with what are you saying is that there is not other party other than the Democrats who will fight for us. The GOP has gotten so far right it's being compared to the fucking Nazi Party for crying out loud. We cannot risk this election by voting for these insane fascists.
>As her advocate, what hypothetical thing would she have to do for you to stop supporting Hillary?
I've been actively campaigning for her and donated to her campaign. I believe she's the best choice for president and has had a lot of experience in government which would allow her to get things done.
>>5964640
what lgbt civil rights are needed?
>>5964958
>what lgbt civil rights are needed?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equality_Act_of_2015
>>5964600
>Hillary shouldn't be held accountable
>>5964953
>You could make this same argument for Latinos and African American voters
And I do.
One of my biggest problems with politicians like Kamela Harris is how she advertises herself as an advocate for black communities that are disproportionately impacted by the drug war, yet she supports criminalizing recreational marijuana while lauding herself for medical marijuana decriminalization half measures.
>The problem with what are you saying is that there is not other party other than the Democrats who will fight for us.
Agreed that the two party system takes away our choices in a general election, but we still have choices when it comes to a primary candidate.
Besides this election race is by far the best possible election Hillary could have ever hopped for. Her biggest primary opponent is an until recently effectively unknown politician that refuses to engage in mud slinging, and her primary opponent is a despised reality TV star.
Sanders almost certainly can't win the nomination, but the longer he stays in the further left he'll push her, so when she inevitably pivots right in the general she can't get too far away from her progressive primary campaign promises forced out of her by Sanders
>I've been actively campaigning for her and donated to her campaign. I believe she's the best choice for president and has had a lot of experience in government which would allow her to get things done.
That's actually really cool that you're so politically active, but I want to know if there's a logical limit to your support of your candidate. If you don't establish a red line for abandoning a candidate, then how exactly can you hold that politician accountable for anything?
>>5965086
>That's actually really cool that you're so politically active, but I want to know if there's a logical limit to your support of your candidate. If you don't establish a red line for abandoning a candidate, then how exactly can you hold that politician accountable for anything?
What do you mean "not support anymore?" Do you mean not vote for Hillary? And who would I vote for? Trump, Cruz? Not vote? That's voting Republican anon.
>>5965241
>What do you mean "not support anymore?" Do you mean not vote for Hillary?
Yes, I do mean: not vote for her, write an angry letter, advocate for a different candidate, whatever.
>And who would I vote for? Trump, Cruz? Not vote? That's voting Republican anon.
Can't really get flustered by that notion when in my state and voting district our presidential votes are guaranteed to go to the Democrat candidate.
That and I am also am not particularly worried about partisan politics. A platform and voting history is more important to me than a (D), (I) or (R) at the end of their name on CSPAN.
If you can name a red line issue (for example if hypothetically Clinton promised she'd nominate Josh Duggar for the SCOTUS, if she chose Wayne LaPierre as her running mate, etc. But please feel free to get more substantive and granular than that) I'd know you're not so far in the tank for Hillary that all you'd be able to offer the LGBT community as an assurance that Hillary would be even minimally accountable to our group is a few focus grouped slogans, party loyalty to democrats, and blind faith in a candidate.
>>5963695
all of those are indeed socialism, and pretty much communism, of course you are a fucking loser that never worked in your entire life so you think they are all good things
please overdose
>>5967422
I'm actually an accountant. Get bent :)
>>5967488
making spreadsheets on your iphone isn't a job
what do you do
>>5964953
ohhh my god if this isn't trolling holy shit. can't get much more kucked than this
