Within the Republican Party, does anyone not already a member of Log Cabin Republicans think they have any effect, or are they considered to be a group only tolerated for public relations purposes?
The following paragraph from the Wiki Log Cabin Republicans entry leads me to believe that, not only are they an ineffectual joke, but that they would have it any other way:
“LCR president Greg Angelo described the “preservation of LGBT rights and support for the LGBT community” as hallmarks of Donald Trump’s 2016 Presidential campaign, and asserted that support would continue during his presidency. On that same day as these comments were made, the New York Times reported that the Trump administration had rescinded Obama-era guidance on transgender students’ rights. David Badash, editor-in-chief and founder of the New Civil Rights Movement has criticized the LCR for not opposing this action. Angelo has gone on from describing Trump as “the most pro-LGBT Republican president in history” to implying that “Trump is even better for the LGBTQ community than former President Barack Obama,” according to a report in the Huffington Post.”
Roughly 5% of Americans are LGBT, and roughly 1/4 of them are republicans. I’ve heard it may be as low as 1/5 are republicans now.
So it is 1% of voters, and 2% of Republicans.
Its a fringe group. I have no idea what motivates them. If they have priorities in life higher than LGBT rights, that is fine. But what are they? My impression is that they were more a libertarian group for economic purposes. But do they not understand that the modern GOP is not libertarian, but white nationalist authoritarian?
I’ve always been vaguely aware of what the Log Cabin Republicans are, and I think it would probably be faulty logic to assume that their objectives would align with those of transgender advocates. For one thing, sexual orientation is different from gender. For another, there have always been gay men who have been bigots, it’s just that they used to have to conceal it. One positive development in recent years is that society is more openly accepting of homosexuality, but the other side of it is that just means we’ll see more openly gay bigots, and the fact that their group was and is the target of discrimination doesn’t mean they’ll extend any sympathy to other groups.
I know their positions-What I am asking is whether they are something the other Republicans pay attention to, or are they a joke used by the Republicans to claim that they supposedly support diversity?
They are a token group just like Diamond & Silk, Herman Cain or Michael Steele are the token blacks.
They are pushed out to the forefront so people can’t say ‘the GOP is bigoted’. They are bigoted obviously, but they like to use token groups as a way to defend themselves from those accusations.
Anecdotal but in my experience it is money.
One thing that motivates them is their strong support for gun rights. That is probably the largest factor behind the fact that they’re Republicans at all.
I’d put them in the same category as pro-gun or pro-life Dems: essentially window-dressing for the party that represent a fringe position that haven’t yet sorted to their appropriate party yet.
Any idea how many Log Cabin Republicans are themselves gay?
For gay Republicans to oppose anti-gay hatred is no more interesting than Hispanic Republicans who oppose anti-Hispanic hatred. But for denizens in the Party of Hatred to oppose hatred against a group that doesn’t include them would be something special. (Or are they just cynics trying to lure gays to join the GOP?)
By that standard they are also a fringe group in the Democratic Party, just a slightly larger one.
As for their influence, on gay rights they appear to have none, so they fail at their central mission. However, as lobbyists for non-gay issues that indirectly affect gays disproportionately, such as tax policy(gays tend to be wealthier, especially Republican gays), their voices are heard. I’ve always seen them kind of like the Taiwan lobby, they matter, but they can’t actually change much since where the GOP already agrees with them, they listen, and where they don’t, they don’t.
The Log Cabin Republicans are also a fringe group in the Democratic Party?
What definition of “in” are you using here?
Gays would be a fringe group in the Democratic Party if we are citing percentages.
This is more than a little obnoxious. Hermain Cain joined the party on his own. He wasn’t hired by the party sonthey can pretend to be diverse which is what a “token black” would be. Maybe what you really want to call him is a race traitor?
Yup. 1.5 million African-Americans voted for Trump in 2016. While that’s a small minority(10% or so), it’s far from “tokenism”. It’s a rather large pool to draw spokesman from and they deserve to be heard as much as white liberals do.
I don’t think that they even rise to the level of token group. Near as I can tell, they want to be Republicans far more than the Republican party wants them to be.
Millions of rural white christian men voted for the democrats. Whats your point exactly?
Most groups in America tend to vote along demographic lines, and those demographic lines are divided by in-group vs out-group dynamics.
There will be members of the in-group who vote democratic and members of the out-group who vote republican.
That doesn’t change the overall trend-line and overall nature of political polarization in America where in-groups lean GOP and out-groups lean democratic.
Dan Savage speaks out about them from time to time. I believe that he had a bit about them on one of his recent podcasts but I don’t remember when exactly – it’s a weekly podcast and it must have been a couple months ago at least. Here is something he wrote about them in July 2016:
The GOP keeps adopting anti-LGBT agenda and will occasionally trot out a Log Cabin Republican to show “Hey, we’re not so anti-LGBT.”
I don’t myself remember them being trotted out in any significant way. Cite?
And they get to speak and not have their identity attacked. Minority viewpoints within minority communities deserve the same consideration.
Not necessarily LCRs in particular, but LGBT Republicans in general: