Is the Country Ready for a Gay President? Don’t Trust the Polls

I honestly don't care if someone is gay or not. It's not my thing, but have at it.

There are things I like about Buttigieg and things I don't like.

The issues which he supports and I do not are plentiful:

• Abolish the death penalty
• Reparations (he says we should "study" them)
• Raising minimum wage to $15 an hour
  
• Cancelling student debt
• Eliminating the Electoral College
• Increase taxes on upper-tier Americans

But there are also issues on which I agree with him:

• Eliminate mandatory minimum sentences
• Eliminate private prisons
• Boost the defense budget
• Paid family leave
• Boost teacher pay

The main issues for me, though, are illegal immigration and gun control.

Buttigieg supports an "assault weapons" voluntary buy-back system. Well, that doesn't really accomplish anything. It's a feel good, low yield tactic. He also supports a national gun registry and licensing. I think those are dangerous and shouldn't be allowed.

He's yet to come out with any sort of comprehensive plan on how to deal with illegal immigration. Thus far, all he's done is parrot what the other candidates are saying with regards to Trump's handling of it. I don;t need a candidate to tell me how Trump's handling it. I need that candidate to tell me how he/she would handle it.

So, as it stands right now, I'm voting for Trump. Buttigieg is the only one from the left I would even consider voting for, but that would take some serious changes in what he fins important.

 

According to Gallup, 78% of all Americans would be okay with electing a gay.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/285563...utm_content=morelink&utm_campaign=syndication

But only 45% in electing a socialist which could be bad news for Sanders. Especially in the general election where I'm sure Trump and the GOP would hit hard on Sanders being a self-described Democratic Socialist.

Republicans where most of the anti gay folks reside, aren't going to vote for Buttigieg either. Most Democrats would, based only on the D behind his name. Blacks, I'm not certain. They certainly could be more anti gay than whites. I have noticed going through the polls with the different candidates match up against Trump, Biden, Sanders, Warren, are receiving 85-90% support from blacks. Buttigieg is down to 72% among blacks vs. Trump. But their votes aren't going to Trump, they're in the Don't know/would not vote columns. Trump does no better among blacks 8-10% regardless of who the candidates are.

So we'll see.

 

I haven't found anything on the elder's political ideologies. Can you link to something?

 

Hilarious!
I'll just pick the lowest of all your low hanging fruit.

"6) Tried to bring the races together, rather than tear them apart"

You have got to be kidding. Obama was a race baiter extraordinaire. He never missed a chance to pit races against eachother and race relations were never worse with constant riots, looting, arson and cop killing.

 

You kind of ignored the premise of the OP which was polls on this subject are unreliable.

 

Yupp us dum Trump suporterrs can barlie rhead or wright.

 

Perhaps, it may depend on how much trust one puts in polls. Also who is conducting the polls. There are polling firms I wouldn't trust while trusting others. But that comes from experience seeing how right or how wrong each was over time.

I trust Gallup. They have a proven track record over decades. They also give you the margin of error in their polls and who they polled along with their method. Gallup is an old fashioned polling firm which actually talks to those being polled instead of a quick internet interview.

One can put as much stock in these polls as one wants. But I do think the OP is right to a certain extent that Blacks would be turned off more by a gay running for the presidency than whites. That was what I was addressing, not whether or not you trust polls. But now you have my view on that.

 

I have no problem with a gay president as long as they upheld the constitution and were conservative.

 

http://www.politicalforum.com/index...which-commie-will-win.568078/#post-1071424623

I can't believe anyone would consider voting for this idiot since he has vowed to open the borders and legalize the 30 million illegals already here. We can't even provide for some of our veterans and this mentally ill 'veteran' would **** all over them. **** gay boy.

 

The premise of the OP which you still don't seem to get is not polls in general but polls on social issues such as this. No matter how reputable the poll itself is polls on social issues are notoriously unreliable.

 

Do you think a gay president could deal effectively with Muslim countries that kill or imprison gays?

 

Hahahaha! Good one! Now seriously, what were Barack's actual qualifications back in 2008 to become president? What had he ever actually done -- aside from being a disciple of Saul Alinsky?

 

Yes, i , question is are we dealing effectively with them now? If they are still doing it I'd suggest that we are not.

 

Exactly.

 

I myself can't imagine the contempt the Arab world would have for us with a gay president and I think it would embolden countries like Iran.

 

Number 4 is especially funny since Obama's couldn't put two words together without a teleprompter.

4) Ability to speak in full sentences.

 

It wasn't just red states that amended their constitutions against gay marriage. The issue was decided by unelected activist judges, not the people...

 

Ever seen a small town mayor get this far before? In fact the only mayors that ever got anywhere in recent years have been from NYC, and all of them failed...

 

That is a deliberate MISTRANSLATION of the ORIGINAL text!

https://blog.smu.edu/ot8317/2016/05/11/leviticus-1822/

https://www.stopbibleabuse.org/biblical-references/leviticus.html

FTR the LITERAL punishment for a child with Tourette's Syndrome is the death penalty!

Hardly a credible source for condemnation of two people who love one another.

 

Well, usually the president himself isn't directly negotiating with the Muslims. Following your reasoning, a Christian president is also a problem when negotiating with Muslims and we should consider voting for a male racially Middle Eastern Muslim president for the best negotiating advantage. And we certainly wouldn't want to pick someone who called for a Muslim ban or claims that Muslims were celebrating during 9/11. However we shouldn't let our rivals define or decide who our leaders are.

 

I guess we Atheists should be grateful that we are no longer the last choice anymore.

One more reason to support Bernie!

 

Fair points I myself considered. Difference is I honestly believe countries such as Iran would see this as a weakness and test our resolve. Then we would just have to hope Butt is not as weak as they assume.

 

So your choices seem to be an unelectable socialist or an equally unelectable gay.

 

Actually it would be the Iranian leadership that would appear weak to their own followers when it came to PB being POTUS. Any concessions that they make would appear as an acceptance that a gay man can be the leader of another nation. That puts them in an awkward position because the rest of the EU nations would be willing to reinstate the nuclear agreement with Iran after PB denounced the criminal IMPOTUS's irresponsible footstomping hissyfit withdrawal.

The Iranian leaders KNOW that they were much better off under the Obama nuclear deal and having it put back on the table would relieve some of the pressure they are under. So they would be the ones caught in the dilemma posed by PB being gay and NOT the other way around.

 

The leaders and diplomats of other countries are pretty smart and highly educated. They also will be dealing with our negotiators and diplomats, not the president. Other countries already do test the resolve of new presidents, and it is up to our leaders to show that we mean business.