• Gay BlogAds

  • Gay News Watch

  • Chris Tweets

  • « Bill Clinton's 'fairy tale' part 2 | Main | Hillary 'hurt' alert, Sunday edition »

    January 13, 2008

    Hoping for a Romney win?

    Posted by: Chris


    I haven't posted a complete write-up comparing the Republican presidential candidates on gay rights -- as I did on the Democrats -- but suffice to say that he's right down there at the bottom with Mike "Quarantine the Queers" Huckabee. And yet a victory for Mitt Romney in next Tuesday's Michigan primary could be a very good thing for those hoping for better -- from both parties.

    John McCain is riding a huge wave of momentum from his "comeback senior" victory in New Hampshire -- surpassing Huckabee and Rudy Giuliani in national surveys and even beginning to challenge in South Carolina, the state that sunk his 2000 presidential bid.

    A McCain nomination is the most dangerous for two reasons: first, he's demonstrably worse on gay rights than Rudy Giuliani, who at least favors workplace rights and hate crime laws and (in theory) open service in the military. McCain is on the other side of all three issues, and is only more "compassionate" than the current conservative in the White House because he opposes on federalism grounds a federal marriage amendment. The Jan. 29 Florida primary is do or die for Rudy, and yet he's slipped behind McCain -- in a 30-point shift between the two -- in one new poll there. The Arizona senator is even challenging Giuliani in New York!

    Second, McCain is a much bigger threat than Romney and certainly Huckabee in the general election. Polls show that only McCain beats both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama in many of the "purple" battleground states that will decide things in November. Those polls are premature, of course, and there's plenty of time to remind voters that McCain was among the most ardent supporters of the war in Iraq -- although his prescient support for "the surge" is responsible for his campaign second coming.

    With those two factors in mind, it's encouraging to see Romney actually maintain a survey lead somewhere -- even if it is his home state of Michigan. Two new polls out this weekend put him 5 to 8 points ahead of McCain, with Huckabee another 5 percentage points behind. A 1-2-3 finish like that would give all three candidates a claim at joint frontrunner status, keeping the race jumbled going into South Carolina on Saturday and Florida at the end of the month.

    It makes sense that Romney would do well in Michigan, especially if he focuses on his business background in a state that always worries more about the economy. If he's successful there, it would provide an interesting look of the campaign that could have been -- had Romney not chosen to reinvent himself as an social conservative and instead run as a successful businessman and governor.



    TrackBack URL for this entry:


    1. Andoni on Jan 13, 2008 10:22:10 AM:

      Guess what, in a McCain vs Clinton election, guess who is perceived as the agent of change? I would argue that McCain (in spite of his war positions) would be the change candidate (think new or novel) candidate over Clinton (same old - Bush/Clinton/Bush/Clinton).

      In a McCain vs Obama race, Obama is clearly the change candidate.

      Change is still the prime motivator in the electorate.

      My only worry in a McCain Obama race is that:

      1. a terrorist act before the election may swing fear voters over to McCain because of his strong military record/positions.

      2. America may decide that he's been running for president for so long and has served his country so well as a POW and in the Senate, that he should be rewarded.

      Against McCain, in a race with Obama is his age. There would be a strong contrast between the two in joint appearances. In the absence of a goof up by Obama, or an external attack, I think that should help Obama.

    1. Ksary on Jan 13, 2008 10:29:16 AM:

      I'm 63, so this is not an "agist" thought. Has anyone noticed that McCain is too old for this job? He is quasi-senile. Watch him closely. He moves, gesticulates, and talks like a very old person. Same old. Same old...with senility as a spice. The only person that REALLY represents change (and is perceived that way worldwide) is Obama. Everyone else (except Corral-the-Fags-Hucakbee) is just a variation on a theme.

    1. Andoni on Jan 13, 2008 11:31:28 AM:

      I agree with Ksary..... and I'm 60.

      About 6 months ago I saw McCain on a talk show and his face looked very old and tired. In the past month his face looks much better. The magic or surgery or botox? Who knows.

      But now what I notice is how he moves. He has very little mobility and flexibility ----he moves so slowly and rigidly, but you don't see this on camera very often......sort of like FDR's wheelchair.

      So yes, if the media begins showing more clips of him moving about .... or his surgery/botox starts sagging, it will be a shock to the country. (Maybe the National Enquirer will do one of those hatchet job photos of making him look 100 years old.)

      But yes, age is a problem for McCain. I haven't noticed his senility, but I will be watching......and I hope the media is too.

    1. Craig Ranapia on Jan 13, 2008 4:31:40 PM:


      Yes, you are being ageist and I'd love to know what medical school you attended that regards watching television as a clinically valid diagnostic tool.

      McCain has said himself that 'age' is always going to be an issue for some people, but you'd think its a swift boat that's not going to float as the leading edge of the baby boom hit sixty.

    1. Andoni on Jan 13, 2008 10:41:03 PM:

      Even though you didn't address the question to me, I am a doctor and the TV show we all watched every Tuesday night in med school was Marcus Welby, MD. We learned a new disease every week. I also learned how to make observations on the small tube (we had color back then) and make a diagnosis.

      My diagnosis of McCain --- he is old. He also has a scar behind his left check from the what I believe was the removal of a malignant melanoma. He has two melanomas removed (1993 and 2000) and is said to be cancer free.

      Besides walking rigidly which could be the result of torture injuries during Vietnam, it appears that he has limited use of his left arm, also I believe from the war.

      I think over a long campaign, the public would becom more concerned about his health and age as they observed him.

    1. Geena The Transgirl on Jan 14, 2008 12:45:50 AM:

      Romney would be the most verbally, socially, and legislatively intolerant, because he would not compromise or reverse course on any abortion-gay-lesbian socially tolerant positions.
      He would seek to prove his flip-flop was a conversion by yielding no ground. He has no core beliefs on gay lesbian issues, only political calculations.
      McCain can be talked into compromise if the politics make it advantageous, a Democratic house and Senate could make that situation possible. Remember he did call Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson “Agents of Intolerance”. So he is not without the abilty to critize within.
      Even Huckabee, who would not cooperate legislatively, would likely use a “were all God’s children” style of inclusion.

      Furthermore Republicans get about 8% of the African-American vote in national elections. Romney will get wiped out in single women to Hillary, and African-Americans to Obama.
      Which is why David Brooks wrote of “Romney’s Road to Nowhere”.

      The best way to crush the intolerant factions of the Republican party, and the birdcage paper wing of the Democratic party is to elect Obama.
      Best way to elect Obama is to nominate Romney.

    1. Strict Scrutiny on Jan 14, 2008 10:47:25 AM:

      I think all the leading Republican candidates for president are equally contempible on the subject of gay rights, including Rudy Giuliani.

      Romney was vehemently opposed to gay marriage as governor of MA and has gone to great pains to reinvent himself as a “true” conservative. He has back pedaled away from his previous, more socially progressive positions and would have no problem throwing gays under the bus.

      Huckabee has only said that gay people should be treated with respect. That’s it. His comment about putting AIDS patients in quarantine back in 1992 was wretched and without precedent; so much for his Christian compassion. I don’t think he would concede 1 inch on any gay rights issue.

      McCain is just as bad, but hasn’t been as loud about it. Yes, he did call Falwell an agent of intolerance but that was several years ago. Since then, though, he mended fences with Falwell and even publicly embraced him at a Liberty U. graduation ceremony. No principles, just pandering for votes.

      Giuliani used to be more accepting as mayor of NYC, but even he has retreated from many of his GLBT friendly positions. In one debate, he said it would be OK if Roe v. Wade was struck down. Not a gay issue, but if he thinks that’s OK, he’d probably say the same about Lawrence v. Texas, a big gay rights case.

      And Thompson? See above.

      McCain is the biggest threat now. He is surging in the nation wide polls and, while he might not be able to beat Obama, some think he could beat Hillary. What’s more, I don’t think his age will be a major obstacle.

    1. Monster Beats Sale on Nov 30, 2011 1:19:45 AM:

      What’s more, I don’t think his age will be a major obstacle.

    The comments to this entry are closed.

    © Citizen Crain - All Rights Reserved | Design by E.Webscapes Design Studio | Powered by: TypePad