A Big Tent, Sure—But Not That Big

All the Republican talk of inclusiveness doesn’t seem to apply to gay voters.

For indispensable reporting on the coronavirus crisis, the election, and more, subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter.


For all the Republican talk of inclusiveness — highlighting the number of minority delegates and insisting that “W stands for women” — that spirit of tolerance doesn’t extend to homosexual voters, who find themselves even more marginalized by the GOP than they were in 2000.

During his first run at the presidency, George W. Bush made a point of courting groups like the Log Cabin Republicans. And at the Philadelphia convention four years ago, Arizona Rep. Jim Kolbe made history as the first openly gay politician to address the GOP delegation. But some conservatives used his speech as a protest opportunity, bowing their heads to “pray for him” and holding up signs telling him “there is a way out” – even though Kolbe spoke about trade issues (an area of his expertise) and never mentioned his sexuality. As a spokesman for the right-wing American Family Association told ABC News back then:

“It is a little slick and I don’t care for it. We don’t want to play that game. We have a problem with this idea of tolerance and having to value every kind of lifestyle.”

This year, the GOP is going with that approach. No openly gay Republicans will address the gathering and, despite the efforts of moderate groups, the party platform includes support for a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage and criticizes civil-union partnerships.

The Republican National Committee has even left gays and lesbians off its list of outreach efforts, while listed groups include everything from Greek Americans and Lebanese Americans to snowmobilers and homeschoolers.

The Log Cabin Republicans have held off on endorsing Bush’s re-election campaign, and the groups is running a new ad criticizing the party’s anti-gay tactics. But LCR and other moderates are in a tight spot, trying to influence a party that’s clearly not receptive. As Log Cabin executive director Patrick Guerriero said:

“This party has a choice to make, about whether it will be the party of Rudy Giuliani and Arnold Schwarzenegger or the party of Jerry Falwell and Pat Buchanan.”

Unfortunately, it seems to be choosing the latter.

DOES IT FEEL LIKE POLITICS IS AT A BREAKING POINT?

Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest