Gay voters angry at Democrats could sway election. Let the scapegoating begin!
1. I definitely love how this is just about "gay voters," casually ignoring the fact that a huge majority of Americans support the repeal of DADT and there are literally MILLIONS of reliable Democratic not-gay (straight, bi, asexual) voters who are pissed about this, too. Admittedly, that fact does undermine the "special rights" and "hysterical minority who don't understand how politics work" narratives that are the key to diminishing any civil rights movement and establishing scapegoats.
2. Supposing for a moment that it's true that gay voters (and their allies) are so angry at Democrats that they alone (without the help of alienated female voters and/or trans voters and/or poor voters and/or other underserved constituencies) could sway the election, the headline is still misleading: It's ultimately the Democrats who failed to deliver on promises made to a sizable and politically active constituency who will sway the election, if gay voters (and their allies) don't show up on Election Day.
To revisit a familiar post from the last election season: When someone engages in divisive behavior, any resulting division is their responsibility.
It is, simply, not the duty of any person who is repeatedly subjected to alienating language, images, behaviors, and/or legislation to nonetheless never complain and pledge fealty from the margins. If voters from marginalized populations are valued, then they should not be demeaned-and if they are demeaned, they should not be expected to pretend it does not matter.
The fucking end.
[Commenting Guidelines: This is a post about politicking and narratives, not about voting. If you are going to respond to this post by talking about voting, please familiarize yourself with Shakesville's policy about voting discussions, and utilize "I" language. By way of reminder, "I think you should vote this way" does not count.]