Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

Presidential hopeful Mitt Romney first by slim margin in Iowa caucuses

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. The Republican Party is more rightwing than the BNP in Britain are.

    It’s truly terrifying that they are a mainstream party.

    Oh well I suppose it doesn’t matter seeing as the US can only loosely described as a democracy. Their political system is rotten to the core, so much so that politicians have stopped even pretending to care about the population at large.

    A government of the people, by the people, for the corporations.

    1. The dems are no less a corporatist party any more really. They’re all too similar to call it a two party system.

    2. GingerlyColors 4 Jan 2012, 11:02pm

      Firstly, The Republican Party is linked to the American Jewish Lobby, something that I doubt that the Holocaust denying BNP would have anything to do with.
      Secondly The Republican Party has gay factions, GOProud and the Log Cabin Republicans – does the BNP have a gay faction?
      The BNP Manifesto states that they want to put gays ‘back in the closet’ – in truth if they are elected they will recriminalize homosexuality probably on pain of death.
      It was under George W. Bush’s presidency that the 2003 Lawrence vs. Texas ruling by the Supreme court struck down the remaining laws against homosexuality in states where it was still illegal.
      You may find that the US Supreme Court has the real clout in the USA when it comes to human rights.

      1. GingerlyColors 4 Jan 2012, 11:07pm

        PS If you think I am sticking up for the Republican Party I personally don’t really care who wins the US elections. I would like to point out that there are homophobes in our very own Labour Party. Take the Labour peer Lord Longford for example. Although he campaigned for the release of child murderer, Myra Hindley, he opposed gay rights – what a hypocrite!

  2. i want to cry every time I see headlines about republicans, particularly Santorum.

    Please, please, please, Americans, don’t vote for them – they’re all set to push equal rights back 50 years

  3. And these people if elected will have the nerve to preach morals to the rest of the world.

  4. Dr Robin Guthrie 4 Jan 2012, 11:33am

    Who cares.

    Your countries bankrupt, both morally and financially.

    1. Your grammar’s pretty crap too.

      1. Paddyswurds 4 Jan 2012, 12:39pm

        @Mathair….
        …..Perhaps this is more to your liking Mathair…..
        The United States of America is bankrupt; morally, politically, financially and educationally and as has been predicted many times over the last hundred years, the USA is headed the same direction as the Roman Empire, which the it mirrors…..to oblivion and to be honest the world will be a better place without it’s bullying, warmongering and total disregard for the rest of humanity.

        1. Dr Robin Guthrie 4 Jan 2012, 1:40pm

          Thank you.

          Well put.

        2. de Villiers 4 Jan 2012, 8:14pm

          I would prefer a strong America to a strong China.

          1. Paddyswurds 5 Jan 2012, 12:18am

            I really don’t think that China is in any way interested in the West. We are way more trouble than we are worth. In any case what you would prefer and what you get are pipe dreams Religion and corruption have destroyed the USA and it is way beyond redemption. Within the next 25 to 50 years the USA will break up and it will be every man for himself. New England will probably be the new or rather USA Mark 2. As for the rest it will be a mess. Texas will probably secede as will Vermont , California and Florida and these will become independent states as will some of the big farming states of the mid west. The rest will become or rather continue to be poor ill educated and violent with Evangelical religions becoming a strong influence again as they are in poor ill educated countries in Africa and the rest of the world where their false message won’t be questioned due to ignorance and poverty. .

  5. I am quite surprised there is only a margin of 8 votes between Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum.

    For a state like Iowa where gay marriage became legal in April 2009 to have voted two candidates this closely comes as an unpleasant surprise.

    Given Iowa state statistics peoples attitudes towards gay marriage is liberal. Direct investment, re locations and hospitality industry increases together with job creation have all statistically proven, and recorded for millions $ in Iowa economy since allowing gay marriage, the vote is disconcerting when considering Santorum mandate and attitude of discrimination and bigotry which if he were to be successful would see advances made in gay equality erode.

    1. Santorum as republican candidate would be a gift to Obama. Democrats would have a field day.

    2. Paddyswurds 4 Jan 2012, 12:45pm

      @Steve_R
      ……..i wouldn’t be too het up about this development as Iowa is solidly a Democrat state. Only something like hundred thousand people took part in last nights charade. Things are not going to be changing anytime soon because of this vote. The Republicans are destined to spend a lot longer in the doldrums and have absolutely no chance of unseating Obama. A sitting candidate is rarely ever ousted.

      1. @Paddyswords Very true! it is rare that Presidents are 1 term. I reacted to the vote with sadness and disbelief that in the first Caucuses vote Samtorum was so close. I never expected him to do accomplish such a close vote coming out of the starting gate so to speak. (especially given his views and promises)

  6. “When you redefine marriage, you cheapen marriage. You make it into something less valuable, less special … [and] it is a sure bet that will undermine faith.”

    So Rick you’re saying that same-sex marriage does all these nasty things, whereas heterosexual divorce is tickety-boo A-OK. That divorce DOES NOT undermine marriage, that divorce DOES NOT cheapen marriage, that divorce DOES NOTundermine faith etc.. For people like you a sin is not a sin when that sin is committed by the majority. Ultimately it’s all about scapegoating a minority for the sins of the majority.

    1. That should be a clear warning that he’s a theocrat. Even much of the Republican party would be uncomfortable with that.

  7. ALL Rebublican candidates represent a massive backward step for LGBT rights in America, and lets be honest, its not all wonderfull in the USofA as it stands with many states still opressing the gay community. More for Obama to do, much more, but a Rebublican vote is just plain madness! Don’t let them in America, please don’t!

    1. This is one of the few things that annoy me about Ron Paul, letting states decide on allowing gay marriage. Given, it’s a way or skipping getting the idea past congress but something still sits uneasy about this.

      1. de Villiers 4 Jan 2012, 8:15pm

        It is at least consistent that he considers it not to be a federal issue.

  8. “When you redefine marriage, you cheapen marriage. You make it into something less valuable, less special”
    and YET According to enrichment journal on the divorce rate in America:
    The divorce rate in America for first marriage is 41%
    The divorce rate in America for second marriage is 60%
    The divorce rate in America for third marriage is 73% HOW could we cheapen it any further?????

    1. Because gay marriage is nothing but a convenient wedge issue to disguise the fact that in the hopelessly undemocratic USA, there is no difference between the 2 parties. Both parties are fully in the service of their corporate paymasters.

      Gay marriage (and abortion and immigration) allows the parties and candidates to pretend there are differences between them.

      What is left unsaid is that the US economy is in the toilet and for the 1st time in US history the current generation is worse off financially and with far fewer civil rights than their parents.

      There needs to be a democratic revolution in the US – similar to the Arab Spring perhaps.

      If there is not then it really doesn’t matter who the president is.

    2. Robert in S. Kensington 9 Jan 2012, 5:00pm

      The divorce rate in America is actually the highest in the world. Romney should ask serial adulterer and thrice married Newt Gingrich about cheapening marriage and family values. He knows a thing or two about that.

  9. I’m fascinated by the process for picking the Republican Presidential candidate. Rick Santorum is by anyone’s standard, a nutjob. I expected him to win Iowa as the Republicans there (not the general population which has gone blue in 5 out of 6 elections) are far more “conservative” than most.
    No matter who wins the nomination (probably Romney), I would expect them to lose to Obama, even with the current feeling of disillusionment that many have with him.
    But, on the upside, even if Romney gets the nomination and wins, I wouldn’t expect him to stick with his current view on gay marriage, let alone anything else. He’s never stuck with any policy position if it becomes politically inconvenient.

  10. Unfortunately, I also read huge amounts of money will now be poured in to (p)Rick Santorum’s campaign.

    1. Nope, that’s the Colbert Report on Comedy Central… easy to confuse the two as they do look nearly identical , but the Colbert Report is satire, Santorum’s TV Campaign aught to be satire.

  11. @Mathair For sure, one can hope such turns out to be the case!

  12. A few questions for Mr. Gray.

    What’s the difference between a caucus and a primary? How many states have which?

    What does Obama running for re-election have to do with the Democratic “caucuses” choosing a candidate? (Be sure to answer within the context of 1968 and 1976.)

    What is the Iowa caucus hit rate for predicting the candidate of either party?

    1. Mr. Ripley's Asscrack 4 Jan 2012, 3:35pm

      Do a few google searches and be awed by the power of the net! Also as Obama is going for a second term, he becomes the candidate for the Democrats automatically.

  13. People remember: This is the Party and the Country who elected Dubya Bush… They shouldn’t even be allowed to be an independent nation. They should be governed by a UN peace keeping force!

  14. Keep in mind that the winner of the Iowa caucus in 2008 was Mike Huckabee, and the eventual nominee, John McCain, only came fourth. Romney has splashed a lot of cash around (I believe that each vote was worth about 113 dollars, whereas the lack-witted Santorum spent less than 10 bucks per vote cast) and his party depends on the right wing evangelical bible thumpers, who consider Mormonism to be as potty and nonsensical as Scientology and will never vote for him. And I’m sorry, but that point IS fair game, given all the drivel spread about Obama’s faith by the GOP last time.

  15. Robert in S. Kensington 4 Jan 2012, 3:03pm

    Even if Romney were to win the presidency, I doubt if he’d have a mandate and besides, he like all of the candidates running on the republican ticket have absolutely NO intellectual curiosity, lazy thinkers and readers, but that’s the American political system for you, owned for and by corporations which now can buy elections since they’re now treated as humans and vast amounts of money are treated as free speech. America is fast becoming an oligarchy of the corporate elite, if not already. I’m so thankful we don’t have that kind of system in the UK, faults notwithstanding. Romney has no substance in fact, a bit of an airhead albeit a very lucky wealthy one.

  16. I think Americans need to get a LGBT movement going like back in the days of HARVEY MILK or even a political party to fight these narrow minded far right Christians.

  17. Bachmann drops out. Ding dong, the witch’s campaign is dead (I guess her skydaddy was pulling her leg when it told her to run).

  18. Is there any none gay hating republican or democrat candidate?

    1. Paddyswurds 4 Jan 2012, 6:50pm

      There will be and is is only one Democrat candidate. The sitting President, a Democrat, automatically becomes the Democratic candidate. There may, before November, be other Independent candidates, but they have as much chance of winning as they have of stepping in Unicorn sh*t.

  19. Is there any none gay hating (not even gay positive, just not haters) who are running for democrats or republicans?

    1. If Obama is given a Democratic congress to work with (actual democrats, not DINOs – democrats in name only) then I am certain DOMA will be repealed and marriage equality and the ENDA will be on the cards. An executive order, the only thing he can do without the co-operation of the legislature, is not enough to fully secure rights in law. No, there are no moderate republicans on the cards. While Romney ism’t as rabidly anti-LGBT as the other front runners, he is a Mormon and his church was behind the muscle and the money to enact Prop 8 in California and they are not our friends. To appeal to moderates, he won’t be as overt. But he won’t do anything for LGBT causes if put in to power.

      1. More importantly, the Democrats need to keep control of the Senate where bills are actually passed. Ideally, a Democratically controlled congress would be the way to get things moving towards full equality, but I’m not hopeful they’ll regain many more seats in the House, but I hope I’m wrong. The most important thing now is the Supreme Court. If the republicans appoint one more radical right winger to the bench, forget about equality and the repeal of DOMA.

        1. Very true. Critically true. It seems likely that whoever is elected POTUS will be able to name 2 members – Right now there are 4 problems (RATS – Roberts, Alito, Thomas, Scalia), two more could tip the court to the extreme right for many years to come.

          1. Robert in S. Kensington 9 Jan 2012, 5:02pm

            Exactly, Valsky. A lot of Americans I think are missing the implications of a republican presidency. It’s deeply disturbing.

    2. Paddyswurds 5 Jan 2012, 4:47pm

      @NicolaB…
      …yea, Obama. His second term (when he doesn’t have to think about reelection) should see some very interesting legislation coming from Obama, presuming he gets a Democrat majority in the House.

  20. Mr. Ripley's Asscrack 4 Jan 2012, 5:12pm

    If you squint hard enough and with your fingers in your ears all the Repulsicans candidates look and sound the same. The only difference being the amount of $$$ stuffed in Romney’s mattress. So Iowa voted, by the skinniest of margins, for Romney’s Church of the Literally Dazed Saints over Sanctomonium’s intelligent design being taught to schoolchildren… I’d rather stick a finger up Ronnie Raygun’s Thatcherhole than contemplate that.

    But good news at least for the Repulsicans, Bachmann has been downed over Iowa. She made a very poig-nant speech too. Almost made me cry – if I wasn’t laughing so much that is.

    1. Dave Hall 4 Jan 2012, 6:55pm

      Interesting discussion. And several good points made.

      As a Democrat, I’m happy to see the infighting among the Republicans at this very beginning of the primary elections.

      Let the Republicans waste their money now before the general election.

      Let the most conservative Republican candidate go forward against Obama in November because this will make sure that the President is re-elected. Santorum fits this description.

      “Repeal” of Obamas’ health care proposal is the main goal of all Republican candidates.

      I think that would be the greatest threat to GLBT’s. You guys don’t know how good you have it with universal health care.

      The only time I’ve been covered with universal health care has been when I’ve lived overseas.

      To say Democrats and Republicans are the same is most definitely not true as far as domestic issues like health care. Perhaps both parties are the same when it comes to international issues that is a true statement.

      But healthcare for all Americans is needed. Some 48 million Americans are not covered by health insurance. If Obama is reelected and a Democratic Congress wins perhaps we can continue on this quest for full health care coverage for all Americans including GLBT’s.

      1. Robert in S. Kensington 9 Jan 2012, 5:05pm

        If Romney becomes the nominee, I can’t wait to see Obama destroy him during the debates. Romney has absolutely no credentials and zero intellectual curiosity. Not too bright at that. As a business man, he created very few jobs in Massachusetts from what I’ve read. He now wants to overturn Roe v. Wade granting American women the right to an abortion. That will sit well with women voters I’m sure.

  21. GingerlyColors 4 Jan 2012, 10:53pm

    50 years agao it would have been Blacks vs America. Then segregation was still rife although the black rights movement had already been galvanised by Rosa Parke’s refusal to give up her bus seat to a white man.
    Nowadays can you imagine even Rick Santorum demanding the reintroduction of what was effectively apartheid.
    In the Iowa caucus the lesser of two evils, Mitt Romney won beating Santorum by just 8 votes. Gay marriage is a non-issue for Ron Paul who is unlikely to win the nomination for the final vote in November.
    After a long struggle, a black man has made it to the White House and it is highly likely that he will be re-elected especially as he oversaw the killing of Osama Bin Laden.
    I hope I live long enough to see an openly Gay US President – perhaps even a Republican! It took a Republican, Abraham Lincoln to abolish slavery and many believed that he was gay.

  22. Obama is the only hope for LGBT people in this year of the Right Wing Christian anti gay bashing.

  23. The incumbent does not automatically become their party’s candidate. In 1968, LBJ was so challenged by RFK and McCarthy that he dropped out of the race. In 1976, Reagan unsuccessfully challenged Ford. While incumbents usually go unchallenged in the primaries, it is not a given. This is an important point, because it demonstrates that whatever problems Obama is having, he is not being challenged within his own party.

    Most states have primaries run by the state government not caucuses run by the local party. Iowa, in particular, and other caucus states , in general, are NOT representative of the process in the majority of states.

    As others have pointed out, the Iowa caucus is not a good predictor of the nominees.

    The reporting on American issues on this site is alarmingly inaccurate. Basic facts aren’t even investigated for accuracy. How can an intelligent discussion follow from a set of false premises?

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews.co.uk. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.

Top commenters this week

Latest stories

See all