• JimSamtanko@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Honestly, I’d settle for a good one. Gay or not. Because a person’s sexuality and preferences are entirely irrelevant to one’s ability to be a fair and hard working representative.

    • lmaydev@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Let’s not pretend that people would refuse to vote for a gay candidate.

      Whether we personally consider it an issue it has likely massively hurt their prospects as a politician.

      Also representation is really important. Especially for younger people.

      • JimSamtanko@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        I’ve never in my life voted for someone because they were a heterosexual. I vote based on their track record. When we stop giving a shit about what people do with their genitals, we will be better off. We don’t need gender identity representation in our politics- we just need someone that will treat all people as equals- and enact policy that reflects this.

        • HomerianSymphony@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          When we stop giving a shit about what people do with their genitals, we will be better off.

          (From the people who brought you “JD Vance fucks couches”.)

      • HomerianSymphony@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        it has likely massively hurt their prospects as a politician

        Or, the complete opposite.

        Do you think there’s any way Pete, the mayor of a town of 100,000 people, would have become a national presidential candidate if he wasn’t gay?