Matthew Yglesias writes about my continuing Cruising for Dean saga:

Mostly I've been linking to these posts just because they're funny, but it occurs to me that Dean's strong support from the gay community has been seriously under-noted in the coverage I've seen of the campaign thus far. It's something worth paying attention to, though, because it looks to me like the 2004 primary could mark the emergence of gays and lesbians as a distinct and at least somewhat influential interest group within the Democratic Party alongside the unions, racial minorities, feminists, lawyers, etc.

Unsurprisingly, I'm inclined to agree. Some of the comments on Matthew's post are skeptical: aren't gays already voting democratic, etc. (this seems to miss Matthew's point a bit).

On the ground, as a gay democrat, things certainly feel different now. Not log ago, back in college, we were excited when Democratic candidates would send, almost in secret, minor functionaries who would express some kind of broad support for gay rights. This didn't do much to inspire us to go out and campaign.  Sure, we it, but halfheartedly.

Nothing like what I felt watching the video of Dean speaking at the Howard Dean Meetup.

Certainly, the social atmosphere has changed fantastically in the past ten years: I don't really like Will and Grace, but I'm glad that it's on. Coming out in high school, while not always easy, is enormously more common than it was just ten or 15 years ago.

As one of Matthew's readers remarks:

Um, the days of mere "tolerance" are ending. The climate of public opinion on gay issues and gay relationships is shifting to acceptance and even celebration. Polling data on the opinions of young people is especially encouraging. Republican opponents of gay rights are looking increasingly like Republican opponents of civil rights. Republican opponents of gay marriage are looking increasingly like Republican opponents of interracial marriage. Gay marriage is now a reality in Canada. Gay marriage will likely soon be a reality in Massachussetts. It's pretty obvious which way the wind is blowing. Anti-gay Republicans, which is most of them, are increasingly being seen for the bigots that they are.

Posted by: Don P at June 18, 2003 03:32 AM

But why does this mean, as Matthew claims, that gays are now emerging as as "a distinct and at least somewhat influential interest group within the Democratic Party"?

I agree with this hunch but it's hard to say why. Simply because they have not before been tapped for campaigning and outreach efforts? Does it have something to do with the recent research, cited in The Emerging Democratic Majority, about the positive correlation between the prevalence of out gay people in an area with economic growth, perceived quality of life. and the general desirability of living there?

Perhaps it's simply that politicians can now embrace us fully, much of the stigma associated with homosexuality having eroded over the years -- and that we worry about the possibility of the clock being rolled back. The embrace of the democratic party no longer seems forced, and we feel it.

We are more enthusiastic about democratic candidates. Ready to campaign, write, organize, contribute ideas. And as we become more evolved we do indeed become a more influential group -- because of the value of what we are contributing and it is recognized that we are needed.

Crap: a non-comic post in my Cruising for Dean thread. Hope people will still read. Skip to the next post for the pratfalls.