My wife doesn't support Pete...

[Hortensis]

37. That LGBTQ could find themselves in hell instead is shockingly possible, though.

The past 60 years have been one of intense reaction against the move to equality for all. Although most of the talk is about racist reaction, reactions against women's advances and rights for LGBTQ, especially gay marriage, are also huge. And right now, malignant forces working to take over and destroy our democracy have refined them into toxic fuel for a RW takeover.

That means LGBTQ are in a very dangerous spot right now. We don't know yet which of the giant forces battling for power is going to win, but they took a huge hit in 2016. And that could be nothing to what's coming if we were to, unthinkably, lose altogether.

I think we know a RW authoritarian government would be a lot more "unkind" toward LGBTQ than hard-core conservatives are able to be now. Perhaps extremely so. If a new government took the fascistic form a lot of Republican tactics are suggesting it would, it's probable LGBTQ would be among the groups actively and viciously persecuted to feed the fascistic base.

I once heard an expert in nations that fell to far-right regimes, asked what to look for, said to watch for "mean people." Meanness is now endemic in America, and we can't vote to overcome it if our vote no longer has power. (These days I wish I lived in a blue state! People would be much safer, if not safe, there.)

I'll be voting to protect and advance equality for everyone, as I always do, but that doesn't always mean running straight forward in politics any more than it does on a football field. On the plus side, even just an openly gay primary candidate is an advance.

"It is possible to read the history of this country as one long struggle to extend the liberties established in our Constitution to everyone in America." Molly Ivins