We Need More Bisexual Governors

Especially ones that push through “holy shit, yes, why weren’t we doing this THE WHOLE TIME” kind of legislation, as with Gov. Kate Brown of Oregon and her automatic voter registration legislation.

kate brown

Shockingly, [1] Republicans unanimously voted against this measure, citing “privacy” concerns:

“A one-size-fits-all approach to voter registration does not work for our most vulnerable citizens that could be endangered if their personal information is suddenly made public,” Republican state Senator Kim Thatcher said in a statement.

I have taken the liberty of revising State Senator Thatcher’s statement to be believable:

“A [really freaking logical and easy solution] to voter registration [that allows our most vulnerable citizens to vote with minimal barriers] does not work for our most vulnerable [candidates] that [sic] could be endangered [with losing] if their personal [network] is suddenly [outvoted by the] public,” Republican state Senator Kim Thatcher said in a statement.

[1] Nobody is shocked.

7 thoughts on “We Need More Bisexual Governors”

    1. Well, the title is a bit tongue-in-cheek with respect to any link between her sexuality and this legislative measure specifically. However, I do believe that it is critical to a functioning and fair representative democracy, which is what the U.S. is supposed to have, to have different demographics represented in much better proportion than currently do. Being that this is the first sitting Governor who is anything other than declared heterosexual, I support the thrust of the title, that we do need more bisexual governors, and legislators, as well as gay, women, black, Hispanic, etc. We have an entirely too homogenous government to properly represent a diverse, democratic republic.


      1. Well there is a slight problem with what you say. “to have different demographics represented in much better proportion”. Because if someone asks a lot of gay people if they want to go, and they say no, I know people like you will blame it on the government, no offence.
        Again, you can’t force “gay, women, black, Hispanic, etc” to study politics!


    2. Leaving aside your baseless assumption of how “people like me” would react to a specific premise, your specific premise is a false one, as the problem in the States (which does not appear to be where you reside or vote based on your use of language) is not one of a lack of desire on the part of underrepresented groups for candidate participation. It is one of cronyism, access and party support by the machines that run the only two parties that truly have the ability to get candidates selected.


      1. Do I talk english in a different way than you? No
        And yeah yeah, I know that, it’s like that in every single democratic country that has ever existed. But people where I come from at least, care about having good, honest politicians who listen to the population instead of just wanting them to be gay


    3. Yes, you use different syntax and spelling from how American English is used. Yours identifies you as most likely Canadian, given that you do not have other British hallmarks.

      But your comments have become reductive statements that don’t really indicate a desire for discussion, so I will leave you to your opinions. Enjoy your idyllic homeland of democracy, it sounds like a great place.


      1. Let me guess, this is the part where I ask you an example of how my english differs from yours and you ignore the question, right?
        What the fuck are reductive statements? Nor will I bother to Google what “odyllic” means


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s