Nevada Republican Fails to Become First Transgender State Lawmaker in U.S.

[Marcellow]

Nevada Republican Fails to Become First Transgender State Lawmaker in U.S.
Source: http://www.kolotv.com/home/headlines/Nevada-Republican-Fails-to-Become-First-Transgender-US-Lawmaker-281661701.html
Author: NO KNOWN AUTHOR
Posted: Nov 05, 2014

"A Nevada Republican has failed in a bid to become the first openly transgender state lawmaker in the U.S."

[Devlyn]

And as usual, DO NOT READ THE COMMENTS!

[Missy~rmdlm]

Poor Paula in MN 2 ran too. But that really is John Kline's district until further notice.

[gennee]

Some people don't have anything nice to say that aren't like them.

[Delsorou]

Yeah... I'm in her district so I voted for her.  I honestly don't think her loss had to do with her being trans, either... it was a surprisingly close race here in Nevada.  A few positions were decided by less than 20 votes.

It's not like she lost by a landslide, and she did win the primary before that... I think she just straight up didn't win for normal election reasons... and that's okay.

[JustEmily]

What I think is important is that she was running and not making a deal out of being trans, just running and being the woman she is. Voting for her because she's trans would be just as bad as not voting for her for the same reason.

I find the republican thing a bit off-putting, but live and let, right?

[ImagineKate]

I'm not surprised. The GOP does actually have an edge over the Democrats when it comes to diversity in office in many cases. They just don't really make a big deal out of it.

[Delsorou]

I find the republican thing a bit off-putting, but live and let, right?

I'm not a big fan of either party, honestly.  Mostly because the vast majority of party members don't actually do what the parties theoretically were founded and exist to do.

This is why I will always remain registered nonpartisan. 

[Rachelicious]

Politics as usual, though it's good anytime a transitioned person can act without having to justify their identity. Her party affiliation would obviate any reason I'd consider voting for her, though.

[ImagineKate]

I'm not a big fan of either party, honestly.  Mostly because the vast majority of party members don't actually do what the parties theoretically were founded and exist to do.

This is why I will always remain registered nonpartisan. 

I have no choice really. Most people here register as republican because the elections are usually decided in the primary. Most general elections here are 70% republican.

[m1anderson]

Again, if you saw my previous comments in the "Elections" thread, this was not an optimal scenario.

Lauren Scott ran for the State Legislature in a District that is almost impossible to win, regardless of gender, or affiliation. She ran as a Republican in a district that has a 13% margin of registered Democrats, in what is described as a traditional blue-collar region. She actually did extremely well garnering a loss by a margin of only 54-46%, which represents by most accounts, the national discourse for uncertainty of democrats in this mid-year election. No republican is probably going to win in this traditionally liberal district.

I think she did surprisingly well just given the politics and make-up of the district. Had she been a Democrat in this district, I have a feeling the results may have been reversed and she would be a voice in the legislature.

As an aside, just curious, how someone that may be fighting for rights of the transgendered especially for equality at the very least in insurance benefits, can be Republican (but that is not the point of this thread).

It is a shame she lost, but can actually be proud to have only lost by 8 points.