Barack Obama | Election 2008 | Hillary Clinton | John Edwards | News

Candidates to Hold Dueling Fundraisers on Gay Debate Night

Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama will be holding dueling fundraisers on August 9, the same night as the Human Rights Campaign and LOGO's Presidential Forum on LGBT Issues, aka the "Gay Debate".

Frontrunners_2Obama's fundraiser will take place from 7:30 to 9:30 at Area on La Cienega, while Clinton has chosen gay hotspot The Abbey. The Abbey's event begins at 6 and the debate will be broadcast. Clinton will join the fundraiser after the debate finishes.

One major difference in the two events is the price. Obama's is $250 a ticket while Clinton's is $50 for general admission and $1,000 for a VIP reception. How much face time those shelling out $50 will get is unclear.

And what of the other frontrunner, John Edwards?

Edwards' website says he's holding a $15 "small change for big change" fundraiser at Republic (just doors down from Area) on La Cienega at 5:45 pm. However, that's 15 minutes before the debate is supposed to begin. No word on whether there's a tie-in with the debate there or not.

More on how the candidates are PRing the event, and encouraging supporters to throw house parties, from Good as You.

Barack to Party with Paris and Lindsay? [tmz]
Hillary Sashays into WeHo [tmz]

Feed This post's comment feed


  1. Isn't it time we all stopped calling this a "debate." Unless the format has changed, the candidates won't even be addressing each other - just moderators.

    Posted by: Jim | Aug 1, 2007 6:49:48 PM

  2. The Abbey? Eeeek! Isn't that Reichen's home-away-from-home? Run Hillary Run!!!

    In other news, Dennis Kucinich announced his reception will be held in a Mork & Mindy lunchbox with Special Guest Joe Solmonese, while Mike Gravel said he plans only to stand outside of Mann's Chinese wearing a polar bear costume.

    In other news, Mitt Romney has offered a reward for the return of his eh-hmmm "used" Magic Jesus Underwear, "no questions asked." John McCain has updated his contact information on the campus "Ride Board." And Jilting Guiliani is close to signing a pre-nup with the GOP. [stole that last one]

    Posted by: Leland | Aug 1, 2007 7:30:42 PM

  3. Haha busy day, I think I'm favoring Leland picks.

    Posted by: Rafael | Aug 1, 2007 7:44:37 PM

  4. I doubt that Area is a tie-in to the gay community for Obama. I've not seen anything about it locally. Also the event is on a thursday and Area is only gay on sporadic Sundays so it would not even be a logical connection.

    If someone wanted to get the community's attention and the Abbey was already taken, they'd book Eleven.

    Posted by: Timothy | Aug 1, 2007 8:14:56 PM

  5. The best part about this is that both Area and The Abbey are owned by the same company!

    Posted by: anon tipster | Aug 1, 2007 10:15:10 PM

  6. The best part about this is that both Area and The Abbey are owned by the same company!

    Posted by: anon tipster | Aug 1, 2007 10:15:44 PM

  7. What a total waste of time, energy and money. Change starts locally guys. This is America, thats how it works. Fawning over these personalities running for president is like thinking each color M&M has a different flavor. Giving your political donations to these politico machines is paying for your own demise. Use the money, talent and time you have and start or join a gay organization that can make a difference in your city, county and /or state.

    Posted by: Paris McCartney | Aug 1, 2007 10:28:20 PM

  8. Congratulations, Paris! You win the award for the Most Fucking Retarded Post Of The Month.

    Let me guess: you eat only raw, "vegan" foods which you grow yourself in a wooden box. You wear only clothes that you made yourself from "natural" fibers using an ancient loom you found abandoned along side the road leading to the Hippie Dippy Swap Meet. Your shoes are sandals you hand wove from some hemp plants you let die after realizing they were the wrong kind. Your berm dwelling has no electricity, using only candles you made yourself. The holistic operation you recently underwent to have your foreskin "recreated" has almost healed but using your geodesic outhouse is still a bit painful. Good luck with all that. PS: just to show there's no hard feelings, we're sending you some peanut M&Ms.

    Posted by: Leland | Aug 1, 2007 10:54:51 PM

  9. I sent you a little email Leland. Go read it to see what I think about your response.

    Posted by: Paris McCartney | Aug 1, 2007 10:59:54 PM

  10. LELAND...I love that you managed to use 'berm dwelling' in that response.

    And ANON TIPSTER...your point about The Abbey and Area being owned by the same company is exactly correct. I would add that the guy who owns the company, Sam Nazarian, is a very wealthy straight guy here in L.A.. I hope the fact that Obama and Hillary are using his venues means that he's a Democrat.

    Posted by: peterparker | Aug 1, 2007 11:17:25 PM


    didn't any of you nimrods see his loser performance at the latest debate? or were you too busy posting your incredibly boring posts on Towleroad that noone (other than your miserable selves) are ever going to read??? He just rambled on about hope this and hope that blah blah blah.....I went to law school with him and he was just riding off the coattails of his unique background without any substance and it is beginning to show. What I love about these debates is there is no smoke and mirrors....if you are a complete idiot it shows and it showed with him all the way


    Posted by: Tony the Tiger | Aug 1, 2007 11:33:25 PM

  12. Why support any of these 3!!! If they can't support gay marriage then thats homophobia plain and simple. I can't support someone that has no support for me! So go on gays and throw your money at them. Maybe Elizabeth Edwards will have a fundraiser, at least enlightened

    Posted by: Rufus | Aug 2, 2007 6:35:52 AM

  13. None of these candidates (Ulterior Motive Hilary, Faith Based Barack or Geez, Isn't He Adorable Edwards)will come out and say they support gay marriage. Nor will they push for laws for the cause (Civil unioons are the way to go - and all of them support the equality platform).

    Bottom line here, they are opportunists in this (and all future debates), merely on stage to say what will not hurt their voter-base.

    As for the issue of "gay marriage" itself, well, I've posted enough on this site that my belief need not be re-iterated at this time.

    Posted by: Stephen | Aug 2, 2007 7:00:24 AM

  14. I am sorry to break it to you but there is such a thing as a lesser evil. And any of those three is a MUCH MUCH LESSER EVIL than any of those jesus freaks on the right. So by withholding your vote for the democrats to "punish" them for not supporting gay "marriage," you are increasing the odds the next president will be
    an evolution-denying homophobe. Think about it.

    Posted by: ReasonBased | Aug 2, 2007 11:47:39 AM

  15. Eleven is already taken by the free HRC viewing party.

    Area is big enough for the expected crowds to see Obama, even at $250.

    I agree with ReasonBased.

    Posted by: Mad Professah | Aug 2, 2007 2:15:57 PM

  16. I wouldn't give money to someone because they are a lesser evil. I would support the candidates that support me even if they are not at the top of the pack. The press are who decides the winner depending how they want to play things out. I don't think women and african americans sold out to the lesser of 2 evils. We deserve our rights because We are ALL created equal. If we all supported a candidate like Kucinich he would have 10% more supporters which would increase his funding as well as give him more air time on CNN which increase his popularity which could lead to a nomination. If we keep playing the lesser of 2 evils then we continue to lose our rights. And when they had the youtube debate did they have their fundraiser at a straight bar or a cyber cafe? Do gays just go to gay bars?

    Posted by: Rufus | Aug 2, 2007 2:42:02 PM

  17. I give ReasonBased's argument some credit. However, Giuliani is an exception. I don't think he could by any means be called a homophobe.

    While I am disappointed in some of his non-answers in the primary debates (like his "not today" answer about DADT) I think his history shows that he does not have animus towards gay people.

    As to who would be our best friend in the White House when it came to signing bills, executive orders, appointments, marriage amendments, etc., It's hard to tell. If we go by history rather than rhetoric I would guess it would be in this order: Giuliani, Edwards, Clinton, Obama, McCain and Romney. (that's just my take at the moment).

    Interestingly, of the big six from both parties, only Romney supported the marriage amendment. And even Romney is not anti-gay in the same way that some Republicans have been in the past - though he certainly is trying to change that.

    All in all, five of the six would be better than Bush. And there's a pretty decent chance that the election will be between two candidates that have close personal gay friendships and a general attitude of acceptance. With any luck, this will not be a campaign season in which our lives and our loves are a campaign issue in a negative way.

    Posted by: Timothy | Aug 2, 2007 4:42:13 PM

  18. Just vote for Ron Paul.

    Posted by: DCN | Aug 2, 2007 6:10:53 PM

  19. +10 points for ReasonBased.

    Ron Paul is anti-gay, too, DCN.

    Posted by: SC | Aug 2, 2007 6:20:03 PM

  20. I agree with you, too, Reasonbased, but then there is really no reason ever to be excited about voting. All these Democratic supporters on here are delusional. Yes, the Democrats are better, yes, I will vote for them, but, hey, let's be truthful, there is NO excitement in politics.

    Posted by: jmg | Aug 2, 2007 8:46:37 PM

  21. I'm not a huge fan of his personal beliefs but he's not going to impose them on the rest of the country. His gay marriage policy (let the states decide) is very close to my own (no gov't-sanctioned marriages, civil unions for all), and if you've read that he voted to ban gay adoptions... well, he didn't. That's been endlessly debunked.

    Posted by: DCN | Aug 2, 2007 11:22:04 PM

  22. Change beigns locally? YEAH RIGHT!!!

    So are you saying that if we had elected Al Gore in 2000 (or rather all;owed his to take office), that there would be no difference between Gore and Buch in our lives now?
    Would we be in Iraq?
    Would the budget be in ruins?
    Would the envirnoment be as threatened?
    Would Halliburtin be as enriched?
    Would the Supreme Court have ruled against women suing for equal pay?
    Would we know the term "waterboarding"?
    Would there be mass email and telephone surrveliance?

    All of these things have nothing to do with working locally.

    I'm for fawning over our Democratic candidates.

    Posted by: BillyBoy in DC | Aug 3, 2007 2:17:39 PM

  23. Timothy, methinks you need to crawl back into your Log Cabin and hide, because 2008 is not going to be what you obviously think it will.

    Clueing in the obviously overly-webbed readers here, change happens at BOTH the state and federal levels. Anyone who isn't involved in BOTH isn't doing what needs to be done for us to win in a reasonable time frame.

    Posted by: Doug in Mount Vernon | Aug 3, 2007 3:47:13 PM

  24. Ummm... other than that it was intended as an insult, I'm not sure I understand your comment, Doug. In fact, I doubt that you have any idea what you meant either.

    But as for your second point about both local and national involvement, you're absolutely right.

    Posted by: Timothy | Aug 7, 2007 6:44:17 PM

  25. They will be showing the "forum" on a big screen TV at the Republic, it is a tie in. I have tickets and they are saying we will have a chance to meet Edwards after the forum. Taking a look at the place's size, I'm doubting that now, but I'm still going.

    Posted by: Ellinorianne | Aug 7, 2007 10:11:08 PM

Post a comment


« «Drunk, Crossdressing Baptist Minister Flashes Kids, Offers Cops Sex« «