Is being gαy a disqualifying trait for public office in your opinion? What if there is a gαy married but staunchly pro life candidate? Can he be supported? 

Sodomites are already at war with God, nature and themselves.
Why in the world would you  even consider someone like that in a leadership role or making crucial decisions directly effecting the populace? It's insane, regardless if he's "pro-life" or not.
If he's pro-life, maybe he needs to be in a "lifestyle" that actually perpetuates life.

It's actually an interesting question, if we assume it's asked in good faith and not as an attempt to normalise ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity by way of Trojan Horse. What I mean is, many of us here support Trump as the lesser of many evils at the moment. He's an adulterer, he's many times divorced, he's deeply unCatholic in much of his behaviour and attitude, but still he's a million times better than what else we have on offer so many of us voted for him and would do so again.

So the question here is, is it permissible to vote for a sodomite as the lesser of two evils? It's definitely something I'd be deeply reluctant and uncomfortable doing, but what'd be the morality of it in this case? If the sodomite in this case was actually the less immoral candidate(the other candidate would want to be a real piece of work for that to be the case), should a Catholic vote for them or just not vote at all? And if it's the latter, should we then not abstain from voting for Trump too, since he's also an unrepentant mortal sinner? It's a question I'm not quite sure the answer of myself.