Women's votes worth fighting for-- men's not?

Submitted by Matt on Thu, 2012-10-18 03:39

Article here.  Excerpt:

"And on the campaign trail and on the air, the candidates and their allies argued intensely all day over who would do more to help women. At the same time, the topic of whether the heated encounter Tuesday night had alienated the very female voters they were seeking to connect with became fodder for cable TV discussions.

The level of intensity left little doubt that the election was coming down not only to a state-by-state fight for territory, but also to one for the allegiance of vital demographic groups, chief among them undecided women.
...
Mr. Romney, at a campaign rally in Chesapeake, Va., hit back. “This president has failed America’s women,” he said. “They’ve suffered in terms of getting jobs. They’ve suffered in terms of falling into poverty.”

For Mr. Romney, the imperative, with less than three weeks until Election Day, is cutting into what has been Mr. Obama’s sizable lead among women.

Their goal, Romney aides said, is to keep Mr. Obama’s lead among women, which in many polls has been in double digits, down to the low single digits."

Like0 Dislike0

Comments

... you'd think pols would be more interested in ours.

Politicians these days are all about women's votes.  So is the MSM.  But I wonder if it has even occured to our current president or his challenger that men's and women's votes don't come color-coded, one counted as 1.5 votes while the other just 1.  In particular the president lags significantly with male voters (easy enough to understand given the way he routinely tosses us under the bus), yet in this crucial last couple weeks, his focus is on undecided female voters.  No effort at all to try to sway a few percentage points worth of male voters, some of whom are undecided themselves.  I can't help but think he just doesn't give a rat's a** how we vote, even if costs him his Pennsylvania Avenue address next month.  I really do think he's that blind to the opportunity simply because the voting bloc is men.  As for his challenger, he seems to be counting on his lead among men as a foregone conclusion as he does the same as the president-- chase a few percentage points, just as long as they wear dresses and pantsuits instead of jeans and suits.

If I were an advisor to either campaign, I'd ask them why they are ignoring half the electorate in their down-to-the-wire appeals even as the race is coming down to mere 10s of 1,000s of votes. After all, the votes of 10,000 men are just as influential in a race like this as those of 10,000 women-- or so you'd think.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by Matt on Thu, 2012-10-18 03:49

I agree with you Matt. I get tired on all the focus on women. The sad part is that I think most women see themselves as a special group with special needs. Instead of voting for the person that is best for our country or the most fair to all. Women tend to vote for who will get them the most. They have been brought up to believe they are oppressed and therefore they deserve handouts.

Just tonight I was flipping thru channels and all the political stuff and they were asking about how many women were in leadership positions in Romneys company "Bain". How is that even relevant to anything? They went on to attack him for not having enough female leaders and I guess some time ago he said "women don't want to work there" or something like that and the commentators were throwing around the quote as if he said something extremely evil.

Its sad, but I am afraid all the pandering is going to pay off.

On a political note...and I will keep this plea relevant to men's rights...if any of you have local elections having to do with charter school or homeschool laws. Please study the issue and make an informed decision.

Having local independent control of how children are educated gives more power to parents and communities and less power to teacher's unions, and teachers unions are often the largest political force in a given state and typically they are feminist. Charter schools allow decisions about curricula and teaching methods to be made locally instead of in Washington DC (There are many people fighting to have mind control over our children - it is big business and heavily lobbied). IMO, it would be the MRA best interest to take power away from teacher's unions as unions are more than collective bargaining agencies, they are huge political forces with much money and power behind them! You can bet that your state teachers union is backing feminist issues and supporting feminist politicians. In most states the teachers union is the largest or within the top 3 political contributors.

more charter schools/homeschool = less teacher's unions/feminists

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by Kris on Thu, 2012-10-18 19:53

Both major parties pander almost exclusively to women. I read townhall.com (from the Heritage Foundation), which is a conservative web-site. Many of their articles are from well know conservative writers. It's a dynamic web-site, but here is a snapshot of women-focused articles currently on their front page ...

- Romney Battles for Iowa Women
- Obama's Real War on Women
- Women Will Drive Election Results
- To More and More Women, Romney is the Safer Choice
- Women Who Worked for Romney: Faux Binder Controversy is Ridiculous
- American Crossroads Ad Appeals to Women's Brains and Pocketbooks, Not "Ladyparts"
- "Binders Full of Women": The Dumbest Campaign Controversy Since Big Bird

and related articles focusing on women'ish issues

- Chris Matthews, Abortions and Sharia Law Hysteria
- HHS: Yeah, Planned Parenthood Doesn't Have Mammogram Machines
- Reminder: Planned Parenthood Doesn't Perform Mammograms
- Planned Parenthood Coats Airwaves in Anti-Romney Ads

I see a grand total of zero articles about men and/or men's issues.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by shawn on Thu, 2012-10-18 19:06