Posted on 09/15/2011 6:03:17 AM PDT by Paladins Prayer
We have all heard about the sex gap in voting patterns. This is the phenomenon whereby, in every election, women are far more likely to support liberal candidates than men are. For instance, in 1996, Bill Clinton captured 54 percent of the women's vote but only 43 percent of the men's. And in subsequent elections, the male-female gap has been as follows: in 2000, Al Gore, 42-54; in 2004, John Kerry, 41-51; and in 2008, Barack Obama, 49-56. In fact, even in the watershed election of 2010, during which we heard about the rise of the conservative woman, the fairer sex favored Democrats by 1 point, 49 to 48. The Republican victories were attributable to a sex gap (I don't use the word "gender") that was as wide as ever, ranging from 4 to 19 points.
So, clearly, women tend to gravitate toward statist candidates. And there are many reasons for this. One is that, being the more emotion-driven sex, women are more susceptible to liberals' emotional appeals. Another is that where men are big-picture-oriented, women are detail-oriented. This feminine quality is wonderful when handling young children, whose lives must be micro-managed; the problem is that it also leads to acceptance of a micro-managing government -- and such a Leviathan will treat us all like children. And then you have not just a nanny state (a feminine descriptive, mind you), but what we are quickly descending into: The Harridan State.
Yet there is an even greater reason why women veer left, and it's the one I'll focus on today.
They are the Security Sex.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
I don’t know about as a replacement (I can only speak from a conservative POV though) but we probably do look for the same qualities in the person who runs our country as the person at the head of our family.
Since there is a big difference between what conservative women and liberal women admire and look for in men, this also shows in the qualities we admire (and vote for) in a president.
Government makes no “demands” for the support, you know, like being polite and decent and loyal.
It is NO ACCIDENT that the left’s policies have systematically dismantled the traditional family.
The family is the enemy of the communist utopia.
Yes, it’s a persistent pattern—but not as large as most people imagine. Just about 4 women out of 100 vote more liberally than an equivalent 100 men would vote.
We made the mistake of giving females the right to vote and we are now paying for it.
Unfortunately, you are correct. I've had this conversation with my wife. It generally doesn't end well.
And, for too many, it is the belief that the liberals will promote the demographic they belong to and punish those in the demographics that liberals don't like (e.g. ‘the rich’, ‘privileged white men’, ‘those religious nuts’, ‘those greedy doctors’, and ‘those disgusting air-headed women who don't work, dote on their families, and go to PTA meetings etc.’).
Some women vote for liberals for somewhat less passionate ‘practical’ self interests, such as the belief that liberals will favor women in the work place, and essentially keep in place policy advantages that specifically help women. I believe, however, that a lot of women who vote for liberals do so because of more passionate self interest issues that often have to do with resentment. These are the women who at some level resent what they perceive as the ‘male establishment’, or any ‘establishment’ that ‘wants to put them in a box’.
They resent what they perceive as sexist traditional religion, and often either embrace secularism, or a ‘progressive’ religious movement. They resent, and for some actually hate, the concept of ‘traditional values’, because for them this concept smacks of ‘Father Knows Best’.
For these women, voting liberal is an act of defiance, and many are too entrenched in their resentment of what they think conservatives represent to be swayed by alternative arguments. In the words of Tom Petty, they are ‘Rebels without a clue’.
These women fervently dislike Palin because of what they think she stands for. Palin is the cute cheerleader and tomboy combination that didn't fight against the ‘man's world’, but instead embraced it and has become successful in it. She's everything they resent. On a much more mundane level, in my opinion many women have a problem with successful women that their husbands might like. It was OK for women to fawn about Bill Clinton, with their husbands in tow, and for a supposedly educated ‘liberal’ woman to ask ‘boxers or briefs?’, but if a political candidate that men think is beautiful comes on the scene turnabout is not considered fair play.
My long diatribe for the morning..
Women’s suffrage really isn’t the problem.
The problem is the societal and political agenda to destroy the family.
Otherwise, families would get 2 votes, one from the husband and one from the wife.
-——Women want government to take the place of hubby.——
Or perhaps daddy.
Several I know are sold on doing it themselves, have been told they must be advocates for some cause, must make a difference and strive constantly to increase their own self esteem. The result is owning a house they bought with a loan they can’t afford meaning the electric and phone bills don’t get paid. Daddy pays the phone bill to insure he can call her if need be.
But it’s ok. No heat in January is the price to be paid for living the life.
very god point.
very good point.
—I’ve had this conversation with my wife. It generally doesn’t end well.—
My wife and I are in complete agreement on this. I like to say that being a man, I know the heart of man. And she says that being a woman, she knows the heart of woman.
She is the first woman that ever told me that women are morally worse than men. They just hide it better. I’ve learned that she is absolutely right, and she agrees with solomon, but I’m gonna leave it at that before I sound like a woman basher. I love her like crazy and that is what the Bible tells me to do. I also have 4 daughters that I love “almost” as much.
Anyone offended by the truth has his priorities out of order.
Heh heh.
I think it’s very important to look at marital status when analyzing how women vote.
I believe there is more of a “spinster gap” than a “sex gap.”
From the article:
It’s a danger Thomas Jefferson warned of when saying, “Anyone who would sacrifice liberty for security doesn’t deserve either.”
Wrong attribution... Benjamin Franklin said that.
Did a man write this article?...
“fights the bloating, the cramping, the irritability, and the voting for Democrats”
So... I assume you are studying up on low cost digital video editing. You could go a long way with a few nice commercials showing her why you really need a new bandsaw, shotgun, Camaro, etc.
In many cases, women need government to take the place of a missing hubby. This is just another manifestation that God has created us to be in a man/woman couple.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.