Skip to comments.Polls Show Voters Split Along Gender Lines
Posted on 10/02/2012 7:01:33 AM PDT by ConservativeStatement
On the eve of the first presidential debate, a pair of new national polls find President Obama and Mitt Romney locked in a close race with support for the two candidates divided sharply along gender lines.
The president leads Romney, 49 percent to 45 percent, among likely voters in a Quinnipiac University survey released Tuesday, buoyed by an 18-point advantage, 56 percent to 38 percent, among women. Romney has a 10-point lead among men, 52 percent to 42 percent. The poll has a margin of error of plus-or-minus 2.2 percent.
(Excerpt) Read more at pbs.org ...
Perhaps we should consider taking away women's right to vote. (KIDDING! sort of...) :)
Single women too ugly or too “liberated” to have a husband, now need the government to take care of them. That turned out well.....
pRESIDENT pU$$Y! We tax payers are paying for these lies just like we do when obama speaks.
All these liberal polls assume most women are for murdering their children, well they’re not. Most women are more concerned with putting food on the table for their families, and Romney will get their support. Obamagabe will lose this election and these shrewed polls and the liberal media will have some splaining to do.
Funny you should mention that; as politically incorrect as it is, I believe women's suffrage is much to blame for our current state of affairs WRT welfare. Before women's suffrage men voted as heads-of-households, that is for the family, [anyone who claims that this disenfranchised women has never seen a husband and wife interact]... but with women's suffrage voting became individual-centered rather than family-centered. Women are also somewhat predisposed to go with "safety" rather than risk, so they as-a-group tend[ed] to be for welfare-type programs.
America is full of people with IQ’s below 80.
Actually you can trace the explosion of the welfare state back to women getting the right to vote. If I recall, before then the only thing even resembling welfare was a small government payout to the widows of Civil War soldiers. I not sure if it has to do with women's "mothering instinct" or what, but they seem to be much more accepting of socialism in the form of big government and social spending than men. (Of course I'm speaking in general terms, I know there are many conservative women who don't fit the profile).
The one on the left looks like a Kennedy male. Well... so does the one on the right.
Gawd, libs are fugly.
What about the effect the Sept. 11 riots in Cairo and the death of the Libyan ambassador have had in the minds of the SOCCER MOMS?
WHERE ARE THE SOCCER MOMS? Why isn’t Fox out there finding them and interviewing them???
This must be a real phenomenon, and you can’t tell me that mothers who thought W would be better keeping their kids safe than Kerry back in 2004 are now fooled into believing Zero is the guy to fight terrorism.
He can complain if he wants to, but that's correctly stylistically. Lowercase 'p' if used as a noun and not as a title followed by the name, or as part of the full title "President of the United States".
The rule, surprising to me, seems to suggest the usage of lower case even prior to a name but leaves the door open to a particular editing practice.
Most hate math and have difficulty with ‘story problems’. Well, 99% of economics is exactly that, story problem math.
They are great at seeing fine detail, but not very interested in the details of things they can't see in front of them, like economic projections.
Most would rather watch soap operas than news.
The Gender Gap is a lie.
What you have is a Marriage Gap.
Married Women support Romney.
Unmarried Women support 0bama, their Sugar Daddy.
The Weaker Sex needs someone to rely upon; and for unmarried Women, it’s The State.
I’ll have to check it out. Last publisher I worked with (many years ago) used a different style code, not Chicago. I dont remember which. I also used to refer to my very worn copy of The Elements of Stle”.
Additionally, I made a big deal of always using capital “P” back in the days of my Bill Clinton Joke-of-the-Day Page, even when just using the noun but you understood whom I meant. I think I made a bigger deal out of it the day I decided to stop as he’d gone too far for me about something. (I had been trying to respect the office, even if he wasn’t.)
Indeed! I head a woman on a local call-in show. She was a mother who voted for Hopeychange and was fed up with Obama now, and taxes destroying her family budget.
She "wanted" to vote for Romney as a businessman to lower taxes....but....she didn't FEEL like he could IDENTIFY or UNDERSTAND her positions since he is a RICH MAN.
Nevermind that Baraqqa is richer now than Mitt ever was...anyhow.
Emotional decisions are fine for an artist. They have no place in policy.
Women should not be barred from voting. But there should be a weedout test question on the ballot.
"Would you kill a cute, cuddly kitten to save your neighbor's uncle from getting rabies?"
If they answer no or "not sure" then their vote is discarded.
Ok, ok. That's not good.
1. A homeless man needs money for food.
2. You only have $20, enough money for your grocery list for your children.
3. A rich man with $100 is being held up by a mugger.
If you controlled the situation, how much should each person get?
If the answers are not $0-homeless, $20-mom and $100-rich guy, 5 years in jail-mugger, then their vote is not counted.
When considering such Constitutional [or procedural] amendments always consider how such a change could be used against you, personally.
Ok then. Fair enough. So then let's repeal the 19th Amendment.
Reason 1,230,423 why women should not vote.
A different, and likely near as effective, tactic would be the repeal of the 17th Amendment -- it would also likely be much easier to accomplish.