Women Want America to Better Reflect Their Image

 

Democratic pollster Celinda Lake, in her book What Women Really Want, writes that over the past 85 years, America has become “women-centric.” It’s happened “almost stealthily,” and it’s affecting the voting habits of women—especially single women—across the country.

As a not-so-silent majority of women—from seniors to boomers to Generations X and Y—confront the singular challenge of recasting the nation in their image, they are shaking the culture to its core. Some grew weary of pounding at the seemingly immovable fortress of the male norm. Some gave the male norm the heave-ho altogether.

As pollsters and analysts, we’ve noticed the shifting patterns in family and work practices, lifestyle choices, and voting trends for many years. But when we probed more deeply, we discovered a fundamental new reality that statistics alone couldn’t measure. Women from all walks of life and political persuasions are saying, in effect, that they no longer define issues in accordance with male standards. Women have become the norm, and they want an America that better reflects their image.

And what is that image? Lake says, when it comes to voting, it has to do with issues that reflect women’s interests and affect them directly—and it varies from woman to woman. For many, that includes jobs and financial security, but social issues are high on the list.

Just before the election in 2012, abortion ranked at 39 percent as the most important issue for women, according to Gallup. Jobs came in second at 19 percent, followed closely by healthcare (of which birth control is a big part) at 18 percent. Education was far down the list at 2 percent, tied with Medicare and Social Security. Taxes brought up the rear at 1 percent. It’s not a surprise, then, that Mitt Romney’s emphasis on the economy fell flat among single women (and aggravated by the damaging rhetoric surrounding the social issues prior to the election).

The single woman’s desire (and some married women as well) to vote on issues that “have to do with them” is reflected in a couple of telling interviews from just before the 2012 presidential election. One is with a woman who supported Republicans in 2004 and 2008 when she was married. In 2012, she was divorced, struggling financially, and conflicted about whether to vote for Romney or Obama:

Marisa Hannum is a an abortion opponent, worried about her finances and concerned for friends who can’t find jobs. She’s dumbfounded that anyone is questioning birth control access in 2012. And she has only a glimmer of an idea of how she’ll vote in November.

“Now I am a little bit better informed. But I am really on the fence,” says Hannum, 30, an assistant restaurant manager.

For Hannum, the economy and social issues vie for primacy on her political priority list. She’s the only woman on a three-manager team at an upscale Italian restaurant in Reston. She has a red Volkswagen Jetta and bills that she alone is responsible for. She worries that gas has risen above $3.99 a gallon in Northern Virginia, and says she could not afford any kind of pay freeze or cut.

“I can barely afford life as it is now,” she says.

So what did the GOP do to appeal to this woman and others like her? Romney’s campaign highlighted his business experience and his plan to restore economic growth so women like Hannum would have more money.

And what was Hannum’s response to that message?

“I’m reading about a man who’s accomplished a lot,” she said. But she noted that his statement did not mention women, health care or birth control. “If you’re trying to win me, put something in there that has to do with me.”

Still, after listening to both the Republicans and Democrats on issues like birth control and gay marriage, Hannum became more decisive:

“Because of how I feel about some of the social issues, at this point, I would definitely vote Democratic over the Republicans,” says Hannum, though she left open the possibility that she could be swayed.

If that is so, what could sway her? Answering that question is one of the challenges for the GOP in 2014, but especially in 2016 when more single women are likely to vote (single women show up more for national elections than local; they largely sat out in 2010, which led to many Republican victories).

An article in the New York Times just after the presidential election observed that in an election focused on the economy, single women like Hannum present a complicated case.   

They already earn less than married people and single men, and they have not fared well during the Obama administration. They have had a harder time than married women paying rent, getting medical care and finding jobs. While the jobless rate for married women has stayed relatively low, at 5.6 percent compared with 2.6 percent before the recession, the rate for unmarried women has risen to 11 percent, from a prerecession level of 6 percent.

Still, polling and focus groups show that single women are reluctant to blame Mr. Obama for their economic woes and tend to approve of a greater role for government in crises. Their reliance on programs like welfare, food stamps and Medicaid has grown significantly since 2007. In 2010, 55 percent of their households got some form of assistance, not counting school lunches, compared with 18 percent of married women’s households.

According to Lake, one of the problems Republicans have is the presentation of their message: It doesn’t reflect the single woman’s image; she doesn’t see herself in the message. “How many campaigns start out with an ad that shows a happily married candidate, perfect kids, and talk about the marriage tax credit?” Lake asked. “And you wonder why single women don’t turn out to vote.”

Opinion research shows that single women are not as interested in issues that have no immediate relevance to their daily lives, such as corporate tax rates or the federal debt. Tabitha Farr, 32, divorced mother of two whose income as a waitress has fallen dramatically since the recession, agreed. “Deficit?” she said. “No. I think about, ‘Can I pay for my child care this week?’”

You would think financial worries like this would motivate women like Farr to vote for the party most capable of creating greater job opportunities for them. But this doesn’t always seem to be the case. That’s because many single women don’t believe either party can create a better financial environment for them. As one woman said, when it comes to lack of money and the hope that politicians can make a difference, “We just have to deal with it.”

Democrats have capitalized on this pessimism. If single women think neither party can do anything for them when it comes to jobs and paying for child care, then the only thing government can do is secure their rights to free birth control and abortion. It’s all women have left. It’s the image they see of themselves in the political landscape. And it secures their votes.

This view is borne out by statements like those from Diane Jackson, 61, a former financial planner who is looking for work: “I don’t think a new president will do much to help the economy. But I do see Obama at least protecting us from a radical takeover on social issues.”

If Republicans are going to get the votes of women like Farr, Jackson, and Hannum, they’re going to have to (1) convince them that the GOP can, and will, create better financial opportunities for them—not just the married couple up the street, (2) persuade them that the GOP is not trying to radically take over social issues, and (3) show them that Republicans respect them as single women who want to live free and independent lives, and that the GOP—not the Democratic Party—has the best plan to help them do just that.

There are 180 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Profile Photo Inactive
    @CrowsNest
    D.C. McAllister

    Crow’s Nest

    (3) Do this while simultaneously backing family formation, the lack of which in these same demographics is hobbling the upward mobility indicated in (1)? · 7 minutes ago

    On this one, I need to ask a question. What do you mean by “backing family formation”? Do you mean tax credits for married couples and that kind of thing? Policies that we talk about in campaigns that help married people? · 5 minutes ago

    Yes, something like Mike Lee’s tax proposal that expands the child tax credit, or other similar policies that are middle-class friendly (kitchen table issues, not just women’s issues, have been a problem for the GOP, so I’m thinking big picture, coherent agenda).

    Ditto for reinstituting welfare reforms that Obama has undercut during his tenure that encourage rather than discourage families (i.e. curbing benefits to single mothers with no incentive to marry)

    • #1
  2. Profile Photo Inactive
    @KCMulville

     The meme, then, is that women can either depend on a man, or on the federal government and the Democrat Party.

    But the assumption is that they have to depend on someone.

    I feel like such a fool. I actually took women seriously when they said that they wanted empowerment. I guess fish really do need a bicycle.

    • #2
  3. Profile Photo Inactive
    @ScarletPimpernel
    KC Mulville:  The meme, then, is that women can either depend on a man, or on the federal government and the Democrat Party.

    But the assumption is that they have to depend on someone.

    I feel like such a fool. I actually took women seriously when they said that they wanted empowerment. I guess fish really do need a bicycle. · 0 minutes ago

    You can drive nature out with a pitchfork, but she always returns . . .

    • #3
  4. Profile Photo Member
    @DavidFoster

    “Birth control is easier. We need to counter the accusation that we want to stop women from getting birth control. We don’t answer this attack well enough. We are not going to make birth control illegal. It is not going to happen.”

    Of course: the likelihood that birth control will be made illegal is less than the likelihood of a comet hitting the earth and knocking it into the sun. However, many otherwise-intelligent women actually are concerned about this happening, and it does affect their voting.

    I think that when a person is especially terrified of something, explaining the low probability of it happening usually doesn’t help. If a person has a flying phobia, then you can tell him all the statistics, tell him all about the redundant safety systems, but it probably won’t help, because the image of those last few terrified seconds before the crash is just too vivid to him. I think something like that is applicable in the birth-control cases, and I’m not sure how we get around it.

    • #4
  5. Profile Photo Inactive
    @ScarletPimpernel

    P.S. The “a woman need’s a man” is ripping off an old line.  In Richard Henry Dana’sTwo Years Before the Masthe notes that most sailors did not care to join him for horseback riding on their day of leave because “a sailor has no more business with a horse than a fish has with a balloon.”

    • #5
  6. Profile Photo Inactive
    @DCMcAllister
    KC Mulville:  The meme, then, is that women can either depend on a man, or on the federal government and the Democrat Party.

    But the assumption is that they have to depend on someone.

    I feel like such a fool. I actually took women seriously when they said that they wanted empowerment. I guess fish really do need a bicycle. · in 0 minutes

    No, the meme, in my opinion doesn’t need to be this. Women can depend on themselves, on their own network of family and friends–not as a rejection of men, but as a healthy choice. Singleness doesn’t have to be a bad thing. The choice is not just men or the government.

    That is the winning message. This is what we tell them: Ladies, remember what you really want. You want Freedom! Live Free, Be Independent, Free from the Past of male dominance and Free from the Present Reality of Government Control. Live for a Future in which you can be what your grandmothers fought for–women who live freely alongside men they love and respect. 

    The stories of independent, conservative, single women can testify to this.

    • #6
  7. Profile Photo Inactive
    @DCMcAllister
    david foster: “Birth control is easier. We need to counter the accusation that we want to stop women from getting birth control. We don’t answer this attack well enough. We are not going to make birth control illegal. It is not going to happen.”

    Of course: the likelihood that birth control will be made illegal is less than the likelihood of a comet hitting the earth and knocking it into the sun. However, many otherwise-intelligent women actually are concerned about this happening, and it does affect their voting.

    Then we need to fight that fear. Counter the messaging of the left to convince women we don’t want to take away their birth control. But we have not unleashed our own counter messaging, our own propaganda on this point. We haven’t really tried.

    • #7
  8. Profile Photo Inactive
    @CrowsNest
    D.C. McAllister

    david foster: “Birth control is easier. We need to counter the accusation that we want to stop women from getting birth control. We don’t answer this attack well enough. We are not going to make birth control illegal. It is not going to happen.”

    Of course: the likelihood that birth control will be made illegal is less than the likelihood of a comet hitting the earth and knocking it into the sun. However, many otherwise-intelligent women actually are concerned about this happening, and it does affect their voting.

    Then we need to fight that fear. Counter the messaging of the left to convince women we don’t want to take away their birth control. But we have not unleashed our own counter messaging, our own propaganda on this point. We haven’t really tried. · 2 minutes ago

    By all means, fight the smear.

    But also, let’s not be blind to the fact that during the Sandra Fluke case, for instance, publicly subsidized birth control was “ensuring access”, and saying that women had to be responsible for the cost themselves was “banning birth control”.

    • #8
  9. Profile Photo Inactive
    @DocJay

    The fact that socialist policies are non-sustainable is probably a not a winning talking point but it is a talking point.   Simple graphs help.  

    I think convincing women that the economic disparity will be worse under democrat policies is pretty potent.  

    I also think portraying the current administration as criminal in nature will help.   Please.

    I agree that the social issues are not winnable but there needs to be a way to stick with values and minimize the damage.  There will always be those that vote with their uterus but reassurance makes a difference.   I’d start with not fussing politically about birth control.  As little as some here would like that course, it’s a loser of an issue.     

    • #9
  10. Profile Photo Inactive
    @ScarletPimpernel

    Is it really possible, for the long term, to get a majority of women truly to want to be independent.  Or is the notion of “independence” described here masculine by nature?  History might suggest it is, and that this ideal will never, in the long term, appeal to a majority of women.

    • #10
  11. Profile Photo Inactive
    @DCMcAllister
    Crow’s Nest

    D.C. McAllister

    Crow’s Nest

    (3) Do this while simultaneously backing family formation, the lack of which in these same demographics is hobbling the upward mobility indicated in (1)? · 7 minutes ago

    On this one, I need to ask a question. What do you mean by “backing family formation”? Do you mean tax credits for married couples and that kind of thing? Policies that we talk about in campaigns that help married people? · 5 minutes ago

    Yes, something like Mike Lee’s tax proposal that expands the child tax credit, or other similar policies that are middle-class friendly (kitchen table issues, not just women’s issues, have been a problem for the GOP, so I’m thinking big picture, coherent agenda).

    Ditto for reinstituting welfare reforms that Obama has undercut during his tenure that encourage rather than discourage families (i.e. curbing benefits to single mothers with no incentive to marry) 

    Okay, the Libertarian half of me is going to come out. We don’t need so many tax credits. Why favor one group over another? I don’t believe in using tax policy to promote good (or bad) behavior. contd.

    • #11
  12. Profile Photo Inactive
    @MateDe
    D.C. McAllister

    Single women think Republicans are “radical” on social issues, that we want them barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen. We’re not radical. We need to show them  that. “Show” them is important. Imaging is crucial.

    They think Republicans are ‘radical’ because they are fed that constantly in the media, and movies, TV shows. The conservative message is harder to make in the short sound bite culture we have. Conservative messages can’t always fit on a bumper sticker or in a 30 second commercial. Plus, women can get their back up if an argument is made about the ideal situation if they are not living it and can get defensive and then not want to listen at all. Unfortunatly this is a cultural problem, and we need to try to change the culture. I guess as institutions fail and they can see for themselves how destructive the leftist message they may be more open to it. But seeing that abortion is the highest of their priorites is depressing.

    • #12
  13. Profile Photo Inactive
    @DCMcAllister

    I think in a campaign where singles are big target audience, you should lessen your talk about tax credits and such for married people. Focus on what you can do for everyone across the board, including the singles. Be inclusive, not exclusive. 

    We can also send a message of support to singles in a softer way—through imaging and stories. Don’t hit them over the head with the perfect family images. Do you know, I read it somewhere (I’ll have to go look to find it), but many women were turned off by Romney because of the perfect family imaging. They couldn’t relate. Now, I’m not saying we need to get a single guy to run for office, but there needs to be some sensitivity to the fact that a large segment of our society is not married. They’re divorced. They’re widowed. They might want to be married, but they’re not. They might even be hurting in their singleness. They want someone who understands them on that level, and it’s up to the candidate, even if he’s married, to reach out to those people. 

    • #13
  14. Profile Photo Inactive
    @WhiskeySam

    Oy vey, we’re screwed.

    • #14
  15. Profile Photo Inactive
    @DCMcAllister
    Crow’s Nest

    D.C. McAllister

    Then we need to fight that fear. Counter the messaging of the left to convince women we don’t want to take away their birth control. But we have not unleashed our own counter messaging, our own propaganda on this point. We haven’t really tried. 

    By all means, fight the smear.

    But also, let’s not be blind to the fact that during the Sandra Fluke case, for instance, publicly subsidized birth control was “ensuring access”, and saying that women had to be responsible for the cost themselves was “banning birth control”. · 10 minutes ago

    I know that’s how it was perceived. But, can you, even now, remember any full-out messaging from the GOP, a spirited campaign that was created to counter that perception? No. That’s what I’m saying. We need our own counter-message to this, ie, we don’t want to take away your birth control. We support your right to live independent, free lives. We want to open opportunities for you in the workplace so you don’t have to worry about paying for birth control because you will be able to afford it yourself.

    • #15
  16. Profile Photo Inactive
    @billy
    D.C. McAllister

    Then we need to fight that fear. Counter the messaging of the left to convince women we don’t want to take away their birth control. But we have not unleashed our own counter messaging, our own propaganda on this point. We haven’t really tried. · 14 minutes ago

    I think  the Romney campaign was sucker punched by the utter absurdity of this issue. A clear statement like, “I couldn’t ban birth control even if I wanted to” needs to be worked into every candidate’s appearance. 

    • #16
  17. Profile Photo Inactive
    @DCMcAllister
    Crow’s Nest

    D.C. McAllister

    Of course: the likelihood that birth control will be made illegal is less than the likelihood of a comet hitting the earth and knocking it into the sun. However, many otherwise-intelligent women actually are concerned about this happening, and it does affect their voting.

    Then we need to fight that fear. Counter the messaging of the left to convince women we don’t want to take away their birth control. But we have not unleashed our own counter messaging, our own propaganda on this point. We haven’t really tried. · 2 minutes ago

    By all means, fight the smear.

    But also, let’s not be blind to the fact that during the Sandra Fluke case, for instance, publicly subsidized birth control was “ensuring access”, and saying that women had to be responsible for the cost themselves was “banning birth control”. · 14 minutes ago

    In addition, the Sandra Fluke case should never have been an issue. It was highlighted by Rush’s unfortunate slut comment. That cannot happen again! Not from anyone. 

    • #17
  18. Profile Photo Member
    @

    One reason Republicans cannot convincingly present themselves the party of upward mobility is that they are not the party of upward mobility. Any party whose establishment wants to legalize tens of millions of low-skill third world immigrants, while increasing legal immigration from 1 milion to 2 million per year (!!), cannot claim to represent a striving working-class.

    I’ m like Mickey Kaus: I can sneak an immigration point into any topic…However, this does relate somewhat. Who generally votes for Republicans? Happy, married white people. So, figure out what makes white people happy and married. Lowering the cost of marrying, buying a home and having children should be job one. Ending the influx of labor would go a long way toward raising wages for both the middle and working classes, and would make buying a decent home a live option for younger people.

    Then there wouldn’t be quite so many single, grumpy women voting on various boutique lifestyle issues…

    • #18
  19. Profile Photo Member
    @Annefy
    D.C. McAllister

    Nathan Harden: Even if steering clear of the abortion issue gets more women’s votes, that doesn’t make it the right thing to do. 

    Single women think Republicans are “radical” on social issues, that we want them barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen. We’re not radical. We need to show them  that. “Show” them is important. Imaging is crucial. Surely, there is a way to do this without abandoning our principles, but with being realistic about what we need to focus on in an election (primarily, the economy and Obamacare).

    Do you have any ideas? · 45 minutes ago

    How about a little push back about what defines “radical”? I’ve had several discussions with young women who think Republicans are “radical” on abortion; in every case I describe in detail what a late-term abortion is, describe BO’s voting record on said issue and then ask: now who do you think is radical?

    While the young women in my life are generally unaccustomed to being challenged , once they get over the shock of someone disagreeing with them I have made progress. 

    • #19
  20. Profile Photo Inactive
    @DCMcAllister
    Scarlet Pimpernel: Is it really possible, for the long term, to get a majority of women truly to want to be independent.  Or is the notion of “independence” described here masculine by nature?  History might suggest it is, and that this ideal will never, in the long term, appeal to a majority of women. 

    That’s a bigger philosophical issue. Not one to banter about in a campaign. (And since we’re not in a campaign, per se, here, I’ll address it briefly–as best I can from my perspective. Of course, different people are going to answer this different ways depending on their theological/sociological presuppositions. My epistemology is theist with a Christian theology.

    Human beings were not made to be independent. Not man. Not woman. They are interdependent, needing each other for society to exist. The primary dependence of human beings, both men and women, is on their creator. A great deal of history forgot that God is the center of societies fulcrum. Most of history has put men at the center. More recently–under feminism’s influence–women are put at the center. Both are in error and make for a broken society. contd.

    • #20
  21. Profile Photo Inactive
    @MateDe
    D.C. McAllister: We can also send a message of support to singles in a softer way—through imaging and stories. Don’t hit them over the head with the perfect family images. Do you know, I read it somewhere (I’ll have to go look to find it), but many women were turned off by Romney because of the perfect family imaging. They couldn’t relate.

    But Obama has the same “perfect family” imaging and they didn’t have any problems relating to him. Its because he’s a democrat. This is ideological, abortion and birth control are important to them because its ideological. I think if the Republican candidate is a complete contrast to the democrat candidate instead of trying to be “moderate” or democrat lite that will be more effective.

    • #21
  22. Profile Photo Inactive
    @DCMcAllister

    When it comes to the issue of “dependence,” women can certainly live, practically speaking, independently from men. And men can live, practically speaking, independently from women. However, this is not healthy. They were created to be interdependent. Marriage is an expression of that interdependence and as a basis for society’s propagation through children.

    However, if a person chooses to be single, does that mean that he or she must necessarily be dependent on the State? No. There are many forms of interdependence, and history shows us this. There are social networks in which people live their lives interdependently with support from church, friends, and parents. No one, not even women are ever isolated and completely independent. And they don’t want to be. What is meant by independence in the modern, postfeminism context is being free from the control of a man or being free to depend financially on one’s own earnings, and not a man’s. If a woman chooses this path, she is still spiritually and socially (and sometimes even financially) interdependent on others. That’s actually fine, depending on the person. But the problem is women are being seduced by the state to make contd.

    • #22
  23. Profile Photo Member
    @
    D.C. McAllister

    In addition, the Sandra Fluke case should never have been an issue. It was highlighted by Rush’s unfortunate slut comment. That cannot happen again! Not from anyone.  · 7 minutes ago

    But it will happen again, repeatedly, in every campaign. The left and the media (but I repeat myself) will turn every other comment into a sexist/racist/homophobic Outrage of the Week.

    There will always be an offhand remark by Rush or a minor GOP nominee that will be twisted to fit the deceptive narrative. And even when no offensive remarks are made, they will be invented.

    Look at Romney’s “binders full of women”: His explanation that he hired vastly more women for his cabinet than any governor in U.S. history was twisted into a bizarre meme of female oppression. The MSM delighted in the mockery, despite it making no sense whatsoever.

    While every conservative must avoid gaffes, we must expect to be joyously misrepresented at every turn. And hit back twice as hard.

    • #23
  24. Profile Photo Inactive
    @DCMcAllister

    them dependent on the government. The answer isn’t to tell these women who are either choosing to be single or who are putting off marriage (actually a lot of singles do want to get married one day) or who are widowed or who want to be married but can’t find the right person that they must make themselves dependent on a man to survive. The answer to them is that they should not depend on the state. They should look to themselves (which means government needs to get out of the way so they can make a living on their own), and they need to look to their families, their friends, their churches, and their parents. They need to live truly, interdependently, within the community—not as isolated individuals dependent and enslaved to the state. 

    • #24
  25. Profile Photo Inactive
    @DCMcAllister
    Whiskey Sam: Oy vey, we’re screwed. · 20 minutes ago

    No, I won’t give up. We can change these women’s minds. What we see in the post is discouraging. But we can make a difference. We can effect change. I believe that.

    • #25
  26. Profile Photo Inactive
    @DCMcAllister
    Matede

    D.C. McAllister

     

    Single women think Republicans are “radical” on social issues, that we want them barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen. 

    They think Republicans are ‘radical’ because they are fed that constantly in the media, and movies, TV shows. The conservative message is harder to make in the short sound bite culture we have. Conservative messages can’t always fit on a bumper sticker or in a 30 second commercial. Plus, women can get their back up if an argument is made about the ideal situation if they are not living it and can get defensive and then not want to listen at all. Unfortunatly this is a cultural problem, and we need to try to change the culture. I guess as institutions fail and they can see for themselves how destructive the leftist message they may be more open to it. But seeing that abortion is the highest of their priorites is depressing. ·

    We do have a long-haul of culture change to go (I’ve written about that a great deal). But I do think we can make some headway with a significant percentage of single women to win elections in the short term. 

    • #26
  27. Profile Photo Inactive
    @DCMcAllister
    billy

    D.C. McAllister

    Then we need to fight that fear. Counter the messaging of the left to convince women we don’t want to take away their birth control. But we have not unleashed our own counter messaging, our own propaganda on this point. We haven’t really tried. · 14 minutes ago

    I think  the Romney campaign was sucker punched by the utter absurdity of this issue. A clear statement like, “I couldn’t ban birth control even if I wanted to” needs to be worked into every candidate’s appearance.  · 19 minutes ago

    In an article from the NY Times in the spring before the election, Republican lobbyist poo-pooed the birth control and war on women rhetoric. Many strategists did. They laughed at it. That was foolish of them. It still is.

    Some Republicans and independent analysts say the current debate over social issues will fade soon, trumped by whatever happens with the economy. “Nobody thinks it will matter in a couple months,” said Vin Weber, a Republican lobbyist and former congressman. “I certainly don’t.”

    • #27
  28. Profile Photo Inactive
    @DCMcAllister
    Annefy

    D.C. McAllister

    Nathan Harden: Even if steering clear of the abortion issue gets more women’s votes, that doesn’t make it the right thing to do. 

    Single women think Republicans are “radical” on social issues, that we want them barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen. We’re not radical. We need to show them  that. “Show” them is important. Imaging is crucial. Surely, there is a way to do this without abandoning our principles, but with being realistic about what we need to focus on in an election (primarily, the economy and Obamacare).

    Do you have any ideas? · 45 minutes ago

    How about a little push back about what defines “radical”? I’ve had several discussions with young women who think Republicans are “radical” on abortion; in every case I describe in detail what a late-term abortion is, describe BO’s voting record on said issue and then ask: now who do you think is radical?

    While the young women in my life are generally unaccustomed to being challenged , once they get over the shock of someone disagreeing with them I have made progress.  · 18 minutes ago

    Exactly!

    • #28
  29. Profile Photo Inactive
    @Ontos

    I agree with you totally.  

    D.C. McAllister: There are too many of us women who have been single, who know what it’s like to be alone, divorced, struggling to make ends meet, who don’t want to depend on the government and who vote Republican. We need those women’s stories on every billboard, front page, and television ad. They exist. Women who aren’t married, or don’t want to be married, who are divorced, whatever the situation–there are women who are living life just like all the other single ladies, but who are not giving in to the messaging of the Democrats. What makes those women different?  What are their stories? We don’t hear from them. We need to. The single women out there who are afraid and turning to the government for dependence need to hear from the women who are just like them in circumstance but who are not turning to the government. Women need to see those images, hear those stories, from others they can relate to. The GOP is doing nothing of the sort. They’re just whining or preaching. That’s all. · 58 minutes ago

    Edited 54 minutes ago

    • #29
  30. Profile Photo Thatcher
    @NoCaesar

    Unfortunately, a lot of these women you are describing are the “low-information voters” about whom we’ve been hearing much in the last cycle.  However, decrying them isn’t a solution, as you’ve noted fight fire with fire.  Imaging matters and we suck at it.

    On a related note, I just saw the following article on Instapundit and it seem apropos to this topic.

    When everything revolves around the women’s needs and wants, when women have only rights but men only have obligations, men often just up and quit. With good reason.

    http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/feminisms-pyrrhic-victory-a-reply-to-sara-liben/ 

    • #30

Comments are closed because this post is more than six months old. Please write a new post if you would like to continue this conversation.