Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

Why is it that the talking heads frequently refer to the Republicans having a problem with women voters but never say the Democrats have problems with male voters? It's clear that, over time and given the context of overall election results, male voters tend to support Republicans to about the same extent as female voters support Democrats. So why isn't anybody saying Democrats need to bend over backwards to appeal to males?

Another thing: Why do the media create the impression that Democrats typically get majority support among the stereotypical White women when White women consistently vote majority Republican? Why do they not be honest and say that what's really going on with the female vote is that Democrats get OVERWHELMING majority support among minority women.

This image of a "white female" face on the idea of Republican disadvantage, I think, is definitely projected. But it's a false image. White females do not typically vote majority Democrat in national election. They typically vote majority Republican. Even Obama lost by an estimated 7 percentage points among that groupl

See the exit poll estimates of how groups voted below for information on what I'm talking about. You can look at exit poll results by Googling, for example, "2008 exit polls."


2010 House Elections

Male 41% Democrat 55% Republican
Female 48% Democrat 49% Republican
White Male 34% Democrat 62% Republican
White Female 29 58

2008 Presential Election

Male 49% Obama 48% McCain
Female 56% Obama 43% McCain
White Male 41% Obama 57% McCain
White Female 46% Obama 53% McCain

2004 Presidential Election

Male 55% Bush 44% Kerry
Women 48% Bush 51% Kerry
White Males 62% Bush 37% Kerry
White Women 55% Bush 44% Kerry

I think if you expanded your search to include "unwed mothers," "single women," and "females receiving government assistance," you'd have a truer picture.

IMO it largely comes down to security or the perception of security for women. Some women marry it, some earn it, and some want the government to provide it.

For example: I'm willing to bet that women with HS education or less & unmarried with children vote democrat >90%.

More proof why women shouldn't have been given the privilege to vote.

Baldy wrote:More proof why women shouldn't have been given the privilege to vote.

They could vote on the types of sandwiches being made.

grizzaholic wrote:

Baldy wrote:More proof why women shouldn't have been given the privilege to vote.

They could vote on the types of sandwiches being made.

Yes, and the types of lingerie they can wear.

grizzaholic wrote:

Baldy wrote:More proof why women shouldn't have been given the privilege to vote.

They could vote on the types of sandwiches being made.

Yes, but they shouldn't vote on the kind of beer they are fetching.

Why don't you idiots go jump in a lake?

SuperHornet wrote:Why don't you idiots go jump in a lake?

Don't worry nobody is serious about taking away your right to vote.

JohnStOnge wrote:Why is it that the talking heads frequently refer to the Republicans having a problem with women voters but never say the Democrats have problems with male voters? It's clear that, over time and given the context of overall election results, male voters tend to support Republicans to about the same extent as female voters support Democrats. So why isn't anybody saying Democrats need to bend over backwards to appeal to males?

Another thing: Why do the media create the impression that Democrats typically get majority support among the stereotypical White women when White women consistently vote majority Republican? Why do they not be honest and say that what's really going on with the female vote is that Democrats get OVERWHELMING majority support among minority women.

This image of a "white female" face on the idea of Republican disadvantage, I think, is definitely projected. But it's a false image. White females do not typically vote majority Democrat in national election. They typically vote majority Republican. Even Obama lost by an estimated 7 percentage points among that groupl

See the exit poll estimates of how groups voted below for information on what I'm talking about. You can look at exit poll results by Googling, for example, "2008 exit polls."


2010 House Elections

Male 41% Democrat 55% Republican
Female 48% Democrat 49% Republican
White Male 34% Democrat 62% Republican
White Female 29 58

2008 Presential Election

Male 49% Obama 48% McCain
Female 56% Obama 43% McCain
White Male 41% Obama 57% McCain
White Female 46% Obama 53% McCain

2004 Presidential Election

Male 55% Bush 44% Kerry
Women 48% Bush 51% Kerry
White Males 62% Bush 37% Kerry
White Women 55% Bush 44% Kerry

If you appeal to straight white males then you alienate women, blacks, hispanics, and gays. You do the math.

SuperHornet wrote:Why don't you idiots go jump in a lake?

Listen here little lady, you just simmer down.

Baldy wrote:

grizzaholic wrote:
They could vote on the types of sandwiches being made.

Yes, and the types of lingerie they can wear.

I have a problem wth that. Too often they choose lingerie with feathers and fuzz, which is a common instigator of choking among men. Like children's toys, the FDA should test women's lingerie by having a test panel of men eat the lingerie to determine safety. Let the men determine what lingerie is appropriate, and safe, for women to wear.

because in the end the Dems "men problem" isn't a problem the way women are for the GOP.

The GOP is fast becoming a party for straight, white, Christian males. That's not tenable in a country where their numbers are declining as a percentage of the population. That is why they have a "women problem"... because they are LOSING ground among women (set 2010 aside, as it is an outlier in a much broader trend) If you control for married/unmarried... the gap gets IMMENSE. Unmarried women go Dem to the tune of 70% and growing.

This is significant because the percentage of women who are married is declining pretty quickly. Single women tend to place greater emphasis on reproductive rights and other issues that align them with Dems.

The gap is acknowledged and is growing... it presents a long-term problem for the GOP - and their legislative agenda nationwide this year against women's health care and reproductive rights... just bringing those women to the Dems faster.

It wouldn't be as bad... but it's exacerbated by the GOP's overt hostility to Latino's - another rapidly growing demographic...

TwinTownBisonFan wrote:because in the end the Dems "men problem" isn't a problem the way women are for the GOP.

The GOP is fast becoming a party for straight, white, Christian males. That's not tenable in a country where their numbers are declining as a percentage of the population. That is why they have a "women problem"... because they are LOSING ground among women (set 2010 aside, as it is an outlier in a much broader trend) If you control for married/unmarried... the gap gets IMMENSE. Unmarried women go Dem to the tune of 70% and growing.

This is significant because the percentage of women who are married is declining pretty quickly. Single women tend to place greater emphasis on reproductive rights and other issues that align them with Dems.

The gap is acknowledged and is growing... it presents a long-term problem for the GOP - and their legislative agenda nationwide this year against women's health care and reproductive rights... just bringing those women to the Dems faster.

It wouldn't be as bad... but it's exacerbated by the GOP's overt hostility to Latino's - another rapidly growing demographic...

Baloney. Out 3 days ago:

"Poll: Obama down among female voters from 2008 results

Despite a significant outreach effort to female voters and Democratic accusations of a GOP 'war on women,' a new Bloomberg poll shows Obama losing ground among women from his 2008 vote share.

In a head-to-head matchup with Mitt Romney, women voters back Obama 49 percent to 45 percent — but this is 7 points lower than Obama's 2008 female vote share. Obama captured 56 percent of the female vote in 2008, according to exit polls. And the birth control debate does not seem to have done huge or lasting damage to the Republican party's brand among women. The survey finds that 49 percent of female voters view the Democratic party favorably, while 44 percent view the Republican party favorably....."
http://www.politico.com/politico44/2012 ... 17411.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"Obama Fares Worse Among Women after Month-Long Contraception Mandate Battle
Washington Post poll contradicts Washington Post narrative about female voters.

How's the great contraception mandate battle of 2012 playing out? If you read the Washington Post's news coverage, the issue is supposedly killing Republicans among female voters. But the newest Washington Post/ABC poll tells a different story.

During the first few days of February, about a week before Obama declared a so-called "accommodation" to the contraception/abortifacient mandate, a Washington Post/ABC poll showed Obama's approval rating at 50 percent, with 46 percent of Americans disapproving.

Then, from March 7 to 10--a week into the national media firestorm surrounding Rush Limbaugh's degrading remarks about Georgetown Law student and liberal activist Sandra Fluke--Washington Post/ABC conducted another poll. It found Obama's approval rating at 46 percent, down four points from February, and his disapproval rating at 50 percent, up four points from February.

In February, Obama was leading Mitt Romney, 51 percent to 45 percent among registered voters. In March, Obama was trailing Mitt Romney, 47 percent to 49 percent among registered voters. The Post/ABC pollster finds that Obama "did better among men and women alike last month, and has lost ground slightly among both sexes this month."

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/was ... 33469.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

BDKJMU wrote:

TwinTownBisonFan wrote:because in the end the Dems "men problem" isn't a problem the way women are for the GOP.

The GOP is fast becoming a party for straight, white, Christian males. That's not tenable in a country where their numbers are declining as a percentage of the population. That is why they have a "women problem"... because they are LOSING ground among women (set 2010 aside, as it is an outlier in a much broader trend) If you control for married/unmarried... the gap gets IMMENSE. Unmarried women go Dem to the tune of 70% and growing.

This is significant because the percentage of women who are married is declining pretty quickly. Single women tend to place greater emphasis on reproductive rights and other issues that align them with Dems.

The gap is acknowledged and is growing... it presents a long-term problem for the GOP - and their legislative agenda nationwide this year against women's health care and reproductive rights... just bringing those women to the Dems faster.

It wouldn't be as bad... but it's exacerbated by the GOP's overt hostility to Latino's - another rapidly growing demographic...

Baloney. Out 3 days ago:

"Poll: Obama down among female voters from 2008 results

Despite a significant outreach effort to female voters and Democratic accusations of a GOP 'war on women,' a new Bloomberg poll shows Obama losing ground among women from his 2008 vote share.

In a head-to-head matchup with Mitt Romney, women voters back Obama 49 percent to 45 percent — but this is 7 points lower than Obama's 2008 female vote share. Obama captured 56 percent of the female vote in 2008, according to exit polls. And the birth control debate does not seem to have done huge or lasting damage to the Republican party's brand among women. The survey finds that 49 percent of female voters view the Democratic party favorably, while 44 percent view the Republican party favorably....."
http://www.politico.com/politico44/2012 ... 17411.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"Obama Fares Worse Among Women after Month-Long Contraception Mandate Battle
Washington Post poll contradicts Washington Post narrative about female voters.

How's the great contraception mandate battle of 2012 playing out? If you read the Washington Post's news coverage, the issue is supposedly killing Republicans among female voters. But the newest Washington Post/ABC poll tells a different story.

During the first few days of February, about a week before Obama declared a so-called "accommodation" to the contraception/abortifacient mandate, a Washington Post/ABC poll showed Obama's approval rating at 50 percent, with 46 percent of Americans disapproving.

Then, from March 7 to 10--a week into the national media firestorm surrounding Rush Limbaugh's degrading remarks about Georgetown Law student and liberal activist Sandra Fluke--Washington Post/ABC conducted another poll. It found Obama's approval rating at 46 percent, down four points from February, and his disapproval rating at 50 percent, up four points from February.

In February, Obama was leading Mitt Romney, 51 percent to 45 percent among registered voters. In March, Obama was trailing Mitt Romney, 47 percent to 49 percent among registered voters. The Post/ABC pollster finds that Obama "did better among men and women alike last month, and has lost ground slightly among both sexes this month."

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/was ... 33469.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

polls are a snapshot... they are not elections...

the long term trend is very real - but honestly... I'd love it if conks continued to assume all was fine...

TwinTownBisonFan wrote:

BDKJMU wrote:
Baloney. Out 3 days ago:

"Poll: Obama down among female voters from 2008 results

Despite a significant outreach effort to female voters and Democratic accusations of a GOP 'war on women,' a new Bloomberg poll shows Obama losing ground among women from his 2008 vote share.

In a head-to-head matchup with Mitt Romney, women voters back Obama 49 percent to 45 percent — but this is 7 points lower than Obama's 2008 female vote share. Obama captured 56 percent of the female vote in 2008, according to exit polls. And the birth control debate does not seem to have done huge or lasting damage to the Republican party's brand among women. The survey finds that 49 percent of female voters view the Democratic party favorably, while 44 percent view the Republican party favorably....."
http://www.politico.com/politico44/2012 ... 17411.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"Obama Fares Worse Among Women after Month-Long Contraception Mandate Battle
Washington Post poll contradicts Washington Post narrative about female voters.

How's the great contraception mandate battle of 2012 playing out? If you read the Washington Post's news coverage, the issue is supposedly killing Republicans among female voters. But the newest Washington Post/ABC poll tells a different story.

During the first few days of February, about a week before Obama declared a so-called "accommodation" to the contraception/abortifacient mandate, a Washington Post/ABC poll showed Obama's approval rating at 50 percent, with 46 percent of Americans disapproving.

Then, from March 7 to 10--a week into the national media firestorm surrounding Rush Limbaugh's degrading remarks about Georgetown Law student and liberal activist Sandra Fluke--Washington Post/ABC conducted another poll. It found Obama's approval rating at 46 percent, down four points from February, and his disapproval rating at 50 percent, up four points from February.

In February, Obama was leading Mitt Romney, 51 percent to 45 percent among registered voters. In March, Obama was trailing Mitt Romney, 47 percent to 49 percent among registered voters. The Post/ABC pollster finds that Obama "did better among men and women alike last month, and has lost ground slightly among both sexes this month."

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/was ... 33469.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

polls are a snapshot... they are not elections...

the long term trend is very real - but honestly... I'd love it if conks continued to assume all was fine...

Yeah, because in the last election, 2010, Republicans did so badly...oh wait....

I'd love it if the donks kept on believing in their phony trend...

BDKJMU wrote:

TwinTownBisonFan wrote:
polls are a snapshot... they are not elections...

the long term trend is very real - but honestly... I'd love it if conks continued to assume all was fine...

Yeah, because in the last election, 2010, Republicans did so badly...oh wait....

I'd love it if the donks kept on believing in their phony trend...

Yeah... women sure do love wrinkly old white dudes telling them they need their bosses permission to get birth control... I'm sure that won't effect Republicans in the fall at all...

2010 - an aberration - the tea-party buyers remorse is in full-effect.

TwinTownBisonFan wrote:

BDKJMU wrote:
Yeah, because in the last election, 2010, Republicans did so badly...oh wait....

I'd love it if the donks kept on believing in their phony trend...

Yeah... women sure do love wrinkly old white dudes telling them they need their bosses permission to get birth control... I'm sure that won't effect Republicans in the fall at all...

2010 - an aberration - the tea-party buyers remorse is in full-effect.

Typical donk hyperbole.
-Republican party isn't all old white men.
-There hasn't been a thing about women needing bosses' permission to get birth control, and anyone with an ounce of intelligence can see that. Republicans haven't introduced any new bill that would limit womens' access to birth control more than it has been in the past. The only thing this has been about is Obama introducing a NEW policy to force religious institutions to violate their religious principles, something that is blatantly unconstitutional.

TwinTownBisonFan wrote:

BDKJMU wrote:
Yeah, because in the last election, 2010, Republicans did so badly...oh wait....

I'd love it if the donks kept on believing in their phony trend...

Yeah... women sure do love wrinkly old white dudes telling them they need their bosses permission to get birth control... I'm sure that won't effect Republicans in the fall at all...

2010 - an aberration - the tea-party buyers remorse is in full-effect.

I have seven sisters. Between them and my wife, they're split 4/4 between donks/conks. NONE of them vote the way they do because of your made up reason of "needing bosses permission for birth control". The only single issue voters are people on the government dole. Talk about a MASSIVE red herring.

<<If you control for married/unmarried... the gap gets IMMENSE. Unmarried women go Dem to the tune of 70% and growing.>>

I agree that the long term trend looks good for the Democrats but I think it's mostly because of race. For example: The 2008 election was a very good one for the Democrats, but the exit poll estimates indicate Obama actually lost among White women (46% to 53% as noted earlier). However, the estimates are that he won by 84% to 15% among Non-White women.

Sure, there's a difference between married women and unmarried women, etc. But it would be interesting to break that down by race as well. I supsect that a substantially greater proportion of White than Non-White women are married. And I suspect that if you were trying to predict whether someone voted Democrat or not in a national election race would be a much bigger factor than sex or marital status.

In any case, at the simplest level, I can't see how one can say that usually losing among women is bad but usually losing among men isn't. Losing among women may be a LITTLE worse because women make up a slightly greater proportion of the electorate.

Maybe some of you have but I have never heard ANY discussion among TV talking heads about the problem Democrats have in getting the male vote; even though it has mathematically been about as big a problem for Democrats as the female vote has been for the Republicans. We all hear plenty of discussion of the Republicans needing to be careful about alienating women but I never hear any discussion of the Democrats needing to be careful about alienating men.

To me it's a pretty glaring inconsistency.

Yeah... women sure do love wrinkly old white dudes telling them they need their bosses permission to get birth control...

Where on EARTH did that come from? Who is saying that women need their bosses' permission to get birth control? Or are you saying that if we leave their "bosses" free to decide whether or not they want birth control covered by health insurance that's like saying they need their bosses' permission? I hope that's not what you're saying.

Poor CONKS......in denial about the future.

Take up arms comrades.....everything will be OK when the women, blacks, hispanics and gays come for your children!

mainejeff wrote:Poor CONKS......in denial about the future.

Take up arms comrades.....everything will be OK when the women, blacks, hispanics and gays come for your children!

Whats even funnier is you donks thinking 95% of the conks give a shit about any of those things.

mainejeff wrote:Poor CONKS......in denial about the future.

Take up arms comrades.....everything will be OK when the women, blacks, hispanics and gays come for your children!

Oh no. Everyone understands that the demographics of the country are changing over time and that "minority" races are becoming a bigger and bigger proportion of the population. But the point is that it's not women per se. If White women were the only women who voted, Democrats would be in serious trouble.

Homosexuals are not an issue. They're too small a percentage of the electorate to be a serious concern.

It's the minority thing. Democrats depend on getting an overwhelming percentage of the minority vote to be competetive nationally. As well as Obama did, for example, he'd have lost the popular vote if he'd gotten "only" 70% of the minority vote. But he got 80%.

Since Democrats do get overwhelming support among minority ethnic groups, though, the fact that the proportion of the population composed of such groups is increasing over time portends well for them. Nobody is in denial about that.

AZGrizFan wrote:

TwinTownBisonFan wrote:
Yeah... women sure do love wrinkly old white dudes telling them they need their bosses permission to get birth control... I'm sure that won't effect Republicans in the fall at all...

2010 - an aberration - the tea-party buyers remorse is in full-effect.

I have seven sisters. Between them and my wife, they're split 4/4 between donks/conks. NONE of them vote the way they do because of your made up reason of "needing bosses permission for birth control". The only single issue voters are people on the government dole.

Like bankers.

(no credit union)

TwinTownBisonFan wrote: polls are a snapshot... they are not elections...

the long term trend is very real - but honestly... I'd love it if conks continued to assume all was fine...

Spin it any way you want...this "war on wimmin" demagoguery that has gone on for the last month is not working and will only backfire for the dems. The vast majority of women (even single women) are not hardline "reproductive freedom" advocates.

And when the national average of gas prices tops $5.00 this the only people who will be talking about it are feminazi left wing idealogues.