women in politics

[avatar4321]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/26/AR2007012601626.html

Interesting read from a feminist of all people. I dont think im going to comment on this. just thought it was interesting.

[The Slayer]

It is an interesting perspective for sure.Though, I do not think that her "study" of what sways women's vote's was very broad. It is an easy assumption to make that most women read People magazine and get all their Political information from their male counterparts. But it is as holy as Swiss cheese, you will be able to find any given stereotype if you search for it. There is a plethora of independent women who have minds of their own, are involved in politics, and will make educated decisions either for or against Hilary in the election. It is like any piece of information from the media, you have to do your own investigation to come to a real conclusion of reality and fiction.

[jillian]

It is an interesting perspective for sure.Though, I do not think that her "study" of what sways women's vote's was very broad. It is an easy assumption to make that most women read People magazine and get all their Political information from their male counterparts. But it is as holy as Swiss cheese, you will be able to find any given stereotype if you search for it. There is a plethora of independent women who have minds of their own, are involved in politics, and will make educated decisions either for or against Hilary in the election. It is like any piece of information from the media, you have to do your own investigation to come to a real conclusion of reality and fiction.


I actually think her sampling was fairly strange. None of these women read? They ask their husbands to keep them informed? While I'm sure that's true of *some* women, it certainly isn't a reflective sampling.

Maybe her friends are all vapid? ;)

[darin]

Jillian - you should 'sample' your peers and see how that stands up to the article. :)

[5stringJeff]

I actually think her sampling was fairly strange. None of these women read? They ask their husbands to keep them informed? While I'm sure that's true of *some* women, it certainly isn't a reflective sampling.

Maybe her friends are all vapid? ;)

Yeah... I saw that she admitted her sampling wasn't scientific at all. I wouldn't put a lot of credence in the article, although her ideas are interesting.

[jillian]

Yeah... I saw that she admitted her sampling wasn't scientific at all. I wouldn't put a lot of credence in the article, although her ideas are interesting.

Well, they were interesting as conjecture and something to think about. But in terms of having validity??? I'd say it's a major stretch.

Although I will credit her for being candid about how unscientific it was.

Food for thought, I guess. :)

[Bubbalicious]

My own theory is that women don't decide elections because they're not rational political actors -- they don't make firm policy commitments and back the candidates who will move society in the direction they want it to go.Oh god, ouch! Traitorous bitch.


Instead, they vote on impulse, and on elusive factors such as personality.I think most voters vote this way. Every Presidential election, every candidate, most laypeople talk about his charistma and whether they'd like to have a beer with him. Few people actually examine and compare things like voting records.

I've been hearing a sort of lip-service to doing so with Hillary - people talking about not voting for her just because she's woman and making sure she's really the best candidate. And then the conversation turns to Obama and how well dressed and photogenic he is. http://www.freeforum101.com/forum/images/smiles/icon_rolleyes.gif

Hillary's got some time to get her personality out there, but she'd better get on it if she wants to keep her lead.

As far as feminist causes, she has issues on her radar I don't think any other candidate ever has. I don't know if that's going to help her or hurt her. She's being awfully quiet about it so far.

[manu1959]

all i can figure is every 28 days we are going to war over nothing:dunno:

[Pale Rider]

I think most voters vote this way. Every Presidential election, every candidate, most laypeople talk about his charistma and whether they'd like to have a beer with him. Few people actually examine and compare things like voting records.

It has been my experience that most liberals vote they way they "feel", and conservatives vote on "facts".

[Bubbalicious]

nyuck! she gits her pariod she's a gone hit da nucular button! http://www.freeforum101.com/forum/images/smiles/uglylaugh.gif

[manu1959]

nyuck! she gits her pariod she's a gone hit da nucular button! http://www.freeforum101.com/forum/images/smiles/uglylaugh.gif

doubtful....she needs a man to change a lightbulb

[Bubbalicious]

It has been my experience that most liberals vote they way they "feel", and conservatives vote on "facts".



GWB was "the guy you wanted to have a beer with," and Reagan was the "father figure," but conservatives and republicans don't base their votes on emotions or feelings. No sir.

And btw, are you capable of having a discussion without making it about the blue team vs the red team?

[Bubbalicious]

doubtful....she needs a man to change a lightbulb

And I bet you can't figure out why women tend to vote for Democrats.

[manu1959]

And I bet you can't figure out why women tend to vote for Democrats.

you think they have a cute ass?

[avatar4321]

And I bet you can't figure out why women tend to vote for Democrats.

Because they would rather talk about fixing problems then actually fix them.

[Bubbalicious]

Because they would rather talk about fixing problems then actually fix them.
Good luck ever getting to touch one.

[krisy]

Oh god, ouch! Traitorous bitch.

I think most voters vote this way. Every Presidential election, every candidate, most laypeople talk about his charistma and whether they'd like to have a beer with him. Few people actually examine and compare things like voting records.

I've been hearing a sort of lip-service to doing so with Hillary - people talking about not voting for her just because she's woman and making sure she's really the best candidate. And then the conversation turns to Obama and how well dressed and photogenic he is. http://www.freeforum101.com/forum/images/smiles/icon_rolleyes.gif

Hillary's got some time to get her personality out there, but she'd better get on it if she wants to keep her lead.

As far as feminist causes, she has issues on her radar I don't think any other candidate ever has. I don't know if that's going to help her or hurt her. She's being awfully quiet about it so far.


I blame the press for some of this. They are out there polling people asking the question.."who would you rather have a beer with?"

They pollute a lot of minds with a lot of useless info. I personally don't care too much if G.W. drank too much 30 years ago,or if Clinton inhaled 30 years ago. That's just plain silly.

I admit,it is easier to back a candidate if you find him appealing personally,that has never played into it for me. There are a few issues that I will not budge on,so the Republican candidate gets my vote. I definitely do not get my info from my husband tho-lol-that kind of sets women back,I think.

DIck Morris thinks Hillary is going to win the next election,but I think Rudy Guliani along with the fact that there are still a lot of male Democrasts that won't vote for a woman,are going to give her a tough run for her money.

[Bubbalicious]

I blame the press for some of this. They are out there polling people asking the question.."who would you rather have a beer with?"

They pollute a lot of minds with a lot of useless info. I personally don't care too much if G.W. drank too much 30 years ago,or if Clinton inhaled 30 years ago. That's just plain silly.

I admit,it is easier to back a candidate if you find him appealing personally,that has never played into it for me. There are a few issues that I will not budge on,so the Republican candidate gets my vote. I definitely do not get my info from my husband tho-lol-that kind of sets women back,I think.

DIck Morris thinks Hillary is going to win the next election,but I think Rudy Guliani along with the fact that there are still a lot of male Democrasts that won't vote for a woman,are going to give her a tough run for her money.

The MSM really does suck. It'd be nice if they compared candidates issue per issue so people could get a clear sense of what they stood for. And in a 24-hour news cycle they have time to do that, but they always go for what will grab people's attention the fastest. Any whiff of a scandal wins out over issues and investigative journalism every time. And then they just play the same 3 or 4 stories on a continual loop for 24 hours. You get more information just skimming a newspaper for half an hour than you do sitting in front of CNN all night.

Personally I think Giuliani's a cool guy but he's had a few scandals of his own that won't play well in Peoria, plus he's not with the Republican base on a lot of litmus issues like abortion and gay marriage and guns. He is economically efficient though.