November Polls, First Time Voters, Women, Girls & Hillary

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

When I pull the lever for Hillary on Tuesday, I will think of this girl who was photographed rooting for Hillary outside a Nevada Caucus

-------------------

I saw another diary here today worrying about NOVEMBER POLLS (!?)and wondering about the effect of "Independents" on a general election between either Hillary or Obama and John McCain.

Here, in short, is what another diarist writes about this here at myDD today:

The consensus view as to why there is such a discrepancy is, as Rasmussen's analysis makes clear:

   Obama leads McCain among voters not affiliated with either major political party. McCain leads Clinton among the unaffiliateds.

When will we stop listening to the totally worthless pundit CW? Folks, no offense but, I thought the "netroots" were supposed to represent the "reality based community".  NOVEMBER tracking polls!!?? After we've all seen the absolute failures of polling and punditry so far, where's the "reality" in looking at polled predictions of NOVEMBER voting!?

The value of the "netroots" OBVIOUSLY is as activists, not analysts. If that is so, what the heck are people doing wondering and worrying about polls that, in reality, mean ABSOLUTELY NOTHING, nada, less than zero, to us today. Please stop,please!?

-------------------

Here's the real reality folks.

-------------------

The entire plan and basis of Hillary's special strength in the general election will be with previously non voting, working single women and single Moms who will see Hillary as uniquely caring about them, their families and their problems. Many millions of these women will register and be voting for both Hillary and themselves in November.

Obviously, at first, these "non voters" will have no party. So I think we can safely call these new voters "independents" too.

This is known as "growing the electorate".

WHO DO YOU WANT IN THE WHITE HOUSE? w/ Julia Louis Dreyfus. A PSA from 'Women's Voices Women Vote'

-------------------

This new and historic dynamic was explained to me by one of the smartest people in national politics, an old sage of labor, when I told him that I was worried that Hillary, as a woman, couldn't win a national election.

My worries then were the same as the reasons her foes now repeat day after day after day.

But he opened my eyes to a new American idea and ideal. He said that there were millions of women who up till now, saw themselves as non voters and didn't believe the Government ever worked for them. But these women would register for the first time when they saw that Hillary, a woman, is our nominee.

He spoke to me about the hard and uncertain lives of those tens of millions of women without college degrees, who work for hourly wages, with no or poor health insurance, and raise their kids from paycheck to paycheck, asking for nothing more than a fair deal and future for their children.

He said these women, till now almost invisible in our political culture, would come out and vote for Hillary in the Presidential election.

Not because she's Bill Clinton's wife, or was the First Lady and not because she's a Senator from New York. But because in Hillary's voice, in her passion, they will hear the melodic relief that only enduring hope can offer. They will KNOW that this WOMAN, this candidate, this friendly symbol of historic change in a pantsuit, actually cares about them, their children, their lives.

These women will enthusiastically come out and vote for Hillary because they will want to help her become the President. By doing this, they know they will be changing history, both their own and the entire worlds.

Through this act, this one vote, this BELIEF, they will make themselves invisible no more.

These single women and single Moms are among the "forgotten Americans" that Hillary speaks of. Alone among the candidates, Senator Clinton sees them and speaks to their concerns. In the White House, she will fight for them everyday, starting from day one.

On election day, these women will stand up for her and as President, Hillary will always, ALWAYS stand by them.

-------------------

To the entire media these "non college" single women are now almost entirely invisible. Because of this, there is a possible electoral dynamic the media completely may be missing about these new voters. In November:

THESE WOMEN WILL COME AND VOTE FOR HILLARY.

THESE WOMEN MAY NOT BE THERE FOR OBAMA..

-------------

This idea of growing new women voters has been the basis for my confidence about Hillary's campaign.

Ask Ellen Malcolm,founder of Emily's List if these voters are out there.

Ask Page Gardner, Womens Voices -Women Vote President if these voters are worth fighting for.

I believe this dynamic is why President Clinton has from the beginning  said that he thought that the general election would be easier for Hillary then the primaries would be.   Because the votes of these "forgotten" women will make all the difference.

THEY WILL BE VOTING FOR THEMSELVES,THEIR MOTHERS, THEIR SISTERS, THEIR DAUGHTERS.

I am the son of a single working Mom and I have two sisters. There are many reasons I support Senator Clinton, but those three women and their lives are at the top of my list.

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

The high turn out of single women, even in the primaries, is an effective predictor of what we can expect for Hillary in November.

"The incredible turnout of women on their own in these early contests is a clear sign that unmarried women will play a critical role in the national discussion, and demand the attention of the Presidential candidates," said Page Gardner, President of Women's Voices Women Vote. "The impressive measure of unmarried women in these early races is an encouraging sign that the 20 million unmarried women absent on Election Day in 2004, will make their voices heard in 2008," said Gardner.

In the early nominating contests participation rates of unmarried women has equaled, or exceeded their over-all share of the population.

But this is just a start. Our real goal is November and it all begins with registering new voters.

http://www.wvwv.org/

February 07, 2008

WOMEN'S VOICES WOMEN VOTE LAUNCHES NATIONAL VOTER REGISTRATION DRIVE

Unprecedented mailing aims at Unmarried Women

20 million now unregistered, not voting

With the power to decide elections

WASHINGTON, DC - An unprecedented voter registration drive aimed at the 15 million unmarried women who are not registered to vote will hit mailboxes in 22 states beginning today, as Women's Voices Women Vote launches its largest voter registration drive ever aimed at the nation's largest group of unregistered citizens.

Women's Voices Women Vote, a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization dedicated to increasing the number of unmarried women participating in our democracy, is mailing voter registration forms to more than 4.1 million homes in 22 states: Arkansas, Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, North Carolina, Nevada, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Virginia, Washington state, and Wisconsin.

"In 2008, a new America will be going to the polls. For the first time in history, a majority of households are headed by an unmarried person, and the number of women who are single, separated divorced or widowed is equal to the number of married women," said Page Gardner, President of Women's Voices Women Vote. "But the voices of 20 million unmarried women are not being heard because they are not registered and not voting. Yet, they have enormous power in every election this year."

U.S. Census data shows unmarried women now represent more than 26 percent of the eligible voting age population. In the last presidential election in 2004, of the 20 million who did not participate, nearly 15 million were not registered and another 5 million were registered but did not vote. Compared to married women, single women are 9 percentage points less likely to register and 13 percentage points less likely to vote.

"These are our grandmothers, our mothers, our aunts; our sisters and our friends - across all ages, all races and income levels. These are women facing real challenges in their lives, whether making ends meet, managing a health care crisis without insurance, or worrying about the cost of war," said Gardner. "Unmarried women have already had a profound impact and high participation rates in the 2008 primaries and caucuses. Making it as easy as possible to register to vote will ensure more single women make their voices are heard in our democracy."

From 1960 to 2006, the percentage of the voting age population which is unmarried grew from 27 to 47 percent, according to U.S. Census data. Between the 2002 and 2006 election, the growth rate of unmarried Americans doubled that of married Americans, a trend, that if it continues, means unmarried people will be the majority of the U.S. population within 15 years.

In addition to mailing voter registration forms, WVWV is also encouraging unmarried women to register and vote through innovative online efforts, and is sponsoring the Public Service Announcement campaign, "20 Million Reasons to Vote." The PSAs feature stars such as Christine Lahti and Julia Louis Dreyfus, and are set in the Oval Office, evoking the importance of having women's voices heard and their power felt in electing candidates to every office. The PSAs are visible at wvwv.org.

Imagine - 20 Million Reasons to Register and Vote.

-------------------

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

Vote for Hillary. Do it for this little girl. Do it for your sisters. Do it for your Country. Do it for your Mom.



Display:


My 26 year old daughter (2.00 / 2)

From our family's experience I agree with you:

My 26 year old daughter has never been particularly interested in politics.  But she's been a Hillary supporter for months.  When I asked why, she replied (looking at me like I was an idiot) "Because she's a woman"

It was that simple for her.

I'm on my 3rd choice now (first Gore then Edwards) in supporting Hillary.  But I've got to tell you, I'm liking the idea of a woman president more everyday.

I hadn't really thought about it before.


by katiebird on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 03:04:13 PM EST

Hillary will be the nominee (2.00 / 1)

and women voters will place her in the WHITE HOUSE.

Image and video hosting by TinyPic


Offend the Media - Vote for Hillary!
by Seymour Glass on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 03:36:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary will be the nominee (none / 0)

An people say Obama's the cult leader :/


by MNPundit on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 06:03:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: My 26 year old daughter (none / 0)

Interesting.  And here everyone's saying that it doesn't matter to young women.  The ones born after the 1970s, who supposedly take women's rights for granted.  


by randym77 on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 09:27:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: November Polls, (2.00 / 2)

I've been making lots of grass roots efforts for Hillary, too, on my own.  Like the organization above, I too have aimed my efforts at women.  

I agree that come Nov., women will get together and vote her in....both married and single, and regardless of race.  Gender is a different issue as many 18-24 year olds 'have fallen in love' with Obama.  In short, like you, I have no worries about her electability in Nov.


by findthesource on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 03:07:28 PM EST

Re: Women &Hillary (2.00 / 1)

I didn't realize how much it mattered to me until Nancy Pelosi got sworn in as the first woman Speaker, and I cried like a baby. I don't even always like her that much, but I've sat through two of Bush's SOTU addresses just to see her sitting there behind him in the Speaker's chair.

I would not be supporting Hillary Clinton if I did not also agree with her policies and think she is the most capable person in the race. For example, I did not support Elizabeth Dole.

I fully support other people in their decision to support the candidate that represents them on a personal level. If Obama wins I will also love to see him be sworn in. There is really no loser in this race.


by ocli on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 03:14:14 PM EST

THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE PRESS (none / 0)

You guys/gals keep trying to make this into an issue of media expectations. All you have to do is look at what has ALREADY happened in the primaries.

Obama is destroying Hillary among Independents. Those are facts, not expectations/guesses/theories.  
 


by highgrade on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 03:25:32 PM EST

WHOOSH!!! (2.00 / 2)

This went right over your head!

You and your "Precious",how amusing!


Offend the Media - Vote for Hillary!
by Seymour Glass on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 03:40:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE PRESS (2.00 / 1)

Yes, Obama relies on "independents" to win the primaries and caucuses. Except "independents" love McCain, and since they are "independent" they don't feel any loyalty to the candidate they voted for in the primary.


by LakersFan on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 03:51:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE PRESS (none / 0)

Is he?
That is a real question. Florida is a closed primary but 20% of the voters indicated they were independents. But of course this was about the same percentage as in 2004. And funny thing when I looked at MO, Cal and Iowa the independent percentage voting was about the same in each state. I didn't check any more but I'd be surprised to see much different most other places.
So what the heck does that mean? Well I submit it means that Obama is winning the Democratic leaning primary voters in just the same way he is winning the Democratic voters who make over $100,000 interesting but essentially meaningless come Nov.
by Judeling on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 12:01:40 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: November Polls, First Time Voters, Women (2.00 / 1)

She'll also attract Republican women who want to see a female president. These women will never admit that they'll vote for her to their friends or family, or to a pollster. But in the privacy of the voting booth, they will think about their memories of their mothers' struggles, and their hopes for their daughters' futures, and they will vote for Hillary Clinton.


by LakersFan on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 03:36:00 PM EST

They will be voting for (2.00 / 2)

that little girl in the picture at the top of this diary.

I know I will.


Offend the Media - Vote for Hillary!
by Seymour Glass on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 03:46:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: November Polls, (none / 0)

Women are a far bigger factor in the Democratic primary than the general election, yet this week Hillary only won the women's vote by 6 points. Clearly she is strong among women but I believe people base their preferences more on personality and issues when it comes to a super huge demographic group such as gender.


by animated on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 03:50:11 PM EST

WHOOSH! (2.00 / 2)

Right over the head of another obamacrat!

My Precious!


Offend the Media - Vote for Hillary!
by Seymour Glass on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 04:53:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: November Polls, (none / 0)

Caucuses.  They distort the vote.

She won 2 female votes for every 1 Obama got in MA, and 6 for every 4 Obama got in CA.


formerly bookgirl
by masslib1 on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 01:39:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]

truly inspiring (none / 0)


Offend the Media - Vote for Hillary!
by Seymour Glass on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 10:22:16 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Right, but you can interpret that (none / 0)

in different ways.

1. We need to increase margins among female GE voters as much as possible because it's the Democrats' strength.

2. Women already tilt Democratic.  We need a candidate to appeal to other demographics where there's more potential for growth.

I don't know which argument applies more here.  I do suspect that Hillary may hit a ceiling among women voters in the general, and that Obama can cut into several key Republican demographics.  But I could be wrong.


by corph on Mon Feb 11, 2008 at 02:53:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

My #1 reason for supporting Hillary (2.00 / 2)


"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman
by Steve M on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 05:04:02 PM EST

Uh jeeze (2.00 / 1)

thats the third time Ive teared up just dealing with this diary...

very cute. sweet.


Offend the Media - Vote for Hillary!
by Seymour Glass on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 05:24:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Uh, she can still be president (none / 0)

if Obama wins the nomination.


by corph on Mon Feb 11, 2008 at 02:55:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Totally Agree (2.00 / 2)

Hillary will bring out so many women who don't traditionally vote.  I also think she will snag some Republican women who want to finally see a woman in the White House.  As for the earlier comment about independents going overwhelming to Obama, a lot of women go overwhelming to Hillary.  Also, women have definitely turned out more at the polls than have men, so I am definitely sure that we will best McCain with Hillary on the ticket.


by unabashed dem on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 05:08:47 PM EST

Angry Male Obamacrats may never vote for Hill (2.00 / 3)

but their women will.


Offend the Media - Vote for Hillary!
by Seymour Glass on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 05:27:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: November Polls, (2.00 / 1)

Hillary will bring new women to the polls. I also think she'll win young people by a margin greater than John Kerry did (18-29 was his best demographic). Yeah young people are enamored right with Obama, but I see the vast majority of young Obama supporters going to Hillary if she's the nominee because it will still be about making history, and standing next to McCain she'll look quite a bit more exciting. Independent men will be her biggest concern against McCain, but she'll win Independent women probably by 20 points or more. If she can pick off 20% of Republican women she'll win in a landslide.


by Christopher Lib on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 05:26:39 PM EST

the math really works for her (2.00 / 1)

new voters, new voters, new voters.

How many will McCain get?

Clinton haters already vote!!!


Offend the Media - Vote for Hillary!
by Seymour Glass on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 05:30:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Pretty pictures (none / 0)

and a great essay in wishful thinking.  The Ras numbers mean exactly this if they're accurate: the electorate prefers Obama over Hillary in the general RIGHT NOW.  It doesn't mean Hillary can't make up or surpass the difference.

General match-ups are not the most relevant of polls, but they do provide some insight as to the status of the race.

Oh, and continuing to emphasize gender solidarity as a way to support Hillary may not have the effect you're hoping for, despite women making up the majority of the electorate.


by corph on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 05:26:45 PM EST

Ive worked in Natl Dem Poltcs for 25 years (none / 0)

those numbers may mean something to you and the punidiotcracy, but they mean NOTHING, to political pros.  Zip.


Offend the Media - Vote for Hillary!
by Seymour Glass on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 05:34:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

OK, imagine this (none / 0)

Dems terrified of another Repub president are not up to your level of wisdom and experience, they read the poll and decide they'd better vote for Obama in the primary because he's the more "electable".  Is the poll meaningless then?  It can't predict the race in November accurately, but it can effect people's perceptions of the race now.

Oh, and you will not get your gender-war primary race.  The NY NOW gambit didn't turn out too well.


by corph on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 05:57:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

youve gotta stop belevin the pundits (2.00 / 1)

the only place the NOW thing didnt work was on cable news.

Kennedy lost his own state, notice?

this is gonna play out simply. obama will win the states with high black populations and yuppies and hill wins blue collar dem lands of ohio and pa. And just like the hilariously misplaced Obama strategy doc shows,at worst, we will end up pretty much tied. But, Hillary has and will retain the majority of super delegates. The media and obamacrats will  scream and yell and yell and scream...but since the clintons have MA and FL in their back pocket and since no way will they back down to media pressure, they can't lose.

But obama will.

The only question is what will he want to not completly divide our party. I think we all know the answer to that one.


Offend the Media - Vote for Hillary!
by Seymour Glass on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 06:49:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Ive worked in Natl Dem Poltcs for 25 years (none / 0)

Seymour:

I think both your name and credentials are fiction. I have been reading your blogs and comments for about two months now and you never seem to get it right.  

If you fall into the "pro" category, why are you wasting time writing intellectually weak support blogs on MyDD for the Clinton campaign.

If there is anybody that Hillary can unite, it is Republicans who are inclined to stay home right now. I work with enough Republicans to know that they find something loathesome about Bill and Hillary back in the White House.


by riverred on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 09:32:03 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Ive worked in Natl Dem Poltcs for 25 years (none / 0)

couldnt care any less whether a foolish Obamacrat llke you believes me or not.

Im here, till the end, to provide water cooler ammo for Hillary supporters and to drive silly haters like you  a little nuts.

By the way, even though I'm sure you think this election is all about "You"... anecdotal tales from your personal "Life" don't actually convert over to national voting trends...Sorry.


Offend the Media - Vote for Hillary!
by Seymour Glass on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 10:33:10 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Republicans (and even Dems) will unite (none / 0)

for McCain over Obama's Middle East connections. The MSM is just starting to report Rezko's ties to the Middle East and the Iraq oil-for-food scandal. This looks really, really bad, regardless if Obama has done anything wrong. I've been saying this on mydd. Obama has not yet had to contend with high negatives from his Rezko connections. Rezko's trial is set to begin at the end of this month. More reports are coming out regarding Rezko's Middle East connections. There will also be questions about war-profiteering. This may be a sign of big trouble ahead for Obama. Verify for yourself:

http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/2/9/6957/ 63876

http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/2/7/13301 9/3449

http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/2/8/19811 /97731

If Dems think Rezko, the slumlord, is all the dirt out on Obama, then we are in for a very rude awakening when the Repug hit squad ties Obama (through Rezko) to the Middle East, money laundrying, and war-profiteering. Obama won't stay afloat for long.


by grlpatriot on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 01:24:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Ive worked in Natl Dem Poltcs for 25 years (none / 0)

J. D. Salinger | Seymour Glass on Conformity

"Unfortunately, here as elsewhere on this touching planet, imitation is the watchword and prestige the highest ambition."

J. D. Salinger

From "Hapworth 16, 1924," New Yorker, 41 (19 June 1965): 34.


Offend the Media - Vote for Hillary!
by Seymour Glass on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 06:13:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

ooh just caught your lil threat (none / 0)

"continuing to emphasize gender solidarity as a way to support Hillary may not have the effect you're hoping for..."

Bring it on pal, thats a war we'd want!

But you don't get that or it , so ...oh well...

....my PRECIOUS!


Offend the Media - Vote for Hillary!
by Seymour Glass on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 05:38:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Threat? (none / 0)

how am I in a position to threaten you with anything?  Please learn to interpret comments better.

I'm predicting a backlash against gender-identity politicking.  Especially in the general if Hillary's the nominee.


by corph on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 05:59:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

and I hope that those who think like you (2.00 / 1)

and say as you say

warn and threaten too.

thats just the kind of passive aggressive

misogynistic kindling that will make this

historic fire grow and burn even brighter.


Offend the Media - Vote for Hillary!
by Seymour Glass on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 07:01:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

OK, let me switch to active-agressive (none / 0)

Seymour,

You've taken several opportunities to boost your own credentials and experience in this thread, without showing how they're relevant.  You dismiss polls and contrary opinions without demonstrating why they're wrong.  Circumstantial ad-homs and appeals to authority abound.

You throw around labels like "misogynist" without appearing to understand what they mean. Your semi-verse is clumsy and lame.

I don't have any hard data to support my prediction of a backlash, and I don't know how far the Clinton campaign will push the gender issue.  But I don't claim to be an authority or to be able to read people's minds.

You, on the other hand, are a partisan hack, and not a very good one.


by corph on Mon Feb 11, 2008 at 10:37:51 AM EST
[ Parent ]

insults, always with the insults (none / 0)

Just WHAT is wrong with you people? A new kind of politics? Baloney.   Your type ALWAYS comes and starts with the pathetic and childish personal insult.  What IS the point? Does it somehow make you feel better about yourself?

PAUL KRUGMAN wrote about you and yours today in a Times piece called, Hate Springs Eternal:

most of the venom I see is coming from supporters of Mr. Obama, who want their hero or nobody. I'm not the first to point out that the Obama campaign seems dangerously close to becoming a cult of personality. We've already had that from the Bush administration -- remember Operation Flight Suit? We really don't want to go there again.

For giggles and my amusement, I'll take a moment to respond and I'll turn your confused insults into rational queries.

Q- How is political experience relevant to determining whether November polls are not worth considering?

A- Well, lets see....maybe because they.....eh....have NEVER been consistent or accurate! Ever. The one thing you know is that they will jump around, just like every other set of general election poll has since polling began  the 1950s.  I wanted to make this a positive piece, so i didnt even mention what the effect on obamas polling would be if or when the VRWC  starts banging on him. Rezko, Daley, his "unique" bio etc...troubles galore.  Only media twits and campaign boosters would consider these numbers to have an relevence whatsoever to an election taking place 10 friggig months from now. MY EXPERIENCE WORKING IN OR AROUND A HALF DOZEN PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS SHOWS ME THAT. Though simple common sense would suffice to show these polls to be just plain silly. Ask someone you know who has some for confirmation.

Q-Do I understand the meaning of the word "misogynist"?

A- Let's see..

mi·sog·y·ny   -
hatred, dislike, or mistrust of women.

misogynist -

noun
a misanthrope who dislikes women in particular

Misogyny (pronounced mɪˈsɒʤɪni)- is hatred or strong prejudice against women. Those holding misogynistic beliefs can be of either sex.  A concept related to misogyny is gynophobia, the fear of women, but not necessarily hatred of them. The obsolete Latin language term horror feminae (literally "fear of women)[1] may be seen used as a synonym both for misogyny and gynophobia.

Misogyny is considered by most feminist theories as an implicit motivation of political ideologies that justify and maintain the subordination of women to men. Such ideologies are typically called sexism, by analogy with racism and antisemitism. Misogyny is, therefore, often associated with anti-woman sexism.

Well, seems I did and do and I used that word exactly as I intended to.

You wrote:

"I don't have any hard data to support my prediction of a backlash.."

Backlash? Why would you expect a "backlash" to women using their vote as they would choose to.  Does that THREATEN you somehow? What, are you a member of the He-Man Hillary Haters Club?
Image and video hosting by TinyPic

Or just a garden variety misogynist, fearful of  a "motivation of political ideologies" that works o OVERCOME "the subordination of women to men." Or does the idea of"girl power" just scare you silly.

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

Q-Is my "semi-verse" is clumsy and lame?

A- Well, unlike Barack, I don't have a team of scribes working non stop writing and scripting my every word to make me look "authentic" and "inspiring".  But a full email box today greeted me with compliments on this piece from friends (many who are women and work in politics if thats ok with you) who saw it featured at Hillary Hub. Since I never intended it to be in "semi verse', I'll just take that as a unintended compliment and just say all the credit owed towards the "poetics" is due to the half of me that is all Irish. The rude crack about this piece being "clumsy", I'll just paint over to your being fit with petty envy. Because, of course, all men who fear women are jealous and envious of those men, that cherish and embrace them. Most women may not know this about us, but "we" do, don't we brother?

Q - Are you a "partisan hack"?
A -Proud to say, guilty as charged.  Yellow dogged down to my last bone.

Q-Are you any good at "hackery"?
A-Good enough to raise your "hackles" , get your goat and cause you to send not one, but an entire SERIES of insults and attacks my way.  So yeah, I guess i am.

something else, theyr'e sending out memos to the media trying to suggest that the Clintons are playing the race ca


Offend the Media - Vote for Hillary!
by Seymour Glass on Mon Feb 11, 2008 at 01:30:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

oops (none / 0)

ignore and burn from your memory that last sentence, it wasnt supposed to be there.... twasn't meant for "enemy eyes"...

the spirit of the comment was meant to end with a snide "so yeah"...so please take it that way.


Offend the Media - Vote for Hillary!
by Seymour Glass on Mon Feb 11, 2008 at 01:40:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I'm criticizing YOU, not (none / 0)

mindlessly cheering for Obama.  I'm not beholden to any of his campaign slogans.

I did read the Krugman column in its entirety.  One of his weakest, I thought.  It sounded a lot like one of David Brooks', full of unreaserched impressions and disdain for voters' emotional connections.  Krugman does a lot better when he keeps to popularizing economic concepts.

If you think opposition to the idea that Hillary should promote her campaign based on her gender is misogynist, then I won't continue to argue the point.  As an admitted

partisan, n. A firm adherent to a party, faction, cause, or person; especially : one exhibiting blind, prejudiced, and unreasoning allegiance.
hack, you're unlikely to see the flaws in applying that definition.

Yes, a metaphor using an abstract concept like misogyny as kindling for a campaign fire (what, is she going up in flames?), is clumsy.  And lame because it uses the tired the misogyny straw man and more ad-homs.

And so you don't think I'm cowardly attacking your crappy writing without offering something myself, here are some limericks:

The Hillary camp had resources:
Donations from lobbyist sources.
But it wasn't enough,
Once the campaign got tough,
To whine 'bout misogynist forces.

Monster Tuesday was hardly a blowout
The calender presaged the next drought:
Since, she's gone oh-for-five.
Now, to hope to survive
Gender wars are the easiest cop-out.


by corph on Mon Feb 11, 2008 at 02:31:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'm criticizing YOU, not (none / 0)

man, i really hate people who write in net nerd speak...

strawmen and ad-homs...

ew....

Well, seems a lot more people like my writin'
round these parts then you  {I'm always and your never seen you on the rec list, imagine that), so after we happy partisans take down your shallow cult leader with our superD  and MI and FL delegates maybe you can go back to one of your more "manly' hobbies like collecting vintage comic books or whatever it is you nerds do to amuse yourselves when classic scfi from your lonely childhood isn't being rebroadcast on the cable tv.

Cause, when it comes to politics as a hobby, you sure as heck ain't no talented amateur.

---

Ok, we're done here. I'm not interested in having a dialog with you.  Let's see if you have the self control to not write back or see if you are as petulant, small and childish as I  assume you to be..

Bet you can't help yourself!


Offend the Media - Vote for Hillary!
by Seymour Glass on Mon Feb 11, 2008 at 03:22:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Yep, I'm childish. (none / 0)

I wrote back.  But you've just read me :)

It's great that you're so popular here.  I came here because I'm a contrarian and I like arguing.  I admit I picked a pretty soft target.  Try showing this thread to a neutral informed observer (who understands the rules of argumentation are not just nerd-speak) and ask him/her what they think.  You're not going to come off very well.

As for being a politica amateur, I'm now technically a professional.  I've made a bunch on intrade predicting McCain's fall and rise.  I bought a bunch of Obama contracts when they were at 33% to win the nomination.

He's at 70% now.

Good luck to your career as a political pro.


by corph on Mon Feb 11, 2008 at 03:43:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

intrade.... (none / 0)

well,its time to make your killing.

sell.

hill has mi and fl  as trumps

and will have oh and pa and in and ky and tx and  

with bill calling the superds....come on.

wrote here months ago that it went thru pa and would end wth barry as vp.

i too never doubted my man mcain, ive understood this race clearly from oct 30 on.


Offend the Media - Vote for Hillary!
by Seymour Glass on Mon Feb 11, 2008 at 04:26:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I actually do think (none / 0)

Obama is too high right now.  Not because of FL or MI, though.  Because he could slip up tomorrow, or lose Wisconsin.

Or especially if he makes a gaffe.


by corph on Mon Feb 11, 2008 at 05:01:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'm Dubious About That... (2.00 / 1)

My spouse is retired military, fighter pilot, served 26 years, lifelong republican until Bush. He just voted for Hillary Clinton in the primary, and he likes her for the nominee, too...He's not an ideologue; he just likes her policies, her foreign policy experience and he likes that she's a fighter for universal health insurance. We both opposed the Iraq War and still do, but we think she's got the best experience to find an exit strategy on Iraq, not to mention her economic policy knowledge, which this country desperately needs right now...

I think there are actually a lot of men--particularly older men who are Democrats--who will vote for Clinton.

I think there are a lot of independents who will vote for her too. She won more indies in Florida than Obama, didn't she?

People underestimate her. Not only that, she's going to have the money from the Dems behind her for the general. And, the GOP is broke. They can't help McCain much.

She can do it if she's the nominee. I'm not as confident about Obama. He's never run against the GOP before. He's got so many unknowns....


"I never give them hell. I just tell the truth and they think it's hell." Harry S Truman
by Tennessean on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 11:20:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

si se puede (none / 0)

correct in every way!


Offend the Media - Vote for Hillary!
by Seymour Glass on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 10:40:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]

All valid points (none / 0)

and that's the conventional thinking on Clinton anyway.  I'm not addressing her merits as a candidate.

What I'm saying is that if her campaign starts being perceived as some sort of "feminist crusade", both men and women will resent it.

It would be similar if the Obama campaign started using rhetoric like "for too long, African-Americans have been shut out...".  Of course they won't, because blacks are nowhere near a majority.

Which is the danger for the Clinton campaign.  They must be looking at their strength among women, knowing that women are over half of the electorate.  They might want to push the margins by overemphasizing women's issues, female empowerment and such.

In my experience, people get politically involved more often out of aversion to a candidate or campaign strategy than affection for one, the Obama hype notwithstanding.  I got involved in 2000 because of GWB, for example.

I'm convinced that playing the "gender card" (to employ an overused phrase) will amount to a net loss in support.  Especially among men, but women as well.


by corph on Mon Feb 11, 2008 at 10:21:01 AM EST
[ Parent ]

are you awake? (none / 0)


The Obama campaign would be over right now if they hadnt played the "race card" TO THE MEDIA and accused both the clintons and their campaign of racism and so drive their share of the AA vote from 40% to 90%.

From Jesse Jackson Sr.:

"For example, it was unfair to attack her on that basis [Senator Clinton stated that Dr. King did not act alone. She said that he needed a politician to get civil rights legislation enacted]. The reality is that that was not an insult to Dr. King. Dr. King campaigned for Lyndon Johnson. Because if Goldwater had won, we wouldn't have had the Voting Rights Act of '65. You need a combination of litigation, people like Thurgood Marshall, and demonstrations, [people like] Dr. King. And legislation, [people like] Lyndon Johnson. You need that combination. That was gotcha politics.

Interview on "Inside City Hall," Rep. Charles Rangel:



   

"How race got into this thing is because Obama said `race,'" "But there is nothing that Hillary Clinton has said that baffles me. I would challenge anybody to belittle the contribution that Dr. King has made to the world, to our country, to civil rights, and the Voting Rights Act. But for him to suggest that Dr. King could have signed that act is absolutely stupid. It's absolutely dumb to infer that Doctor King, alone, passed the legislation and signed it into law."

Then the statement that should have ended this whole false and tasteless incident, but that NO ONE in the national media EVER published or quoted, John Lewis said on PBS's News Hour on 1/14:

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

"It is unfortunate that people have tried to distort what Mrs. Clinton had to say about Dr. King," "I think there has been a deliberate and systematic attempt by some people in the Obama campaign to really fan the flames about race and to really distort what Senator Clinton said.  I understood and I think most right thinking people understood what she said.

   "President and Senator Clinton have a record, a history, a very long history of bringing people together.  No right thinking American would ever think that Senator or President Clinton would ever do anything that would use the race card"

   "I must tell you...I'm trying to set the record straight...the Obama camp is doing something else, theyr'e sending out memos to the media trying to suggest that the Clintons are playing the race card."


Offend the Media - Vote for Hillary!
by Seymour Glass on Mon Feb 11, 2008 at 01:53:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Okay... (none / 0)

you're saying that the Obama campaign is claiming Clinton "played the race card".  Fine, I don't agree that she did, though the Lyndon Johnson reference was pointless and petty.

I'll grant you that they were lifting the quote and twisting its meaning.  That doesn't mean they are "playing the race card" themselves, i.e. trying to get people to vote for him because he's black.  Tons of politicians refer to MLK (even [shudder] Bush, when contesting affirmative action).

I don't think Obama would be above doing that if he thought it would work.  He knows it wouldn't, and not just because there aren't enough blacks.  It would make the rest of the population feel excluded.


by corph on Mon Feb 11, 2008 at 02:39:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Okay... (none / 0)

"I think there has been a deliberate and systematic attempt by some people in the Obama campaign to really fan the flames about race and to really distort what Senator Clinton said.  

  "I must tell you...I'm trying to set the record straight...the Obama camp is doing something else, theyr'e sending out memos to the media trying to suggest that the Clintons are playing the race card."


Offend the Media - Vote for Hillary!
by Seymour Glass on Mon Feb 11, 2008 at 04:01:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Identity-politicking (none / 0)

could play a role for either Hillary or Obama.


by grlpatriot on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 01:11:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

True (none / 0)

but so far it seems that Obama has been avoiding it like the plague, at least overtly.  Which I believe is the right strategy.  Clinton doesn't need to emphasize that she's a women; voters already know that.  But try to appeal to voters because you're a woman, and you start to create resentment.


by corph on Mon Feb 11, 2008 at 10:41:03 AM EST
[ Parent ]

resentment? (none / 0)

from who?

men who dont want women in power?

duh .

remind you of anyone?


Offend the Media - Vote for Hillary!
by Seymour Glass on Mon Feb 11, 2008 at 01:57:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Among men AND women (none / 0)

who don't subscribe to identity politics.  Campaign tactics matter; it's one of the main reasons I moved away from Hillary in the first place.  How can't you see this?  Do white Hillary supporters simply "not want blacks in power"?

My dislike (not hatred) of Hillary Clinton has nothing to do with her gender.  I would gladly support a Barbara Boxer, Kathleen Sebelius or Gennifer Granholm (if she could run) candidacy.

The "not wanting women in power" is an offensive canard.


by corph on Mon Feb 11, 2008 at 02:45:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

independents (none / 0)

The "independents" will not vote for CLinton as has already been proven during the primaries.

I think you're right that HRC may see a spike in support due to the excitement of a woman possibly winning the presidency. But women aren't the only voters. She will lose the male vote rather handily.

Finally, I find it a bit amusing that you're betting the presidency on a theory of gender solidarity. When Obama is said to have received the support of most African Americans, all of a sudden it's because of racial pandering etc.


by highgrade on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 07:07:58 PM EST

WHOOSH! (none / 0)

Obamacrats just cant get it!

MY PRECIOUS!!


Offend the Media - Vote for Hillary!
by Seymour Glass on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 08:08:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: WHOOSH! (none / 0)

LOL. Their "hipness" precludes them from it.


by grlpatriot on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 01:08:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: independents (2.00 / 2)

While you're being "amused" try to envision that women make up about 60% of the voters okay? The African American vote is a very small slice of the electorate by comparison. So, when someone tells you that Hillary can get between 15-20% of Republican female voters, you can see that it's possible to actually win an election based on that voting chunk. And, there is evidence from polling showing that Clinton could pick up a sizeable chunk of women GOP voters....

I have no idea, honestly, but if it's true, then she could do some serious damage. And, by the way, the numbers from Florida showed she won more independents than Obama. Plus, in California, I believe, she tied Obama with men.

So, all your arguments really aren't holding up as well as you think they are.

Do you want to win in November? Or are you more interested in ramming your ideal candidate down people's throats whether he can win or not? Me? I want to retake the White House in November...


"I never give them hell. I just tell the truth and they think it's hell." Harry S Truman
by Tennessean on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 11:26:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: independents (none / 0)


While you're being "amused" try to envision that women make up about 60% of the voters okay?

Try about 54-51% in the general election.

Hillary is losing men so badly that the small difference in male and female voters won't matter.


by wayward on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 10:14:03 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I have my own theory (2.00 / 2)

and that is there are lots of Hillary supporters that are "in the closet" so to speak.  And they're not just women, although probably most are. Given all the anti-Hillary invective out there and how the media has portrayed her over the years, its quite possible that lots of people are keeping their real preference to themselves. I know I'm very careful about when and where I'll speak up about it. If I think I'm going to get slammed for it, I don't volunteer political opinions in general.  Though I'm in fairly safe territory here in MA.


by dragoneyes on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 08:18:36 PM EST

Re: I have my own theory (2.00 / 1)

This is the non-tinfoil theory for why the exit polls underestimated Bush support in 2004.  Some people didn't want to admit they actually liked him.


"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman
by Steve M on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 09:17:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I have my own theory (none / 0)

I think you are 100% right.  

My family is kind of like that.  

The only time I can remember my mom talking about politics was when she took me aside once when I was a little girl.  She explained what abortion was, and why she was supported abortion rights.  Then she told me to never tell my dad.  "He's a man. He'll never understand."

I haven't asked my mom how she plans to vote, and she wouldn't tell me if I did.  But I think, in the privacy of the voting booth, she might vote for Hillary if she's on the ballot.  And so would many of the other women in my family. I know some of them voted for their current mayor just because she's a woman.


by randym77 on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 09:25:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

What's wrong with the Hillary campaign. (none / 0)

This diary is another example of what's wrong with Hillary Clinton's campaign.

I see diaries about "Girls for Hillary", "Women for Hillary", a "women's uprising for Hillary"

What about the men?  Men vote too.

Hillary's problem, and her fatal flaw, is that her campaign has a problem attracting male voters.

Hillary Clinton has a huge gender gap, especially compared with John McCain.


 But the big difference [between Obama and Clinton] is men: Men give McCain an 18-point lead over Clinton, 57 percent to 39 percent, according to the CNN poll. The margin of error for that question was plus or minus 5 percentage points.

But if McCain and Obama went head to head, McCain's lead among men shrinks to three, 49 percent to 46 percent -- statistically a tie.

Women, on the other hand, vote for either Clinton or Obama by similar margins.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/02/08/2 0008.matchups.schneider/index.html

Is it sexism?  Probably. Does it matter? Not really.

I like Hillary Clinton.  I think she'd make a great President.  But I sure as hell would rather have President Barack Obama than President John McCain.


by wayward on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 10:07:38 AM EST

whoosh! (2.00 / 1)

right over your head.

quoting from polling fiction from b. schneider proves it is you mr. who doesn't have a clue.

I think I'll trust the smarts of the smart women behnd this battle plan, who always expected to run against McCain, over you, OK?


Offend the Media - Vote for Hillary!
by Seymour Glass on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 10:48:15 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: November Polls, First (none / 0)

But Obama has become aware of our efforts and is now targeting women too, even in PA and OH.

So please, Seymour, what you know about Clinton supporters targeting women, please keep that information to yourself...It should be our little secret ;)


by findthesource on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 10:11:06 AM EST

in:November (none / 0)

I'm sure Hillary will get his female voters...the question is, if he were the nominee, would he get Hillary's?


Offend the Media - Vote for Hillary!
by Seymour Glass on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 10:52:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Hillary will win (2.00 / 1)

because she is the BEST candidate, not because she's a woman..

Women cannot make it that far for being an average.  They have to be "Exceptional" to make it any where in this male dominate world.  

Hillary is exceptional, better than many average male politician out there.  She is the best choice for us,  like Cher said "it's a no brainer".


by JoeySky18 on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 01:13:04 PM EST

sGlass, thanks for the diary (none / 0)

Love your sig: Offend the Media - Vote for Hillary!


by grlpatriot on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 01:28:00 PM EST

HillaryBots, make up your mind Polls bad or good (none / 0)

While some of the points inthe diary have merit, I just have to question the ridiculousness of the Hillary supporters who were poll obsessed when the polls favored Hillary. At one point, you would see a different polling diary on here everyday and people would be enthusiasticallly chiming in. Now that the polls dont favor Hillary, we hear a lot of "hear hear, polls are useless" kind of sentiment lately


by Pravin on Sat Feb 09, 2008 at 07:53:52 PM EST

Re: November Polls, First Time Voters, Women, Girl (none / 0)

I'm an HRC supporter in Minnesota.  I still have Wellstone and Kerry/Edwards bumper stickers on my '98 Subaru.  My HRC stickers are coming in the mail.

The other day, I was in conversation about Obama vs. Clinton, and a conversation I had with my grandmother (years ago) flashed into my consciousness... (My dad is 80, so that tells you how long ago this happened) She worked full time and raised 5 kids "on her own", with occasional support from my grandfather, her alcoholic husband.  My aunt has recalled how Grandma would stay up into the wee hours, sewing clothes for the kids, and baking bread for her family.  She was a hard worker...

I recalled our conversation, where she told me how a young man had been brought into her department, and she had to train him in for the job she should have had.  She could have used the money.  She had the experience... but He was a man.

Grandma "spoke" to me the other day, in that conversation, saying Hillary is the qualified one.  Give her the job!

As I said, my HRC stickers are in the mail.


MN for HRC
by goody on Sun Feb 10, 2008 at 10:34:24 PM EST

Are Women Ready? (none / 0)

Thank you, Seymour Glass, for this entry in your diary.  Nicely done!

I have been thinking, analyzing and writing about the rampant sexism manifested during this primary campaign season at www.MenForHillary.org (www.HillaryNowObamaLater.org).  Whether Senator Clinton becomes president or not, her run for the presidency will have put another solid nail in the coffin of anti-female sexism. It will become almost as unacceptable as racism.  I say "almost," because women still don't get it, and it will likely take another great woman to come along before women will get it.

Many factors are operating to keep women, and, especially younger women, from voting for Senator Clinton.  You will note that in most instances, it has been older women who are clearly voting for Senator Clinton.  In my opinion, there is a generational backlash in younger women against the women of Senator Clinton's generation.  In other words, NOT anti-feminism, but anti-boomer. In my opinion, younger women are making a big mistake by following their hearts instead of their heads, but what can you do.

Also, I think younger women actually believe that sexism does NOT limit them like it did in the "old" days, so it is not as important to them to "make a statement" by voting for a qualified woman.  No matter how you argue it, the facts are that Clinton is clearly as qualified as Obama.  

Personally, I find it quite interesting that there are so MANY people saying they are voting for Obama because he did not "vote" for the Iraq war.  Where were all those people when Congress was authorizing the President?  Obviously, a huge amount of the people who have voted for Obama based on his vote to not authorize the President are people who essentially supported the vote to authorize the President. So, what is this?  Voters absolving themselves of their OWN mistakes by aligning with someone who did not make the mistake they made?  Hmmm... sounds like group absolution to me. Sure, now we know that Obama rolled the dice the right way, but, frankly, Obama's "holier than thou" attitude will NOT get him very far in his so-called quest for "bipartisanship."

The other factors that will keep women from voting for a woman are detailed at www.MenForHillary.org (www.HillaryNowObamaLater.org), but, briefly, one of them is documented by studies which show that both men AND women overestimate the intelligence of men (it is a hangover from all the years of patriarchy).

Women do not seem to be ready to break the ultimate American glass ceiling and are finding themselves caught up in the usual manipulations of men -- the most classic being how well men can make women feel guilty for voting for a woman because she is a woman.  You can call that "reverse-sexism" if you want, but quite frankly, just how do you bring about a change in the balance of gender power without exerting the power?  Hmmm... interesting ploy by men to keep women down.  I learned long ago, growing up in LA, that you can't play by the rules of those in power if you want to change the balance of power. That's why they have those rules -- to stay in power.  My advice to women -- "don't let men or other women make you feel guilty for wanting to vote for a woman because she is at least as equally qualified."


by Men4Hillary on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 12:18:31 PM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.