Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
August 20, 2014, 03:27:54 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Don't forget to get your 2013 Gubernatorial Endorsements and Predictions in!

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
| |-+  Presidential Election Trends (Moderators: Mr. Morden, Bacon King)
| | |-+  Can the GOP ever win the women vote?
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 3 Print
Poll
Question: In the next 50 years or so
Yes   -37 (75.5%)
No   -12 (24.5%)
Show Pie Chart
Total Voters: 48

Author Topic: Can the GOP ever win the women vote?  (Read 4217 times)
Username MechaRFK
RFK
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1275
Canada


Political Matrix
E: -5.16, S: -7.30

View Profile
« on: August 19, 2011, 02:49:53 pm »
Ignore

If it's a women like the Maine senators or someone that pro-choice and moderate socially, yes, I can see the GOP winning the women vote. If not, it stays the same as the current state for the GOP grab for the women vote.
Logged



 
Del Tachi
Republican95
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2281


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: August 19, 2011, 02:57:00 pm »
Ignore

No.

Women skew poorer and less educated, not good for the GOP.
Logged

Lt. Governor TJ
TJ in Cleve
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4798
United States


Political Matrix
E: 2.45, S: 7.30

View Profile
« Reply #2 on: August 19, 2011, 03:02:19 pm »
Ignore

Yes, if the election is a blow-out and the GOP wins the male vote by more.
Logged

Username MechaRFK
RFK
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1275
Canada


Political Matrix
E: -5.16, S: -7.30

View Profile
« Reply #3 on: August 19, 2011, 04:37:45 pm »
Ignore

No.

Women skew poorer and less educated, not good for the GOP.

Women are becoming more educated then men. Especially in the demographics of poor whites, blacks and hispanics. It's even in rich whites and asians.
Logged



 
"'Oeps!' De blunders van Rick Perry Indicted"
DarthNader
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 389


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: August 19, 2011, 04:51:23 pm »
Ignore

Didn't they almost win it in '04?
Logged
cavalcade
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 746


Political Matrix
E: 2.71, S: -3.13

View Profile
« Reply #5 on: August 19, 2011, 04:57:50 pm »
Ignore

Didn't they almost win it in '04?

Kerry 51%, Bush 48%.  Bush had gotten 43% in 2000 against Gore.

I'm sure many Republican candidates could do better than that, so yes.
Logged
shua
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 11258
Russian Federation


View Profile WWW
« Reply #6 on: August 20, 2011, 01:17:33 am »
Ignore

A GOP candidate doesn't need to be pro-choice to win the "women's vote" - (whether you define that as a majority of women or more women than men voting Republican). What he/she needs to do is give some sense of compassion - "I feel your pain" stuff - Giving a sense of strength without being belligerent helps too.
Logged

phk
phknrocket1k
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12975


Political Matrix
E: 1.42, S: -1.22

View Profile
« Reply #7 on: August 20, 2011, 02:37:03 am »
Ignore

Didn't they almost win it in '04?

Kerry 51%, Bush 48%.  Bush had gotten 43% in 2000 against Gore.

I'm sure many Republican candidates could do better than that, so yes.
Logged

Robb the Survivor
Antonio V
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 30488
France


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: August 20, 2011, 04:08:32 am »
Ignore

Of course. Women aren't overwhelmingly democrats like blacks or hispanic. I'm sure Reagan and Bush'88 won the women's vote, and so would a republican winning by the margin they won.

Similarly, didn't Obama and Clinton win the male vote ?
Logged



Robb of the House Stark, First of his Name, Lord of Winterfell and King in the North



Quote from: IRC
22:15   ComradeSibboleth   this is all extremely terrible and in all respects absolutely fycking dire.

"A reformist is someone who realizes that, when you bang your head on a wall, it's the head that breaks rather than the wall."

Peppino, from the movie Baaria
Username MechaRFK
RFK
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1275
Canada


Political Matrix
E: -5.16, S: -7.30

View Profile
« Reply #9 on: August 20, 2011, 01:27:31 pm »
Ignore

Of course. Women aren't overwhelmingly democrats like blacks or hispanic. I'm sure Reagan and Bush'88 won the women's vote, and so would a republican winning by the margin they won.

Similarly, didn't Obama and Clinton win the male vote ?


Obama did but Clinton, I think no. Reagan and Bush 88 lost the female vote from study's I've read on female voting patterns.
Logged



 
"'Oeps!' De blunders van Rick Perry Indicted"
DarthNader
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 389


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: August 21, 2011, 11:48:52 am »
Ignore

Obama did but Clinton, I think no. Reagan and Bush 88 lost the female vote from study's I've read on female voting patterns.

Clinton won the male vote in '92 but not '96 (Dole +1). Republicans won female voters in all three Reagan-era elections, but very narrowly in '80 and '88.

http://www.ropercenter.uconn.edu/elections/presidential/presidential_election.html
Logged
Username MechaRFK
RFK
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1275
Canada


Political Matrix
E: -5.16, S: -7.30

View Profile
« Reply #11 on: August 21, 2011, 02:55:55 pm »
Ignore

Obama did but Clinton, I think no. Reagan and Bush 88 lost the female vote from study's I've read on female voting patterns.

Clinton won the male vote in '92 but not '96 (Dole +1). Republicans won female voters in all three Reagan-era elections, but very narrowly in '80 and '88.

http://www.ropercenter.uconn.edu/elections/presidential/presidential_election.html


Thanks DarthNader. Surprise that female and the youth were Republican back in the 1980's but it was the era of Reagan-Bush 41, which was very popular at the time.
Logged



 
Lucius Quintus Cincinatus Lamar
amcculloum
Full Member
***
Posts: 116


Political Matrix
E: 1.29, S: 4.00

View Profile
« Reply #12 on: August 22, 2011, 09:59:18 am »
Ignore

White women went McCain by 7.  Hispanic  women went Obama by 38 and black women went Obama by 93.  Looking at the 2008 results, there is virtually no difference between the white male and white female vote, with the exception of New England, where it appears white males and white females were watching 2 different elections.  That wasn't the case in the rest of the county.
Logged
Username MechaRFK
RFK
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1275
Canada


Political Matrix
E: -5.16, S: -7.30

View Profile
« Reply #13 on: August 24, 2011, 01:48:47 pm »
Ignore

White women went McCain by 7.  Hispanic  women went Obama by 38 and black women went Obama by 93.  Looking at the 2008 results, there is virtually no difference between the white male and white female vote, with the exception of New England, where it appears white males and white females were watching 2 different elections.  That wasn't the case in the rest of the county.


White males and white females voted Obama in Rhode Island, Vermont and Massachusetts.
Logged



 
Lucius Quintus Cincinatus Lamar
amcculloum
Full Member
***
Posts: 116


Political Matrix
E: 1.29, S: 4.00

View Profile
« Reply #14 on: August 24, 2011, 04:54:32 pm »
Ignore


White males and white females voted Obama in Rhode Island, Vermont and Massachusetts.

They did, but here was the breakdown.  White males (WM) in Rhode Island tied 48-48.  White females (WF) went 66-33 Obama, a 33 point gender difference. 

Vermont WM was 63-33 Obama, WF was 71-28 Obama, an 13 point difference.  Bigger than the national average, but not that big for New England.

Mass WM was 53-46 Obama and WF was 65-33, a 25 point difference.

The national average was about a point 9 gender difference.  Without New England, it would probably be 3-4 points.  Why is there such a big separation in the sexes in New England?  I am genuinely curious.  I made a map charting gender differences, but I don't yet have enough posts to display it.
Logged
They call me PR
Progressive Realist
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 5458
United States


View Profile
« Reply #15 on: August 24, 2011, 05:48:38 pm »
Ignore


White males and white females voted Obama in Rhode Island, Vermont and Massachusetts.

They did, but here was the breakdown.  White males (WM) in Rhode Island tied 48-48.  White females (WF) went 66-33 Obama, a 33 point gender difference.  

Vermont WM was 63-33 Obama, WF was 71-28 Obama, an 13 point difference.  Bigger than the national average, but not that big for New England.

Mass WM was 53-46 Obama and WF was 65-33, a 25 point difference.

The national average was about a point 9 gender difference.  Without New England, it would probably be 3-4 points.  Why is there such a big separation in the sexes in New England?  I am genuinely curious.  I made a map charting gender differences, but I don't yet have enough posts to display it.

My guess would be the men are more likely to vote based on "fiscal responsibility" and "small government" in New England, while the women are more likely to emphasize "social justice."

It could also be that more women work and are well-educated in New England, which translates to feelings of independence from the views of men.

« Last Edit: August 24, 2011, 05:50:39 pm by Grover Cleveland was a DINO »Logged
Lucius Quintus Cincinatus Lamar
amcculloum
Full Member
***
Posts: 116


Political Matrix
E: 1.29, S: 4.00

View Profile
« Reply #16 on: August 24, 2011, 10:30:12 pm »
Ignore



My guess would be the men are more likely to vote based on "fiscal responsibility" and "small government" in New England, while the women are more likely to emphasize "social justice."

It could also be that more women work and are well-educated in New England, which translates to feelings of independence from the views of men.


[/quote]

I may agree with you as to the first part, but that is more on gut feeling than any empirical evidence.  I'm not sure that prior to Obama's inauguration, there was any indication he would be a bigger spender that W.  McCain, I believe, was widely perceived as carrying on W's legacy of "compassionate conservatism" a/k/a big spending conservative, so I'm not sure "fiscal responsibility" pushed people towards McCain.  In fact, those voters who were very concerned about the economy went 60-38 for Obama.

Either way, I disagree with you on the second statement.  I have no indication that New England white females are any more educated than West Coast white females.  RI, VT and MA had a 33, 13 and 25 point gender difference, respectively, but CA, OR and WA had a 9, 6 and 2 point gender disparity, respectively.  If you compare those voters in RI, VT and MA with bachelors or post graduate degrees, you get 47%, 52% and 47%, respectively, to those in CA, OR and WA, at 49%, 45% and 48%, respectively, they have a substantially similar level of higher education. (The national average was 45%).

So both the Pacific west and New England voters were slightly above the national average in college degrees, both politically liberal, yet the Pac west averaged less than a 6 point gender difference, while New England averaged nearly a 25 point difference.  If whites voted with a gender consistency seen in the rest of the US, NY, NH and ME come into play for McCain (though still probably go to Obama), while CT might tip to McCain.
Logged
Cincinnatus
JBach717
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4150
United States


View Profile
« Reply #17 on: August 24, 2011, 10:48:28 pm »
Ignore

Who is this person creeping in on my name?  Tongue
Logged
Username MechaRFK
RFK
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1275
Canada


Political Matrix
E: -5.16, S: -7.30

View Profile
« Reply #18 on: August 25, 2011, 09:07:42 am »
Ignore


White males and white females voted Obama in Rhode Island, Vermont and Massachusetts.

They did, but here was the breakdown.  White males (WM) in Rhode Island tied 48-48.  White females (WF) went 66-33 Obama, a 33 point gender difference.  

Vermont WM was 63-33 Obama, WF was 71-28 Obama, an 13 point difference.  Bigger than the national average, but not that big for New England.

Mass WM was 53-46 Obama and WF was 65-33, a 25 point difference.

The national average was about a point 9 gender difference.  Without New England, it would probably be 3-4 points.  Why is there such a big separation in the sexes in New England?  I am genuinely curious.  I made a map charting gender differences, but I don't yet have enough posts to display it.

My guess would be the men are more likely to vote based on "fiscal responsibility" and "small government" in New England, while the women are more likely to emphasize "social justice."

It could also be that more women work and are well-educated in New England, which translates to feelings of independence from the views of men.




Then why would some "fiscal conservative" vote for McCain, when he would be a big spender on the government? Not saying Obama is the opinion but I think fiscal conservatives would stay out of the election.
Logged



 
Mechaman
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13785
Jamaica


View Profile
« Reply #19 on: August 25, 2011, 10:01:56 am »
Ignore


White males and white females voted Obama in Rhode Island, Vermont and Massachusetts.

They did, but here was the breakdown.  White males (WM) in Rhode Island tied 48-48.  White females (WF) went 66-33 Obama, a 33 point gender difference.  

Vermont WM was 63-33 Obama, WF was 71-28 Obama, an 13 point difference.  Bigger than the national average, but not that big for New England.

Mass WM was 53-46 Obama and WF was 65-33, a 25 point difference.

The national average was about a point 9 gender difference.  Without New England, it would probably be 3-4 points.  Why is there such a big separation in the sexes in New England?  I am genuinely curious.  I made a map charting gender differences, but I don't yet have enough posts to display it.

I'm pulling this out of my ass, but I'm speculating that sex appeal has a little bit to do with how women in New England vote.  After all, a prominent tall and handsome Democratic candidate from the 1950's and 1960's liked tea parties.  And for good reason.

Not to mention, how many comparisons the media made between aforementioned Captain Sexy Abs and Barack Obama.
« Last Edit: August 25, 2011, 10:03:54 am by Rip Marky Mark »Logged



23:19   Xahar   you're literally a white dude Mechaman
Lucius Quintus Cincinatus Lamar
amcculloum
Full Member
***
Posts: 116


Political Matrix
E: 1.29, S: 4.00

View Profile
« Reply #20 on: August 25, 2011, 10:26:04 am »
Ignore

Who is this person creeping in on my name?  Tongue

Ha!  Sorry on the creep.  It's hard to pass up a good name.  I may now have the required posts to post my own map.  If so, I may try posting it tonight.
Logged
Username MechaRFK
RFK
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1275
Canada


Political Matrix
E: -5.16, S: -7.30

View Profile
« Reply #21 on: August 25, 2011, 10:31:32 am »
Ignore

JFK won the male vote back in 1960, where Richard Nixon won the female vote, though the gap of both gender was extraordinary small.
Logged



 
Mechaman
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13785
Jamaica


View Profile
« Reply #22 on: August 25, 2011, 10:59:54 am »
Ignore

JFK won the male vote back in 1960, where Richard Nixon won the female vote, though the gap of both gender was extraordinary small.

Wow, that's pretty shocking.
Logged



23:19   Xahar   you're literally a white dude Mechaman
Username MechaRFK
RFK
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1275
Canada


Political Matrix
E: -5.16, S: -7.30

View Profile
« Reply #23 on: August 25, 2011, 11:02:37 am »
Ignore

JFK won the male vote back in 1960, where Richard Nixon won the female vote, though the gap of both gender was extraordinary small.

Wow, that's pretty shocking.

Yeah, when I read the results of that online I stared at the screen and went WTF. Then again, the Republican were actually the female dominated party until the feminist movement of the late 60's-early 70's that switched females from Republicans to Democrats.
Logged



 
They call me PR
Progressive Realist
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 5458
United States


View Profile
« Reply #24 on: August 25, 2011, 11:05:42 am »
Ignore

Where is the "gender gap" the smallest, regionally?
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines