The GOP can and has won the women's vote. Perhaps the more interesting question would be what are the roots of the gender gap. Even when they win the women's vote, the modern GOP has done worse among women then men. Abortion rights certainly plays a role, but it would be too simplistic to say that was the main reason and leave it at that.
We could point to some historical events, such as the 1970's women's movement association with the Democratic Party and the Clarence Thomas hearings, as having played a role in the gender gap. Perhaps that 70s activism was a catalyst for the gender gap's first appearance in 1980, just as the Thomas hearings turned 1992 into the "Year of the Woman." The GOP has placed far fewer women in elected office than Democrats and I believe that also shapes perceptions of the party. I do not think most women are fooled by the GOP putting a few high profile conservative women in front of a camera -- especially those that are clearly unqualified.
Even though most women don't identify with feminism, they are still aware that some aspects of feminism do make their lives better, and most Democrats show how they realize that there are plenty of structural issues in our society that favor men.
I think the lack of a gender gap before 1980 (or a reverse one) had more to do with more women staying in their so-called "place", and being shielded from the positives of feminism. Working women have always been more liberal than working men, though of course there used to be a lot fewer of the former.
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.
Or NH or ME would have voted more like CA, IL, or MD. You can't treat New England WF's as any more of an aberration than New England WM's!
Poll
