Can the GOP ever win the women vote?

[Ogre Mage]

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.

[Ogre Mage]

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.

What was the gender voting breakdown pre-1980?  I couldn't find a good chart.

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!

I mentioned this in my post on the 2012 Election board.  It is possible the New England WMs would vote more democratic rather than WFs voting more republican, but I thought it unlikely.  New England WMs voted only slightly more democratic than WMs in the rest of the country while WFs voting way more democratic than WFs in the rest of the country.  If we were talking about a huge gender gap in the south, I would expect the WMs to vote more democratic rather than southern WFs to vote more republican, because the WM vote was much further off from the national average.  Here is my stats from the other post:

That is a good point.  It could very well mean the males vote more democrat.  However, nationally white males voted +16 for McCain and white females voted +7 McCain.  Northeastern white male voted much closer to the national average for white males than Northeastern white females did compared to the national average for white females.  For example CT white males (WM) McCain +8, WF Obama +19.  New York WM McCain +2, WF Obama +14.  Rhode Island WM - tie, WF Obama +33.  PA WM McCain +13, WF Obama +3. Since Northeastern white females voted significantly more democratic than the national average for white females than did Northeastern white males compared to the national average, I looked at Northeastern WF as a statistical aberration. 

Those  quotes are from nclib, not me.

[Ogre Mage]

I don't think either party was really all that associated with women's rights prior to the 1970s, but from what I understand the Republican Party was a little more friendly to the cause.  Then in the 1970s there was a realignment and the feminist movement became a constituency of the Democratic Party. 

[Ogre Mage]

Any comment about the article about historical female vote?

It fits with what I have heard.  I suspect the Democratic Party picking up the mantle of the civil rights movement in the 1960s may have precipitated the women's rights movement of the 1970s bringing their banner to the Democratic Party.  The cultural conservatives who opposed racial integration and began abandoning the Democratic Party over the issue were not likely to favor expanded rights for women either.  The feminists elected to Congress in the late 60s and 70s (mostly Democrats) waged high profile battles over the ERA, Title IX, reproductive rights, employment discrimination and other issues.  Many of these efforts were successful and women across America noticed.