Print This Post Print This Post

Aug

31

Palin doing poorly w/women, says Gallup, Rasmussen

Filed Under Gender, John McCain, Politics, Poll, Predictions, Sarah Palin, Vice President, Voting, WH2008, Women | 11 Comments

No surprise to me though Editor & Publisher isn’t as sure.

The most striking numbers first:

From Rasmussen: …

And by a 29/44 margin, men and women together, they do not believe that she is ready to be President. 

The more complete graphs:

The first national polls on John McCain’s pick of Sarah Palin yesterday came out today from Rasmussen and Gallup — and contrary to what the GOP probably hoped, she scored less well with women than men.

Here’s a finding from Gallup: Among Democratic women — including those who may be disappointed that Hillary Clinton did not win the Democratic nomination — 9% say Palin makes them more likely to support McCain, 15% less likely.

From Rasmussen: Some 38% of men said they were more likely to vote for McCain now, but only 32% of women. By a narrow 41% to 35% margin, men said she was not ready to be president — but women soundly rejected her, 48% to 25%.

Only 9% of Obama supporters said they might be more likely to vote for McCain.

Overall, voters expressed a favorable impression of her by a 53/26 margin, but there was a severe gender gap on this: Men embraced her at 58% to 23%, while for women it was 48/30.

And by a 29/44 margin, men and women together, they do not believe that she is ready to be President. 

And on Gallup’s numbers:

Gallup is now out with its own initial poll. It also shows women with a slightly less favorable view of Palin. An excerpt from USA Today:

There is wide uncertainty about whether she’s qualified to be president. In the poll, taken Friday, 39% say she is ready to serve as president if needed, 33% say she isn’t and 29% have no opinion.

That’s the lowest vote of confidence in a running mate since the elder George Bush chose then-Indiana senator Dan Quayle to join his ticket in 1988. In comparison, Delaware Sen. Joe Biden was seen as qualified by 57%-18% after Democrat Barack Obama chose him as a running mate last week…..

Remember, this is all from the judging a book by its cover and wanting to believe in something and someone, if you’re in the GOP, that would be McCain.

What happens to the numbers as we hear more and learn more about McCain’s running mate?

Bookmark and Share

By Jill Miller Zimon at 1:46 pm August 31st, 2008 in Gender, John McCain, Politics, Poll, Predictions, Sarah Palin, Vice President, Voting, WH2008, Women | 11 Comments 

Print This Post Print This Post

Aug

31

Sarah Palin: Settling for the face of feminism while trading in its soul

Filed Under Barack Obama, Campaigning, Culture, Debates, Gender, Hillary Clinton, Ohio, Politics, Sarah Palin, Sexism, Social Issues, Vice President, WH2008, Women | 19 Comments

American Princess writes on BlogHer and on her own blog. I’m not that familiar with it, but I spent a few moments there this morning.  I like what I found – even though I disagree with it.  If I were a conservative woman, particular in her generation (let’s just say I could be her mom – I’m finding I could be the mom of a lot of women who let me befriend them lately though!), I can imagine making very similar arguments in favor of Sarah Palin.  Hattip to Denise for linking.

In her posts about Palin, American Princess deploys the debate points I’d make if I thought even for one minute that I could support Sarah Palin as John McCain’s running mate.  But Sarah Palin and I differ on pretty much every single issue (i.e., I’m pro-choice, I believe that creationism is a fabricated construct intended to get religion into the public schools, I’m anti-gun, I’m against drilling in ANWR, and I have ideas about what vice presidents do), so this is a no-brainer for me: on the issues alone, I wouldn’t be voting for her, even if I lived in her hometown of Wasilia or her home state of Alaska, let alone as a VP candidate on the GOP ticket.

That said, the danger in accepting as acceptable all the arguments that American Princess makes in favor of Palin as a totally awesome, appropriate and best selection for the USA’s vice president, following in the footsteps of people like Dick Cheney, Al Gore, Walter Mondale and even George Bush the first, exists in what it means from here on out:

Recognizing, allowing and granting women success when they push for what women like myself have always believed was worth pushing for and using as debate points with employers, when looking for work after having children and claiming that being on the PTA and raising kids more than prepares us for leadership in pretty much any sector:

That those experiences do matter.

However, my gut and other evidence suggests that while the Palin Pick may be the face of feminism, it is a face that is completely detached from the soul, which would make and champion this argument of what, in a life experience, matters, and when.

In real life, not the life of John McCain trying to get elected, when women argue the value of the PTA to potential employers, they get “pffft.” I know. I had this happen to me late last fall. It was absolutely demoralizing, insulting and wrong – to have my literally decades of service and accomplishments – in paid and unpaid roles – consider to be nothing – absolutely nothing, because I have not been employed except as a freelancer, since 2000.

So, if I believed that having Sarah Palin on the GOP ticket would mean that from here on out, we will be giving the political party structures, and every other sector that needs leaders, hell every time they pfffft at the PTA and city council experiences mothers (or fathers for that matter) bring to the table, and we could say, “But look what John McCain said was enough!?,” and the employers would crumble and fall and say, “Ah, yes! Of course!” and women would start to succeed over the pfffts, and women like American Princess would continue to help fight this battle for all the parents who serve on PTAs and city council and have to fight to have those experiences recognized as valuable, then hey – I would love this pick too, even though, as I said, I don’t side with Palin on the issues.

Thing is, of course, that the breaking of the ceiling for women with Palin-like experience is not what this choice is about.

This choice is about helping the man, about getting John McCain elected and not about helping parents who juggle and debate and decide to swap board meetings for PTA meetings. Remember that when Palin references Hillary Clinton’s 18 million cracks, Clinton made those cracks because she was going for the top, not because she was asked to help a man get to where he wants to go.

No one but those trying to make sense of the Palin Pick have even tried to argue this angle – that now America must accept what women like myself have always known: serving on the PTA and raising a family absolutely provides you with great leadership skills and experience.

Why isn’t anyone making that argument?

In part because, serving on the PTA and raising a family does not qualify you for being vice president of the United States. In fact, the Palin Pick actually has the potential for knocking women off the ladder and not propelling them through the ceiling because every time a woman now steps forth to say, “But look! I have what she has!” and still doesn’t get the offer, or the raise or the promotion, we are back where we started.

Finally, does anyone honestly believe that the GOP – or anyone else – will now and forever come forward and offer leadership roles to women with the exact same modicum of experience as Palin, and ask them to bring it on and challenge and get support from those ahead of them when they do challenge?

For example:

Bobby Jindal, age 37, newly elected Louisiana governor – which women would the GOP support against him?

Kevin DeWine – would the Ohio GOP support any female Republican with the resume of a Sarah Palin against him?

John Boehner – the Ohio GOP going to support small-town Ohio female GOP mayors against him?

Or Chris Redfern, the Ohio Democratic Party chair – any women being supported right here right now for that job? I know many women who have as much experience as he has, certainly in comparison to the Palin Pick over the other VP potentials.

If Sarah can be selected over numerous individuals like Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee, why not other small-town mayors with the same experience as Palin over individuals like those named above, for far less sweeping roles than vice president?

Because Palin is not on the ticket as a prod to move in the direction I just described, and no one is having her tout the fact that PTA members are good enough, experienced enough and doggone it electable or employable enough to be selected for all kinds of leadership roles.

I don’t know as much about feminism as pretty much all the other women on the feminist listservs I follow, but I’d rather that Hillary tried and fell short than Sarah Palin provide nothing more than a face without a soul that gets ahead.

Bookmark and Share

By Jill Miller Zimon at 11:52 am August 31st, 2008 in Barack Obama, Campaigning, Culture, Debates, Gender, Hillary Clinton, Ohio, Politics, Sarah Palin, Sexism, Social Issues, Vice President, WH2008, Women | 19 Comments 

Print This Post Print This Post

Aug

31

Get yer female conservative dissent on Sarah Palin right here; Coulter update

Filed Under Barack Obama, Campaigning, Elections, Gender, Joe Biden, John McCain, leadership, Politics, Sarah Palin, Sexism, WH2008, Women, Writing | 11 Comments

Beliefnet.com‘s Crunchy Con, Rod Dreher (editorial columnist at the Dallas Morning News) points it out, from a female conservative writer Heather Mac Donald, no less (horrors!):

Thanks a lot, John McCain. With his selection of an unknown, two-year female governor as his running mate, he has just ensured that the diversity racket will be an essential component of presidential politics forever more. Had the 44-year-old Sarah Palin, whose greatest political accomplishment before being elected Alaska’s governor in 2006 was serving as mayor of Wasilla (population 9,780), been named Stanley, she would have had exactly zero chance of ending up in the Oval Office in the next four years. But from now on, any presidential ticket that consists solely of white males–no matter their qualifications–will likely be dead in the water. [emphasis mine]

Of course, Democrats have been playing the identity-politics game to the hilt this election cycle; it’s what they do. And it will be amusing to watch them twist themselves into knots to avoid criticizing the Palin pick for what it is: a diversity ploy. As short-term political strategy, the Palin selection has diabolical appeal. Prevented from stating the obvious–Palin was chosen because she was a woman–the Democrats will instead have to seize on her lack of experience. They are right to do so, but then they have to explain why Barack Obama is so much more qualified for the top of the ticket, let alone the number two spot.

Except she’s wrong on that part about being prevented from stating the obvious – damn straight I’m stating the obvious, and I’m not sure why Mac Donald thinks we can’t – that is part of why I’ve written that the Palin Pick is a huge miscalculation.  The Palin Pick possesses more enough gender-neutral weaknesses than Annie Lennox owns men’s suits.

[Read all of Mac Donald's column and the comments at Dreher's post - she is not a happy conservative voter. Here's more about her if you're not familiar. Given her Yale undergrad and Stanford law degrees, I'm guessing she's one of many, maybe millions of bright women who happen to hold conservative beliefs and are absolutely bulls**t over the selection of Palin.  I actually really thank her for writing what she did because talk about bucking the system, which is something that Palin supposedly has done - that is what MacDonald is doing but calling an affirmative action move due to genitalia, exactly that - by the very idealogues who decry affirmative action in general.]

There also is no need to have to argue that Barack Obama is “so much more qualified” for the top of the ticket – because there is no argument. He is.  In comparison to John McCain or Sarah Palin.  Given the dangerously low threshold that enthusiastic conservatives are willing to set for the leaders of this country, there is no basis for requiring Obama supporters to “explain” Obama’s better qualifications.

Even though he will, as will the ticket’s supporters.

I’m starting to get more excited about the 57 reasons.

Coulter Update: No word yet that I know of from Ann Coulter on how she feels about the Palin pick.  But here’s part of the transcript from when she expressed her belief that George Bush’s nomination of Harriet Miers was wrong because she lacks the competence and the experience to be a Supreme Court judge; here’s one of her columns on Miers:

What I’m critical of is — is the White House attacking conservatives, for saying we’re elitist for pointing out that Harriet Miers isn’t qualified to sit on the Supreme Court.

And by the way, I’m starting to feel sort of bad about — about saying that. And I’m annoyed with George Bush for putting us in the position of having to say that.

I mean, I’m sure she’s a very competent woman. She’s probably in the top half of lawyers in America. She’d be competent for many, many jobs out there. But this is the Supreme Court. Why is he nominating someone — forcing us to point out that she is not Supreme Court caliber?

And:

One [straw man argument being made by the Bush Administration against its detractors on the Miers' nomination] is that it’s sexism, that it’s elitist, that we don’t know how she’s going to vote, that she wasn’t a judge. That isn’t the argument we’re making. I mean, this is the strangest world I’ve entered where Republicans are arguing like liberals, coming up with these crazy straw man arguments that no one is making.

…

The argument is she’s not qualified to sit on the Supreme Court. There’s no disputing that. The hearing isn’t going to change anything. And — and the White House is just digging up a hole for itself.

Hmm. Sound familiar? Talk about not learning from history, or from George Bush’s mistakes.  Again, reflects very, very poorly on John McCain’s judgement and decision-making processes.  That’s the most dangerous issue related to the Palin pick for Americans.

Will Coulter echo Mac Donald? I hope so, I really hope so – because you know what? It would make me respect Coulter. Sincerely respect her.  And it would show what bucking the old boys really looks like – compared to what Palin claims to do.

Brief footnote:

Why do I highlight female conservative dissent? Because we know what it was like for women who chose not to vote for Hillary Clinton – they got vilified by those who did for not supporting a woman, sometimes arguing that it was just because she was a woman that she should be supported.

Now, maybe dissent within those who identify as left of center is more common, more out in the open or both. But on the right? Not so much – especially as driven by women – which is why the McCain campaign is trying to trump up Sarah Palin’s image as a maverick against her own party, because it’s so rare in the GOP.

But the other reason why I highlight this is because just yesterday a local conservative male blogger, Daniel Jack Williamson, whom I respect, wanted to change my thinking that there are no conservative husbands and fathers who would support their wife and mother of five children including a newborn with special needs being elevated to the VP nominee slot.  I believe Daniel when he suggests that he wouldn’t blink an eye if this was his family, but he is an aberration in the conservative world as far as we knew from what groups like the Family Research Council (with Ken Blackwell as a senior fellow there) and Focus on the Family trotting out the family values concept that seems to go against what Daniel is saying.

I urged Daniel to think about making sure that families like his are the ones that are highlighted – the ones where the men arrange to manage while the women seek and procure and maintain and excel in leadership roles while having young families, because I get regular communications from FRC and I have never seen them argue for or emphasize that the way Daniel says he would support his wife is something they value or cheer.  So if I’m generalizing and thinking that men like him don’t exist, it’s in part because no one is highlighting men like him – although also perhaps because on the right of center spectrum, he’s still rare.

Okay – that wasn’t so brief. What’s new.

Bookmark and Share

By Jill Miller Zimon at 9:10 am August 31st, 2008 in Barack Obama, Campaigning, Elections, Gender, Joe Biden, John McCain, leadership, Politics, Sarah Palin, Sexism, WH2008, Women, Writing | 11 Comments 

"));