CONNECT
2012 Elections
Women Unanimously Behind Obama
For this presidential election gender seems to play a big role on who people are voting for. Polls show that President Obama is beating Romney by nine points with women. However, Romney is beating Obama by nine points with men. An eighteen point differential in total makes a big difference in the election. The red and blue gender gap has widened over the years, but women and men’s presidential preferences often diverge.
Read it at Mother Jones
2 comments on "Women Unanimously Behind Obama"
October 25, 2012 10:50am
Obama, like Romney, represents more war, more draining of the people's wealth into the coffers of the powerful, fewer liberties for Americans. Women should focus only on peace & we should push forward every agenda that adds to that cause. To do that we need a steady firing platform from which to aim our intent.
This system is so designed that the power over our lives is vested in the banks, corporations and government. The banks & government control the land we need to live on. The corporations mete out the rest of the resources based on how much service we are willing to give them. Those of us that don't provide them wealth are discarded into the streets without control over even our food supply. We must beg the police & government for minimal shelter, and for food. At their whim they deliver or force us to move on to some other place where we are not wanted & our survival actions we take are made illegal. Thus, our very right to be alive in America is only a privilege granted by the powerful.
Women must join together to demand human rights to the basics of our survival and that means a natural share of land and resources for each one of us. We women must demand peace & an end of funding the military industrial complex. If women stand with one voice and say we will not serve you until you make the world decent for all of us, and we hold our ground until it is done - the world will change for the good.
Jill Stein of the Green Party will represent us - let's Roll!
October 25, 2012 10:05pm
Why do Greens make such blanket condemnations of the President? Obama ended the unnecessary - but very costly, in lives and money - war in Iraq, and he is winding down the war in Afghanistan, and he's seeking diplomatic solutions to the conflict with Iran over nukes, so why do you say Obama means "more war?" Remember that he inherited these wars from the neocons.
I've said it before, and I'll say it again: if you live in a state that will lopsidedly vote for Obama or Romney, then by all means, vote for Jill to "make a statement," but if you live in a "toss-up" state, you'd be foolish to vote for Jill, because a vote for her could just elect Romney, which reason should tell you is a much worse alternative than Obama.
There's no point, is there, in "Rolling" for Romney, though I know most Greens don't seem to grasp that fact. It's all or nothing for the Greens this year, or so it seems, but that may be like cutting off your nose to spite your face, as an old saying goes.
Recognize, too, that I have voted for Green Party candidates in the past, but never in a general election where the occupant of the White House is decided. I can't seem to get Greens to acknowledge that THERE IS such a thing as a greater and lesser evil.
To give one example, let's say you had an election in which George W. Bush was running against a resurrected Adolf Hitler, with all we know about both of them. Well, I consider George W. Bush an evil and incompetent man who did what he could to break the budget of the federal government so that that pressure would be put on us to "cut the budget" for the safety net for all Americans. I truly believe that was his intent, so I'd sure hate to vote for him. (Remember that Bush's party has hated Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid and Unemployment Insurance since the Dems first enacted them.)
But I think Hitler would be a far greater evil, so if it came to a choice between the two, I'd have to choose the Junior Bush who would get my vote.
That, of course, is an extreme example, but I cite it only to show that there ARE lesser evils who should be supported to thwart a greater evil. But too many Greens say, "I'm tired of holding my nose, I'm going to vote for Jill Stein," ignoring the fact that if they do so in a toss-up state they may only be throwing the electoral votes to Romney/Ryan.
You can't escape that reality, spin it however you wish. TOO MUCH IS AT STAKE in this election to walk around with your nose in the air, scorning those who realistically vote against a greater evil.