Posted on 04/05/2016 10:41:13 PM PDT by AmericanInTokyo
Completely false.
Republican candidates suffer an ETHNIC gender gap.
White women supported Mitt Romney 56-42.
Young white women (age 18-29) supported Romney 49-48.
Black women supported Obama 96-3.
Latino women supported Obama 76-23.
I call horsesh**
All the writers at the Post and beyond can continue to paint any meme they want, and cruzettes eat it up.
How’s this one AIT, Teddy is the TOOL, for the powers that be...not a damn thing will change with Ted the TOOL
So silly, and you guys know it.
If in fact Trump was “doomed” the drive-by media would be doing everything they could to help him get nominated. Instead they help St. Ted.
That tells you all you need to know about who they fear.
St. Ted is the one being cute and clever, maneuvering for a brokered convention to get Paul Ryan in. He should be ashamed.
Now for a little unbiased truth:
McLaughlin Associates
Hillary’s Woman Problem: Most Women Don’t Like Her
By John McLaughlin & Jim McLaughlin - April 4, 2016
Steven Shepard of Politico wrote an important article last week about Donald Trump’s “rock bottom” ratings with women. And his low standing with women has certainly become a much-discussed topic among pundits analyzing the Donald Trump candidacy.
An overlooked story, however, is that Hillary Clinton, who might become the first female president in the history of the United States, isn’t far behind in her unfavorability ratings among women. Our just-released poll shows that Donald Trump has a 68 percent unfavorable rating among women. But 58 percent of women say they view Hillary Clinton unfavorably. In fact, Hillary’s unfavorable rating was two points higher among women than it was among men.
Secretary Clinton (whom the FBI will apparently soon interview, in connection with her national-security e-mail scandal) and her allies in the media are relentlessly hammering Donald Trump to raise his unfavorable rating among women. They want to make sure that Trump’s negatives among women are higher than her negatives are among women. In this way, gender rather than issues or character would become the defining factor for women’s votes.
But Hillary Clinton’s negatives among women voters are broad and deep. Our poll results, which mirror those of many other recent media polls, show that Hillary Clinton’s unfavorable ratings outweigh here favorability ratings in these areas:
In every region: In the East, 39 percent view her favorably; 53 percent view her unfavorably; in the Midwest, her ratings are 36 percent favorable to 62 percent unfavorable; in the South, 36 percent favorable to 60 percent unfavorable; in the West, 38 percent favorable to 54 percent unfavorable.
Among women on the right and in the center: Her ratings among Republican women are 9 percent favorable to 90 percent unfavorable; among independent women, they are 24 percent favorable to 65 percent unfavorable; among conservative women, 10 percent favorable to 88 percent unfavorable; among moderate women, 42 percent favorable to 50 percent unfavorable.
Among white and Hispanic women: Among white women, her ratings are 30 percent favorable to 65 percent unfavorable; among Hispanic women, they are 41 percent favorable to 56 percent unfavorable.
Among women of all ages: Women younger than 55 have a 37 percent favorable to 58 percent unfavorable view of Clinton; women older than 55 have a 37 percent favorable to 60 percent unfavorable view.
Among women of all incomes: Her ratings among under-$60K-per-year households are 39 percent favorable to 56 percent unfavorable; among over-$60K-per-year households, they are 34 percent favorable to 61 percent unfavorable; among working women, they are 39 percent favorable to 59 percent unfavorable; among self-employed women, they are 28 percent favorable to 69 percent unfavorable; among retired women, 36 percent favorable to 51 percent unfavorable; among unemployed women, 42 percent favorable to 46 percent unfavorable.
By religion: Protestant Women have a 33 percent favorable to 63 percent unfavorable view of Clinton; among Evangelical women, it’s 31 percent favorable to 66 percent unfavorable; among non-Evangelical women, it’s 40 percent favorable to 54 percent unfavorable; among Catholic women, it’s 35 percent favorable to 59 percent unfavorable.
There are, in fact, very few segments of the female electorate who have an overall favorable view of Clinton, and she still has significant negatives in her narrow base: Jewish women hold a 54 percent favorable to 46 percent unfavorable view; among liberal women, it’s 68 percent favorable to 30 percent unfavorable; among Democratic women, it’s 71 percent favorable to 26 percent unfavorable; among African-American women, it’s 86 percent favorable to 10 percent unfavorable.
Sixty-two percent of the remaining undecided voters, in a head-to-head contest between Clinton and Trump, are women. The opinion of Hillary among these undecided women is overwhelmingly negative: 6 percent favorable to 82 percent unfavorable.
Among all voters, three in ten, 30 percent, are unfavorable to both Clinton and Trump.
Among these who are unfavorable to both, 60 percent are women. They’d vote for Trump 39 percent to 33 percent.
So both the leading candidates have very high unfavorable ratings among women. This portends an ugly battle to come. But winning ugly is still winning. That’s Hillary Clinton’s ironic strategy.
.... spewing insults and sexist remarks ....
Sticks and stones. At least Mr. Trump didn’t put national security at risk with a home brew server.
I for one, cannot imagine a conservative female supporting Hillary Clinton.
Nor can I imagine any sane republican/conservative of the past supporting Hillary Clinton.
If Trump is the nominee, I will support Trump.
If Cruz is the nominee, I will support Cruz.
If power takes the nomination from one of these two, then I’ll support any legitimate 3rd party effort that is actually attempting to win electoral college electors. Otherwise, I’ll support whatever piece of meat the rinos run as a clone of Clinton, whose corruption is certainly worse than anyone the rinos can dream up.
Beg to differ. The 14th by far and away is used to redefine the entire structure of society. The equal protection clause of the first section is so vaguely written that it means anything to anybody. It has absolutely no specific definition of purpose. NONE!
And if one looks further about the passing of the 14 amendment,,, it wasn’t. Passed that is. It was declared as passed by some bank of judges. I use to know the specifics once but forgot. It was declared as passed. Period. It is a national disaster.
And if the States do convene a constitutional convention this amendment needs to be addressed.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
