Posted on 04/21/2010 4:13:04 AM PDT by FreeManDC
There's little doubt that November 2, 2010 will mark a historic realignment in American politics, as Democrats are predicted to endure painful losses in both the Senate and House. What is less appreciated is the fact that men, especially white men, will lead the way.
While it's true that women represent 53% of the national electorate, it's the 47% male vote that will make the difference on Election Day. That's because historically, the female vote tends to split between the two parties, casting men as electoral tie-breakers.
That's exactly what happened in January in Massachusetts. While 52% of white women voted for ultra-liberal Martha Coakley, 60% of men pulled the lever for candidate Scott Brown, handing the Republican upstart a stunning upset victory.
This same dynamic is now playing out across the nation, according to a recent Pew Research Center report, "Distrust, Discontent, Anger, and Partisan Rancor:" http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1569/trust-in-government-distrust-discontent-anger-partisan-rancor
The national poll of 2,500 Americans found seven out of 10 say government is wasteful and inefficient. A solid majority of citizens now believe the government "unfairly benefits some groups," "doesn't do enough to help average Americans," and "is too big and powerful." And nearly half — 47% — of Americans believe the government represents a threat to personal rights and freedoms.
But it's the male-female breakdowns where the numbers jump off the page and do somersaults and head-stands.
While 35% of women believe the government is pursuing the wrong priorities, 41% of men think the government has gone off the track, representing a six-point gender gap.
A minority of women (43%) believe the federal government threatens personal rights and freedoms, whereas a majority of men (52%) express this worry.
When asked whether government programs should be cut back, 52% of men, compared to 42% of women said "yes." (I suspect many of the gents used colorful language like, "h*ll yes," but the Pew report dutifully sanitizes that information.)
Not surprisingly, male anger over perceived government excess has translated into mushrooming support for the Tea Party movement. While 44% of female respondents indicated agreement with the Tea Party goals, 56% of males expressed such support, a landslide 12-point difference.
Pundit David Paul Kuhn believes these stark differences can be traced to underlying perceptions of what he calls the Mommy-Daddy Political Divide.
Maternal Democrats emphasize health care, the environment, and helping the poor. In contrast, the paternal Republicans view government primarily as a force for law and order. Hence, GOP priorities emphasize strengthening the military, illegal immigration, and moral breakdown.
(Ironically, Sarah Palin, courageous advocate for social conservativism, admits in her Going Rogue book to embracing nanny-state policies like Title IX, which imposes rigid gender quotas on college sports.)
As Kuhn notes, "Democrats saw an absent father who made a mess of the nation. The responsible mother was to take charge and make everything all right." That perception translated into sweeping Democratic victories in 2008.
But alas, Obama over-reached. While the $878 billion economic stimulus package was sold to the American public as a jobs bill, it was transmogrified behind the scenes into a social service entitlement bill. Then Obama became a stout defender of Wall Street and big business. "The president now personified the worst stereotypes of the mommy and daddy parties," Kuhn concludes.
Liberals read the polling numbers, too. Indeed, they tremble at the prospect of a mass exodus of the white male electorate, 41% of whom voted for Barack Obama in 2008.
But when push comes to shove, Democrats are firmly tied to the ideological apron-strings of radical feminism, as revealed by their unswerving positions on abortion, affirmative action, and the so-called "gender pay-gap."
So rather than accommodating the concerns of their male base, Democrats opted to caricature men, turning "White male" into a shame-inducing epithet.
Seeking to marginalize the rejuvenated political muscle of men, the Dems then accuse the Tea Party movement as being racist and sexist. As we know by now, liberal accusations of others are often a reflection of their own prejudices and biases.
So Tea Partiers — men and women, Black and White, young and old. I have some words of counsel: Stand tall, stand proud. If the lamestream media resorts to sneering stereotypes of angry White males, take them to task for their shameful and classless demagoguery.
And for good measure, ask them to explain how their family-destructive, nanny-state policies are helping women to become strong and independent.
On January 20, 2010, a remarkable political reversal took place in the least likely of venues, in ultra-liberal Massachusetts. Come November 2, history is destined to repeat itself.
So, in other words, the majority of women are, apparently, complete idiots.
Men have endured years of being the scapegoats. I think many of us have finally had enough, and are saying "OK, time to end this foolishness."
It's about time we stand up and say "You know, no ethnicity or gender is labelled bad just for being other than 'white male'--that ends now, or you don't get my business/viewership/whatever."
I’m not so sure this is cause for celebration.
It indicates that women (especially single women) continue to be much more willing to be dupes of these sugar daddy Marxists.
Whoops, now I'm a hater...oh well...she apparently has no problem engaging in sexism, on top of her support for McCain. Can't say that, tho'...
Ann Coulter has said for a long time that this country would be in better shape if women didn’t have the right to vote. Thirty years ago I would have erupted in outrage at such a statement. Now I agree with it...modified. Only FReepergals should be allowed to vote, heh.
There are FAR too many women who expect gov’t to do for them those things that males (fathers, husbands, etc) used to be responsible for doing. This is only one of the destructive legacies of the feminist bunch.
The other is this: the “wimpification” (some of you will change the terminology, I know. LOL) of the male species in the U.S. These crazy broads are trying to turn men into the new “chicks!” ugh...
I find the male conservative surge heartening.
Just a few weeks ago the msm was declaring the Tea Parties populated with mostly women.
They keep trying new fairy tales to diminish our commitment to freedom.
Title IX a nanny state idea?
Okay then.
Single women have always been liberal tarts that want a big daddy to take care of them because their real daddy’s do the same thing for them... they expect it and demand it... not all mind you... but a majority. They become Conservative as they age and become wise.
LLS
I’m a fan of Palin, but I disagree with her on this.
While I don’t mind equal opportunities for females via Title IX, they should be presented along side of, but not instead of current programs that serve males. The idea that we were carving up popular male programs to implement female programs (that in many cases, weren’t as popular) just seems foolish to me.
Or as Palin herself might put it, I’m in favor of “common-sense treatment of college programs.”
:)
I keep telling people that Palin is not a pure conservative though I don’t think she would ever be as big a spender as Bush or Obama. She would attempt to triangulate between Pro business policies, fiscal responsibility, as well as maintaining some profamily, pro feminist spending and support. She certainly isn’t proabortion.
Don’t get me wrong, I prefer her over anyone else on the horizon, but I have strong reservations, and she’s not above criticism without that being considered “hate”.
I think it has everything to do with a what I believe is a woman’s natural tendency to want to be supported. Track the country’s move toward socialism since the passing of the 19th Amendment. I was interviewed by the local paper at our Tea Party last week and the reporter was asking “devil’s advocate” questions with regard to Constitution. When the subject of Women’s Suffrage came up I thought I better not say what I really think about this issue...;-)
More or less correct from my point of view (at least with regards to the effects of ‘feminism’.
Also of interest is how all these feminists get older, get past the ‘LUG” stage, then wonder where all the good men went and why many of them seem to be searching abroad for mates. They seem puzzled as to why all the good men they see are either gay or taken.
I’ll tell you where all the good men went - the smart ones take one look at said feminists (and the rest of the garbage that the supermajority of American women get programmed with these days) and head for the hills - or an international dating service. Men have no desire to be married to/have a relationship with Miss Pretty Pretty Princess who never puts one iota into the relationship except for just being there. Or worse, being married or in a relationship with Queen Ice Bitch, who demands you do everything as if you were a slave to her ‘superior’ feminine status.
Finally, ‘feminism’ has encouraged promiscuity among women, something that biologically is a really bad idea. Men, however, being smart, take advantage of this. After all, why buy the cow (i.e., get married) when they give away the milk for cheap (the cost of dinner and a few dates)?
Indeed.
Hence the reason most of my friends are men. I have two female friends and they would agree with most of what is on this thread. I don’t have a lot of patience with clueless people. Other than my two lifelong girlfriends the only females I run across with an ounce of sense are on FreeRepublic.
If this nation was invaded and our gov’t toppled, it would be EXPECTED that men step up and fight to regain our freedom.
So, when men stand up against socialism within our ranks, it is no different. We want our freedom back.
The march to socialism began in earnest with the passage of the 16th, 17th and 19th amendments. I blame the passage of these amendments on the massive immigration of millions of proto-Marxists from Eastern Europe into America between 1890 and 1920.
It is especially amusing to see the reaction of Miss Pretty Pretty Princess or Queen Ice B*tch when she realizes that the fairy tale she was sold was just that, a fairy tale and that she’s driven off most all prospective alpha male mates.
Usually they realize this at about age 45, when the bio-clock is ticking out and they suddenly notice the minority of their peers (like, apparently, you and some of the other women in this thread) have a happy home life with a man and perhaps even children, despite the feminists’ warnings about how such things were slavery and drudgery, suitable only as a torture. They see your happiness and notice the cold emptiness of their lives, then attempt to ‘catch up’.
Their antics and desperation are quite comical to watch, from a man’s point of view. By that point, these women have generally locked themselves into that lie they bought from the feminists and no good man will touch them with a 100 meter pole in terms of a long term relationship. We instinctively know that such a woman is to be avoided as she would be nothing but trouble.
The only good news is that most of these idiots aren’t breeding, so give it another generation or so and a lot of this stupidity may begin to come to an end.
While I understand the notion of “free milk”, promiscuous males aren’t helping the situation by rewarding “feminists” with free dates on condition that “the milk is served freely”. If quality males want better quality females with which to marry and have relationships with, perhaps they should refrain from dating girls that just throw themselves out there. Once females start learning guys aren’t going to take their crap anymore, over time the behaviors will change.
What I see as a female is the demand for things to get back to being “balanced”.
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.