We need the women to catch Ron Paul fever!!!

[mstrmac1]

I know Mr Paul is doing better in the polls but he seems to be lagging w/ the women vote (Nevada). I think this is where we can honestly turn this around. Any comments on a better way to capture this vote??

[Austin]

I think a good way to convert older women is his stance on health care, especially when it comes to vitamins and the like. It is one of the things that sold my mom on him.

[Pauliana]

A few women in Nevada might like his Tax Free Tips Bill... ;)

[ckhagen]

Yeah, go for pushing his stance on vitamins/herbs/homeopathy (freedom to choose), homeschooling, midwifery licensure (I posted about this in the Issues forum), and the draft!

[Micahyah]

Maybe the campaign can play up his family status (married for 50 years). Maybe the obstetrician angle could help his image among women too?

[DXDoug]

Yeah women might not be our speciality, but it can be with ron on our side :)

Krippy came up with a good one though talking about what issues matter to them .
But for appealing to the masses of women im not sure how we could do that.

[Austin]

Yes, the Tax Free Tips is a great idea to talk about. Hopefully sooner than later, the store will make that Slim Jim available. When they do, buy a ton of them and every time you go out to eat, give one to your waiter/waitress. It will almost guarantee their vote.

[ladyliberty]

This what I sent out to all of my friends (40+ yr young!) - I plagarized a couple of blogs at times, I am not that eloquent, I hope yall dont mind...feel free to use if you want too:

Hi everyone,

I wanted you to know that I support Ron Paul for President, and I want you to know why I support him. As a Med-Waiver provider for the past 4 years I have learned much about the way the Medicaid System and Social Security and SSI works to provide Services and Supports to Individuals with Disabilities and their families. There is a lot of misinformation being spread about Dr. Paul and his platform. I am writing to address one of the beliefs that is being misrepresented by the press.

Dr. Ron Paul doesn't advocate "gutting Social Security and Medicare," as some people have maintained. Rather, he truthfully asserts that these programs are going broke and that the only way to finance our current obligations to those dependent on them is to massively reduce our military empire throughout the world. He would use those funds to fully fund Social Security and Medicaid for those who will need it, while at the same time offering young people a way out of this despicable Ponzi Scheme that promises them money and security that simply won't be there for them.

And while he wants most things left to the privet sector, he wants to take back control of our monetary policy from the illegal cartel of private banks that run it today and end other forms of corporate welfare that are bleeding the middle class of this country dry. With sound money once again controlled by congress, the inflation tax will end, and the need for many of the social programs that Paul wants to cut will be mitigated by growing prosperity and the genuine human charity made possible by a wealthy society.

You don’t have to take my word for it, you can read Dr. Paul’s stance on Medicaid/Medicare/Social Security and SSI issues for yourself:

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul291.html

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul339.html

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul215.html

Hear from Dr. Paul in his own words http://youtube.com/watch?v=v6ZwHhl_gbY

Another good blog article about Dr. Paul

http://www.graphictruth.com/2007/10/ron-paul-rings-true-on-issues.html

I urge you to take some time and learn more about this remarkable man by visiting his website at http://www.ronpaul2008.com . I believe he is the only candidate running who appears to know anything at all about the way Social Security and Medicaid are funded, how they are being robbed by other government expenditures, and he knows how to save Social Security and Medicaid so that those who need it the most will continue to receive it. I believe the current budget deficit crisis that we face in Florida today is a direct result of rampant government spending. I am angry that our present government is even considering expanding Medicaid to include illegal aliens, when we do not have enough money to provide services to Individuals with Disabilities who are in this country legally and need those supports in order to continue living with their families in their own homes and not in an institution. This is but one of many reasons why I choose to vote for Dr. Ron Paul in the GOP Primaries on January 29th and why I will support him all the way to the presidency in November 2008!

Sincerely,

[mstrmac1]

Good Idea.. but I mean what action(s) can we take to capture more interest? I know my wife thought I was crazy until she helped me hand write 25 letters to undecided voters in Iowa. Once she did some diggin she was taken back and now shows support.

[Hope]

Good Idea.. but I mean what action(s) can we take to capture more interest? I know my wife thought I was crazy until she helped me hand write 25 letters to undecided voters in Iowa. Once she did some diggin she was taken back and now shows support.

Going door to door is the only way to effectively reach people in your community.

[DXDoug]

I think we need more women input on this one to get it right :D

[ckhagen]

I'm a woman ;)

[Brennon]

I converted a young lady I'm seeing with his stance on foreign policy. Ironically enough, she's Jewish and loves the fact that he wants to end the entangling alliance with Israel.

[Proemio]

I know Mr Paul is doing better in the polls but he seems to be lagging w/ the women vote (Nevada). I think this is where we can honestly turn this around. Any comments on a better way to capture this vote??

Good recommendations above.

I minor stylistic thing: I started to refer to Ron Paul as Ron Paul, MD instead of Dr. Paul.
Dr. Paul does not paint a complete enough picture. Rice, Kissinger and 3 quarters of Washington have their Drs as well, just not the useful kind, and most people know it. Medical Doctors, however, have generally a high appreciation/credibility rating - with women in particular. Might help on the margins.

[Margo37]

A few women in Nevada might like his Tax Free Tips Bill...
Thanks for the good ideas above, I'll see where I can post his bill free around the Las Vegas area. There was a printout with this on a guest check to leave with a tip but don't know where I found it, maybe in Member Spotlight or Resource/Work area.
Lady Liberty, definitately would like to use most of yours also but in a different way.

[ValidusCustodiae]

Don't forget, Ron Paul would work to legalize prostitution and gambling nationwide. All voluntary associations are protected by the Constitution. You have an unlimited right to contract.

[Brennon]

Don't forget, Ron Paul would work to legalize prostitution and gambling nationwide. All voluntary associations are protected by the Constitution. You have an unlimited right to contract.

So are you advocating we start gunning for the vote of prostitutes? :D

I dunno how much that'll sway soccer moms.

[Thunderbolt]

Yes, the Tax Free Tips is a great idea to talk about. Hopefully sooner than later, the store will make that Slim Jim available. When they do, buy a ton of them and every time you go out to eat, give one to your waiter/waitress. It will almost guarantee their vote.


I actually like using the tax free tips flier better. If you give one person a slim jim that goes to one person. A flier can be posted in the break room and dozens of people can see it.

Here it is again for you; http://files.meetup.com/564287/TaxFreeTipsAct.pdf

And if people would get off their butts and get busy and have a night out on the town where they hit every restaurant, casino and bar they can find, this would be really effective. Especially in Nevada. But for some reason the Nevada meetup groups don't want to do it. Except for one in Parhump.

You could capture nearly every woman in Nevada with these things just by handing them to every dealer, cocktail waitress, valet driver, etc. you find in a casino. Those of you going to Las Vegas in a few days to see him, take a several hundred of these. A few thousand slim jims - the regular ones without Reagan on them, and go hit the town! Send groups of two into each casino and hit each category of tip taker. (They all have different break rooms.)

Tell them all about this. You should be handing out about 10-15 fliers plus 100 slim jims per casino. That's around 6.50 per casino per two people. Can you each spare three dollars and twenty five cents to go do this?


We don't have time to order the slim jims but I am sure that amongst all of us going to the event in Vegas there will be plenty of them around. And go to a kinkos and print up 500 copies or so. That will cover 50 or more casinos.

You want women? Want to show a huge jump in the Zogby poll? Tax free tips flier bomb Vegas!

Someone bring a list of all the casinos. groups of two or even one pick as many as you need to cover the town. If 50 of you will do it, you can blanket the town in an hour. Are you willing?

[Edward]

This what I sent out to all of my friends (40+ yr young!) - I plagarized a couple of blogs at times, I am not that eloquent, I hope yall dont mind...feel free to use if you want too: Reading this, my impression is that women voters are more likely to be persuaded to vote for Ron Paul by other women voters. We need the women supporters to tell all their women friends that it's OK not to vote for Hillary Clinton.

[mstrmac1]

Has anyone heard or seen his wife speak? I think that would help. How about getting him on Oprah or Suzy Orman. (just brain storming)

[Nefertiti]

Don't forget, Ron Paul would work to legalize prostitution and gambling nationwide. All voluntary associations are protected by the Constitution. You have an unlimited right to contract.

Well, I'm not sure that would actually be good for the women who work in those businesses in Nevada, because it would mean they would have more competition.

[Skeeterbug73]

I think the one of the biggest problems is going to be single mom's who don't have health insurance through their jobs and might be scared that their child's Medicaid will be taken away. I suppose you would have to try and convince them that it wouldn't happen immediately and that it would gradually be phased out. Yet you don't want to scare them away or overwhelm them. Any ideas?

[Nefertiti]

What would attract more female supporters to Ron Paul is more gentlemen supporters.

[ConstitutionGal]

I've had VERY good luck converting other 30- and 40- something women to Dr. Paul on his end the war stance - I simply ask them if they're willing to see their children sacrificed to 'bring democracy' to Iraq. When they start that line about having to 'fight them over there so we won't have to fight them over here', I politely inquire as to why, if we're in so much danger 'over here', we're not securing our borders from illegal invaders. Some has walked away angry only to return in a few days and tell me they are now supporting Dr. Paul and a couple have already donated!!

Another issue that's garning support around here is health care freedom. Just point out the fact that Dr. Paul is an actual medical doctor and that he still supports alternative care options because he hasn't been bought and paid for by big-pharma!! This has been a MAJOR 'selling' point here as a lot of women are getting more informed about the dangers of childhood vaccinations and the side effects of many prescription drugs.

Sometimes, it takes more than a two minute conversation to win folks over but, it's more than worth the time and trouble to begin educating the masses when all is said and done. You just have to find the issue that will get your foot in the door and then go from there.

[ckhagen]

What would attract more female supporters to Ron Paul is more gentlemen supporters.

Keyword: gentleman. 'nuff said.

[Thrice]

I can't think of one woman I know, myself included, who would be sold by the fact that Ron Paul is an OBGYN. Would you get excited at the prospect of voting for someone who, say, has given prostate exams? What needs to be pushed is the number of babies he delivered for free. That is, emphasize the charity aspect.

As a sidenote, I guarantee you if you could get this man on Oprah by focusing on the private charity/active in the community angle, you'd reach a broad swath of the female vote. This usually works on an individual basis as well. I know a lot of pro-life women who are also against the War in Iraq. In cases like that, I emphasize his consistency in valuing lives.

With health care, I point out the success and momentum of breast cancer awareness and funding as a result of private action and fund raisers. I realize there is a bigger picture, but it's what usually gets this particular audience to listen to what I have to say at all.

I wouldn't emphasize the whole prostitution thing as a way to convince women voters...

[ConstitutionGal]

I can't think of one woman I know, myself included, who would be sold by the fact that Ron Paul is an OBGYN.

I'm not so sure abuot that. Most women TRUST their OBGYNs and trust can play a MAJOR factor in politics.

[mstrmac1]

I can't think of one woman I know, myself included, who would be sold by the fact that Ron Paul is an OBGYN. Would you get excited at the prospect of voting for someone who, say, has given prostate exams? What needs to be pushed is the number of babies he delivered for free. That is, emphasize the charity aspect.



Point well taken.

[Thrice]

I'm not so sure abuot that. Most women TRUST their OBGYNs and trust can play a MAJOR factor in politics.
Most people trust their doctors, period (most.) If you emphasize Ron Paul's specialty as opposed to what he's actually done with it, the point is missed.

[literatim]

Don't forget, Ron Paul would work to legalize prostitution and gambling nationwide. All voluntary associations are protected by the Constitution. You have an unlimited right to contract.

Um, no he wouldn't. There is no federal law against prostitution and nothing would change in this regard. States that ban gambling and prostitution would still keep them banned.

[kill the banks]

he is the only one who will end war ~ flip flopping hillary can not be trusted ... ron paul can be trusted ... no more risk of son's being drafted too ... most women want war to end

kill the banks

[katlizard]

I am a 26 year old woman who has always voted democrat until now. I can't say there are different issues that woman need to hear vs what men need to hear. I think the places and ways they hear the message of Dr.RP is the key to gaining woman voters. Think of the places that woman go more, like to the grocery store, the mall, the starbucks, the park/playground, the bank, the schools (schools are usually over 90% females who almost all VOTE).
I also think a lot of woman are intimidated about politics and feel like they don't know enough about to take a strong stance, so the presentation of the information is important in building thier confidence on the issues so that they will make a bold voting choice like Dr. Paul. I think a lot of women (that I know) tend to vote with their husband's choice because of the lack of poltical confidence.
I think that if you make women feel pretty solid on understanding 2-3 important issues like the foreign policy and monetary policy, you have them sold. Plus, woman can spread the word like nobody's business, because we talk about everything we care about with all our friends/family daily.
Hope that helped.
Peace
-K
"Ron Paul said things that think right in my head bone." ~Stephen Colbert

PS; Oh yeah, and women really trust their Ob/GYN doctors, so play that up too!!!

[derdy]

Some else suggested he deliver a baby at a rally. Maybe he could devliver a baby on a campaign ad to get women voters?:p

[mstrmac1]

lmao!

[katlizard]

Ron Paul DELIVERS freedom!

Call the baby Liberty (Libby for short) :)

[framecut]

I know Mr Paul is doing better in the polls but he seems to be lagging w/ the women vote (Nevada). I think this is where we can honestly turn this around. Any comments on a better way to capture this vote??

Women by default prefer big government. It's just in their DNA.

Sorry.

Maybe this is something Carol Paul can help out on...but I've yet to see her speak publicly on behalf of Dr. Paul at any events.

[katlizard]

If it is a boy, Jefferson.

[Thrice]

There's a government gene now?

[karen81]

I've got the fever...

and the only prescription is more cowbell!

...and Ron Paul as President elect come November:D

[SlapItHigh]

How about an ad in Mothering Magazine - http://www.mothering.com/

It has a high circulation rate and the type of people that read it are often the networking activist type and are big into health freedom, birth freedom, vax freecom, etc. Getting more of these women on board would automatically set a wave off for a large amount of support.

~Erin

[Skeeterbug73]

Women by default prefer big government. It's just in their DNA.

Sorry.

Maybe this is something Carol Paul can help out on...but I've yet to see her speak publicly on behalf of Dr. Paul at any events.

Please don't generalize women. There are plenty of men who like big government too. A lot of men and women still don't even know who Ron Paul is. My parents and husband didn't know who he was until I told them.

[SlapItHigh]

Moms for Ron Paul - http://www.cafemom.com/group/3994/

and

Libertarian Moms - http://www.cafemom.com/group/3523/

Two groups with women who already support Ron Paul - they may have some insight on other ideas.

[derdy]

I've got the fever...

and the only prescription is more cowbell!

...and Ron Paul as President elect come November:D

woo hooo finally we're getting women!!

[Man from La Mancha]

I can't think of one woman I know, myself included, who would be sold by the fact that Ron Paul is an OBGYN. Would you get excited at the prospect of voting for someone who, say, has given prostate exams? What needs to be pushed is the number of babies he delivered for free. That is, emphasize the charity aspect....

.....I was out on the street corner yesterday waving signs and talking to people and two different reluctant woman seemed to melt when I told them Ron delivered 4000 babies and was a grandfather that was married to the same woman for 50yr..
.....I think it would be great if Mrs. Paul goes on the women talk shows by herself.


http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/9435/blackwsmallyh7.gif (teaparty07.com)..http://img211.imageshack.us/img211/8947/brighton7gs5.gif (teaparty07.com)

[Valene]

I was in the feminist movement way back when. After reading this about Gloria Steinem and her connection to the CIA and the and how the corporations funded her to destabilize the family, I really became enraged. It's become very commonplace to say, Ron Paul is our only hope, but I believe that with my whole heart and soul. There might be something you might gain from this site to convince an older women to consider Dr. Paul.

http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Evils%20in%20America/Feminism/gloria_steinem-feminism.htm

[framecut]

Please don't generalize women. There are plenty of men who like big government too. A lot of men and women still don't even know who Ron Paul is. My parents and husband didn't know who he was until I told them.

I basically am correct. Sure, there are women who do support Ron Paul, but that's a minority in this case.

Women by nature prefer to be nurtured and coddled. That's why Starbucks is such of a big hit.

Ron Paul is for getting rid of government pampering you, and women have a difficult time accepting this as a 'good thing'

[SlapItHigh]

I can't think of one woman I know, myself included, who would be sold by the fact that Ron Paul is an OBGYN. Would you get excited at the prospect of voting for someone who, say, has given prostate exams?

Good point. I fully agree.

[SlapItHigh]

Ron Paul is for getting rid of government pampering you, and women have a difficult time accepting this as a 'good thing'

Simply your uneducated opinion on the matter. You are incorrect.

[SlapItHigh]

Carol Paul really seems like an amazing woman. I emailed her many months ago, thanking her for everything she has done to support and encourage RP through his candidacy. She wrote me back right away and her words were very touching. I had expressed how important freedom and liberty are to me as a mother because I am concerned about my children's future and she expressed that she knew exactly what I meant as a mother and a grandmother herself. I really felt a connection and an understanding from her.

My brother met her at the Philly Rally and he had wonderful things to say about Carol Paul as well. I noticed another person posted a huge rave about her in the general forum shortly after meeting her at the rally also. I think she could be a big asset to helping other women understand how important the message of freedom and liberty is to our children.

[framecut]

Simply your uneducated opinion on the matter. You are incorrect.

Summary: If you read the article, you'll see that women need big government until they get married, and then they rely on their husbands to become the 'government'

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/polls/2004-08-25-female-vote_x.htm

All women (From a gallup poll, 2004 election)
Bush: 45%
Kerry: 50%
Democratic advantage: +5% points

Married women
Bush: 54%
Kerry: 41%
Democratic advantage: -13

Unmarried women
Bush: 35%
Kerry: 60%
Democratic advantage: +25

Marriage gap:
Democratic advantage: +38

[maiki]

I basically am correct. Sure, there are women who do support Ron Paul, but that's a minority in this case.

Women by nature prefer to be nurtured and coddled. That's why Starbucks is such of a big hit.

Ron Paul is for getting rid of government pampering you, and women have a difficult time accepting this as a 'good thing'

Ummm men go to starbucks all the time, you know? I don't understand that sentence.

I still think it is fundamentally a information transmission problem. Less women are in the workforce, for example, so it is less likely they will hear it from co-workers. More women are registered Democrats. More women are against the war, and might not even *look* at the republican candidates. Less women go to gambling, drug legislation, economy sites that have advertised RP. Women might be watching more television than men. I don't know. There are hundreds of reasons why less women have heard about RP than men: it is a gross generalization to say that women like being coddled more than men, with no basis on reality. Start spitting out some evidence for your claims, if you want to make them. By simply *assuming* them, you are likely to turn off those potential women voters instead of converting them.

[SlapItHigh]

Summary: If you read the article, you'll see that women need big government until they get married, and then they rely on their husbands to become the 'government'


You are making that leap but that is not an accurate assumption. Correlation does not imply causation. There are many other possible explanations why women are more likely to vote differently when married.

[Dorfsmith]

Personally, I like to look at people as individuals when it comes to how they think. I know more men than women who drive through Starbucks every morning on their way to work. I don't think it's a good idea to generalize. But anyway, I know just as many women who support Ron Paul as I do men. My wife, my mom, both my sisters, my mother-in-law, my meetup leader etc. etc. When talking to people day to day I find women to be just as receptive as men when it comes to Ron paul's message.

[Mark Rushmore]

The idea that everyone (or, in truth, anyone) voting for Bush in 2004 was voting for "limited government" or felt empowered enough to "not need big government" is silly. At least use the 2000 results if you want to try and make this sort of argument.

[framecut]

You are making that leap but that is not an accurate assumption. Correlation does not imply causation. There are many other possible explanations why women are more likely to vote differently when married.

That's my theory. When they are unmarried, they want government to protect them.

When they get married, they realize how government actually is more of a burden on their family and their husbands. Hence they want less government.

Big cities primarily have more single women than married women. Suburbs are the opposite.

It really is about 'control' I suppose. People who want big government, in their mind believe they can use this system to control others through laws.

It's all kinda gross.

[ckhagen]

I disagree that the marriage change brings that much more security...
I think it's partly due to women who marry and become mothers ending up leaning more to a pro-life stance. Once one has carried and birthed a baby, at least a few will become much more likely to err on the side of the baby.

Slapithigh...
I'm a pretty long-time MDC poster (a few years). I don't know if you're active in the forums, but... we're getting eaten alive by the socialists in the politics forum there. It's amazing to me but out of one side of their mouths comes "freedom"... to birth, for healthcare, for gay rights, and anti-war views, but then out the other side comes socialistic views on healthcare and support for affirmative action and such. I just don't know how anyone can think that they can get both on the same plate :(
And then there's the deal with them being convinced that RP is a racist lunatic...

So while, yes, garnering supporters from could be successful in one right, there's a completely polarized side that's ready to smear the hell out of him.

[SlapItHigh]

That's my theory. When they are unmarried, they want government to protect them.

When they get married, they realize how government actually is more of a burden on their family and their husbands. Hence they want less government.

Big cities primarily have more single women than married women. Suburbs are the opposite.

It really is about 'control' I suppose. People who want big government, in their mind believe they can use this system to control others through laws.

It's all kinda gross.

Yes, that is gross. Good thing it isn't accurate!

[framecut]

I disagree that the marriage change brings that much more security...
I think it's partly due to women who marry and become mothers ending up leaning more to a pro-life stance. Once one has carried and birthed a baby, at least a few will become much more likely to err on the side of the baby.

I'd have to disagree

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/polls/2004-08-25-female-vote_x.htm

Most unmarried women — 54% — have annual household incomes below $30,000, according to the Census; that's twice the percentage of married women with incomes that low. Most married women — 51% — have household incomes of $50,000 and above; that's double the number of single women with income that high.

That makes single women more anxious than their married friends about bread-and-butter issues, less confident of having health coverage and more likely to take an expansive view of what the government can and should do to maintain safety-net programs.

[SlapItHigh]

Slapithigh...
I'm a pretty long-time MDC poster (a few years). I don't know if you're active in the forums, but... we're getting eaten alive by the socialists in the politics forum there. It's amazing to me but out of one side of their mouths comes "freedom"... to birth, for healthcare, for gay rights, and anti-war views, but then out the other side comes socialistic views on healthcare and support for affirmative action and such. I just don't know how anyone can think that they can get both on the same plate
And then there's the deal with them being convinced that RP is a racist lunatic...

So while, yes, garnering supporters from could be successful in one right, there's a completely polarized side that's ready to smear the hell out of him.

Yeah, I've been posting on MDC for 2 years and lurking even longer before that. I usually stuck to the birthing and beyond, homebirth, etc forums but then I started posting in the politics forum and there are some hardcore socialists there who have a serious agenda against Ron Paul and they are not interested in truth. at. all. I spent hours providing evidence to their false claims and as soon as I did they would call for the thread to be deleted. They'd say they didn't care that it wasn't true, they were going to keep spreading the smear anyhow. I just decided that my time was much better spent reaching out to those who are actually open minded. I hate that a lot of people are influenced by those narrow minded few but there isn't much I can do about it. I mean, I guess i could if I spent many hours a day posting but I just don't have that kind of time.

Anywho, I personally believe that the libertarian message and the AP message go had in hand. Socialism is direct contradiction to attachment parenting. Also, the democratic candidates are continuing to limit health freedom, birth freedom, vax freedom which is also a big contradiction. This is why I think it would be a good idea to put an ad in Mothering. A lot of people read the mag who don't have time to sit around on the politics forum there. They can read the facts for themselves in the ad and hopefully continue to research him on their own.

A lot of crunch mamas support Ron Paul. My libertarian moms group is full of ap mamas. Even my local Ron Paul meetup has lots of crunchy mamas. A few of my local crunchy mama AP friends have finally decided to support Ron Paul despite being long time hardcore dems. The message is compatible. With the magazine ad, we don't have to worry as much about smear. I have no idea if they would allow political ads though.

~Erin

[ckhagen]

I'd have to disagree

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/polls/2004-08-25-female-vote_x.htm

Most unmarried women — 54% — have annual household incomes below $30,000, according to the Census; that's twice the percentage of married women with incomes that low. Most married women — 51% — have household incomes of $50,000 and above; that's double the number of single women with income that high.

That makes single women more anxious than their married friends about bread-and-butter issues, less confident of having health coverage and more likely to take an expansive view of what the government can and should do to maintain safety-net programs.

Um, wouldn't it make sense that they have double income because there's double the number people living in the household?

IME, married women with children are more likely to vote REP than their childless counterparts. Yet, we're talking about a lot of SAHMs who're living off of ONE income with even more than two people to feed. So if anybody would want socialist programs it would be the SAHMs, but I find that to be the opposite. They're willing to scrimp and save and count their pennies, yet still vote for whoever best represents their "family values".

I'm not saying you're totally wrong. But I don't think that's the ONLY factor.

[SlapItHigh]

That makes single women more anxious than their married friends about bread-and-butter issues, less confident of having health coverage and more likely to take an expansive view of what the government can and should do to maintain safety-net programs.

1. It isn't safe to say that a lower income makes someone more likely to want government safety net programs. Would it make it more likely for you to change your idea about the role of government?

2. Even if it were true that it made that more likely. that does not mean that - "women need big government until they get married, and then they rely on their husbands to become the 'government'" nor does it mean that women don't like the idea that Ron Paul wants to end the government "pampering you".

~Erin

[Mark Rushmore]

I'd have to disagree

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/polls/2004-08-25-female-vote_x.htm

Most unmarried women — 54% — have annual household incomes below $30,000, according to the Census; that's twice the percentage of married women with incomes that low. Most married women — 51% — have household incomes of $50,000 and above; that's double the number of single women with income that high.

That makes single women more anxious than their married friends about bread-and-butter issues, less confident of having health coverage and more likely to take an expansive view of what the government can and should do to maintain safety-net programs.

If you insist on using 2004, then you might as well say:

"Most married women with household incomes over $50,000 had grown complacent and lazy, fearful only of anything that might disturb their way of life. As such, they have come to see the government as some sort of big-brother, to whom they may have to sacrifice privacy autonomy and power - yet which will take up 'responsibility' for all their security. Full of this longing for big and intrusive government, this demographic was quicker than its unmarried counterpart to fall in line behind Bush."

Not because it's any less of a pile of shit, but because both parties have long been for out-of-control government... isn't that why we are all here?

[Liberty Star]

Women and men, all are catching on the fever:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lwzqy8NXvWM

[ckhagen]

A lot of crunch mamas support Ron Paul. My libertarian moms group is full of ap mamas. Even my local Ron Paul meetup has lots of crunchy mamas. A few of my local crunchy mama AP friends have finally decided to support Ron Paul despite being long time hardcore dems. The message is compatible. With the magazine ad, we don't have to worry as much about smear. I have no idea if they would allow political ads though.

~Erin

I'm definitely working hard on our LLL and BirthNetwork moms. Really hard.
I'm definitely amazed by the two-sidedness I see coming from the AP moms. They either love him to death or hate his guts. Obviously I'm on the loving him side.

[SlapItHigh]

If you insist on using 2004, then you might as well say:

"Most married women with household incomes over $50,000 had grown complacent and lazy, fearful only of anything that might disturb their way of life. As such, they have come to see the government as some sort of big-brother, to whom they may have to sacrifice privacy autonomy and power - yet which will take up 'responsibility' for all their security. Full of this longing for big and intrusive government, this demographic was quicker than its unmarried counterpart to fall in line behind Bush."

Not because it's any less of a pile of shit, but because both parties have long been for out-of-control government... isn't that why we are all here?

Great points Mark.

~Erin

[SlapItHigh]

I'm definitely working hard on our LLL and BirthNetwork moms. Really hard.
I'm definitely amazed by the two-sidedness I see coming from the AP moms. They either love him to death or hate his guts. Obviously I'm on the loving him side.

Yes, I have experienced the same. Lately, I've been finding that some of the haters are starting to come around though. It is exiting to see. I know that many more would come around if they really thought about it some more. A friend posted this article in my local AP playgroup - http://ishmael.org/Education/Writings/unschooling.shtml . It is funny because the author applies critical thinking to the topic of unschooling and makes perfect sense...yet this same author favores socialism. It is a complete contradiction. You could replace school related word with the welfare system and reach the same conclusion. She wants others to "get it" about unschooling while she fails to get it when it comes to big government. I am truly baffled.

~Erin

[framecut]

1. It isn't safe to say that a lower income makes someone more likely to want government safety net programs. Would it make it more likely for you to change your idea about the role of government?

Not really. Poor people are basically for bigger government. It's the oldest game in the book. Politicians love playing class warfare by constantly blaming the worlds problems on the rich, and if only the rich were taxed a bit more: The government would play "Robin Hood"

The thing is: The definition of poverty has consistently changed over the decades. Most poor people nowadays have cable tv, dvd players, internet, etc...


2. Even if it were true that it made that more likely. that does not mean that - "women need big government until they get married, and then they rely on their husbands to become the 'government'" nor does it mean that women don't like the idea that Ron Paul wants to end the government "pampering you".

~Erin

The stats are there for all to see: Women just don't dig Ron Paul. Sure, a few women here can post themselves as the exception, but the fact remains: Ron Paul's not going to get elected via the woman vote. It's just not gonna happen.

Especially when it comes to abortion. Most women want abortion since they don't like having 'power' taken away from them by government.

[Drknows]

We need a video that makes him look like a ladies man. I forget who posted this image before. BUT ITS A GREAT IDEA!

Concept Ron Paul Walking around.
http://images.zwire.com/local/Z/Zwire2737/zwire/images/2007/11/story/RonPaulWalking_story.JPG


Music Bee Gees Remix.
http://thegoodlife.vox.com/library/audio/6a00b8ea072de81bc000e398b3fa5f0003.html



:D:D:D:D:D

[Mark Rushmore]

Politicians love playing class warfare by constantly blaming the worlds problems on the rich, and if only the rich were taxed a bit more

Interestingly, it wasn't a politician [that I'm aware of] in this case, but rather you who made an appeal to class warfare.

And for the record, I'm sure the millions of previously working poor now rotting in jails for trying to engage in 'free market economics ' are thrilled with big government, and only wish they could get another 10-25 years of it.

[ckhagen]

And for the record, I'm sure the millions of previously working poor now rotting in jails for trying to engage in 'free market economics ' are thrilled with big government, and only wish they could get another 10-25 years of it.

Yeah, not to mention the millions of us (and when I say "us" I mean it LITERALLY) who're working service industry jobs and tip jobs and multiple jobs, because this government has destroyed our workforce. My husband supports our entire family on his one income bringing people's luggage to their hotel rooms because there are no jobs around here between poor and billionaire. We're not idiots, we know why there's no longer a middle class and it's not for lack of hard work.

[framecut]

Interestingly, it wasn't a politician [that I'm aware of] in this case, but rather you who made an appeal to class warfare.

Yep.

You caught me, it was my master plan all along.

Good investigative work.

[Mark Rushmore]

Yep.

You caught me, it was my master plan all along.

Good investigative work.

Cheers.

[SlapItHigh]

Not really. Poor people are basically for bigger government. It's the oldest game in the book. Politicians love playing class warfare by constantly blaming the worlds problems on the rich, and if only the rich were taxed a bit more: The government would play "Robin Hood".

Please see Mark's comment - it is spot on.

Please don't forget that both unmarried women and unmarried men have lower household incomes in general than their married counterparts.



The stats are there for all to see: Women just don't dig Ron Paul. Sure, a few women here can post themselves as the exception, but the fact remains: Ron Paul's not going to get elected via the woman vote. It's just not gonna happen..

What stats? Are you talking about the polls that everyone here thinks are so accurate? Or are they only accurate when they reflect your own opinion? Regardless, I am not disputing that less women support Ron Paul than men. I just have a different idea about why. I also think that the polls aren't giving us an accurate idea of just how many women are supporting Ron Paul.

[hard@work]

I am going to throw out there a few things that I think will win over women voters:

1. The war and sentimentality over the evils of this war, the prospect of drafting children again, etc ..

2. Grandma Paul. Time to get our secret weapon out and get Gramma Paul on the intertubes!!

[Hope]

I basically am correct. Sure, there are women who do support Ron Paul, but that's a minority in this case.

Women by nature prefer to be nurtured and coddled. That's why Starbucks is such of a big hit.

Ron Paul is for getting rid of government pampering you, and women have a difficult time accepting this as a 'good thing'

Then why is the female vote split 60/40 Democrat and Republican?

[framecut]

What stats? Are you talking about the polls that everyone here thinks are so accurate? Or are they only accurate when they reflect your own opinion? Regardless, I am not disputing that less women support Ron Paul than men. I just have a different idea about why. I also think that the polls aren't giving us an accurate idea of just how many women are supporting Ron Paul.

Votes are like money. They don't care what's the motivation behind why the vote is cast or the money is spent: so long as someone gets it (vote or money)

I think I explained pretty succinctly why women won't go for Dr. Paul's platform. It has more to do with women by nature than anything else.

Yeah, you can say that I opened a 'can of worms', but I am hoping people here will just take it on face value and not try and derail the topic by throwing out the labels (in this case: "sexist pig" will do).

[Hope]

Votes are like money. They don't care what's the motivation behind why the vote is cast or the money is spent: so long as someone gets it (vote or money)

I think I explained pretty succinctly why women won't go for Dr. Paul's platform. It has more to do with women by nature than anything else.

Yeah, you can say that I opened a 'can of worms', but I am hoping people here will just take it on face value and not try and derail the topic by throwing out the labels (in this case: "sexist pig" will do).

In other words, "I hope people accept my opinions as fact and not call a spade a spade."

[ckhagen]

In other words, "I hope people accept my opinions as fact and not call a spade a spade."

haha... love it.
Trust me, women aren't stupid. Most have just been fooled into thinking that Dems are more likely to preserve freedom and personal liberty (what a joke). ie... draft, abortion, gay marriage, and other individual freedoms. It's just a matter of showing them the flip side of exactly what's going on.

[Mckarnin]

I know Mr Paul is doing better in the polls but he seems to be lagging w/ the women vote (Nevada). I think this is where we can honestly turn this around. Any comments on a better way to capture this vote??

I really want to write up and make a why women should vote for Ron Paul YouTube and flier. Something fairly straightlaced with a drop of lightheartedness. Unfortunately our video camera has whacked out focus and uses those tape looking things and has no USB port. Anyone know of quick ways to get video onto the internet off such a camera?

Katharine

[RockEnds]

I'm a woman, and I learned about Ron Paul in the very first Republican debate. I almost didn't watch it. I really had no desire whatsoever to watch a bunch of old guys debate about which of them is best able to get my offspring maimed or killed in a war run by con artists.

Then the guilt got me.

It was, after all, my duty as a voter to watch the thing at least long enough to witness each and everyone of them proclaim the wisdom of irrational fear before I discounted them forever.

Much to my surprise, there was one with a very different message.

It could be that women have just tuned out Republicans because many find their current policies repugnant.

[chrismatthews]

Summary: If you read the article, you'll see that women need big government until they get married, and then they rely on their husbands to become the 'government'

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/polls/2004-08-25-female-vote_x.htm

All women (From a gallup poll, 2004 election)
Bush: 45%
Kerry: 50%
Democratic advantage: +5% points

Married women
Bush: 54%
Kerry: 41%
Democratic advantage: -13

Unmarried women
Bush: 35%
Kerry: 60%
Democratic advantage: +25

Marriage gap:
Democratic advantage: +38


Dude, you're being pointlessly condescending. You're ruling out the pro-life/pro-choice issue altogether, and you're contributing roughly nothing to the dialogue.

You've provided one set of data to support your archaic theory, and have failed utterly to show causality.

I'd argue that single men, when married, often take comfort in the stability and "government" that a good woman can provide, just as much as a woman does the same.

My reccomendation? Go find a good women, maybe she can cure your illness.

[framecut]

Dude, you're being pointlessly condescending. You're ruling out the pro-life/pro-choice issue altogether, and you're contributing roughly nothing to the dialogue.

You've provided one set of data to support your archaic theory, and have failed utterly to show causality.

I'd argue that single men, when married, often take comfort in the stability and "government" that a good woman can provide, just as much as a woman does the same.

My reccomendation? Go find a good women, maybe she can cure your illness.

Did you even read the article?

No?

Go read it.

[framecut]

haha... love it.
Trust me, women aren't stupid. Most have just been fooled into thinking that Dems are more likely to preserve freedom and personal liberty (what a joke). ie... draft, abortion, gay marriage, and other individual freedoms. It's just a matter of showing them the flip side of exactly what's going on.

I dunno, as a guy...I have this weird tendency to read up on what a politician is saying: Trace his/her voting record and then make a decision.

When I first found out about Ron Paul, I did a lot of digging on his voting record/articles he wrote before making a decision.

I didn't just go "Hey cool! An old man! I'll vote for that!"

[chrismatthews]

Yeah, I've been posting on MDC for 2 years and lurking even longer before that. I usually stuck to the birthing and beyond, homebirth, etc forums but then I started posting in the politics forum and there are some hardcore socialists there who have a serious agenda against Ron Paul and they are not interested in truth. at. all. I spent hours providing evidence to their false claims and as soon as I did they would call for the thread to be deleted. They'd say they didn't care that it wasn't true, they were going to keep spreading the smear anyhow. I just decided that my time was much better spent reaching out to those who are actually open minded. I hate that a lot of people are influenced by those narrow minded few but there isn't much I can do about it. I mean, I guess i could if I spent many hours a day posting but I just don't have that kind of time.

Anywho, I personally believe that the libertarian message and the AP message go had in hand. Socialism is direct contradiction to attachment parenting. Also, the democratic candidates are continuing to limit health freedom, birth freedom, vax freedom which is also a big contradiction. This is why I think it would be a good idea to put an ad in Mothering. A lot of people read the mag who don't have time to sit around on the politics forum there. They can read the facts for themselves in the ad and hopefully continue to research him on their own.

A lot of crunch mamas support Ron Paul. My libertarian moms group is full of ap mamas. Even my local Ron Paul meetup has lots of crunchy mamas. A few of my local crunchy mama AP friends have finally decided to support Ron Paul despite being long time hardcore dems. The message is compatible. With the magazine ad, we don't have to worry as much about smear. I have no idea if they would allow political ads though.

~Erin


Hi, sorry, would you translate? :)

MDC? crunch mama? i think i get attachment parenting, what is the converse?

[ckhagen]

Hi, sorry, would you translate? :)

MDC? crunch mama? i think i get attachment parenting, what is the converse?

MDC= mothering.com and mothering magazine
crunchy moms= moms like us who practice natural family living, reducing waste and chemicals in our lives, natural healing, no-vaccinations/selective vax, homebirth/natural/drug-free birth, cloth diapering, sometimes homeschooling, etc...

AP= attachment parenting. which, for the most part is defined by being in tune and iin physical contact with your young children. Practices included are co-sleeping and wearing your babies in slings, breastfeeding/extended breastfeeding.

Our family is definitely a crunchy/AP family and I stand very firm in having my rights to raise my family this way.

[SlapItHigh]

I really want to write up and make a why women should vote for Ron Paul YouTube and flier. Something fairly straightlaced with a drop of lightheartedness. Unfortunately our video camera has whacked out focus and uses those tape looking things and has no USB port. Anyone know of quick ways to get video onto the internet off such a camera?

Katharine


I think a youtube video would be great. Some of these youtube videos have been extremely powerful. I wonder if Aravoth or eLiberty would think about making one that appeals to women.

[literatim]

I believe it is a combination of both sides. Married women will support smaller government if they have the security of a husband and they are most likely to be pro-life because they have had a child.

[chrismatthews]

MDC= mothering.com and mothering magazine
crunchy moms= moms like us who practice natural family living, reducing waste and chemicals in our lives, natural healing, no-vaccinations/selective vax, homebirth/natural/drug-free birth, cloth diapering, sometimes homeschooling, etc...

AP= attachment parenting. which, for the most part is defined by being in tune and iin physical contact with your young children. Practices included are co-sleeping and wearing your babies in slings, breastfeeding/extended breastfeeding.

Our family is definitely a crunchy/AP family and I stand very firm in having my rights to raise my family this way.

Thank you, i was lost there. :)

[SlapItHigh]

Hi, sorry, would you translate? :)

MDC? crunch mama? i think i get attachment parenting, what is the converse?

ckhagen pretty much covered it. The main thing that sets this type of parenting apart from the rest is that it centers around respecting each child as an individual and therefore rejecting one-sized fits all parenting methods. MDC Is mothering dot commune, the forum for the magazine and unfortunately I don't think you can access the politics forum unless you are a member for 60 days with x amount of posts.

~Erin

[SlapItHigh]

I dunno, as a guy...I have this weird tendency to read up on what a politician is saying: Trace his/her voting record and then make a decision.

uh, yeah...women do that too.

~Erin

[Mckarnin]

I think a youtube video would be great. Some of these youtube videos have been extremely powerful. I wonder if Aravoth or eLiberty would think about making one that appeals to women.


I really think that YouTube has become a powerful ally in our Ron Paul efforts. We need something addressed to women, preferably narrated by a woman or otherwise woman to woman "seeming" that addresses;

War, devaluation of our money, our children in debt at birth, Pro-life/pro-choice issues on the state level where we have easier access to lobby either way, health freedom, leaving us to take care of our own $$, etc...

[chrismatthews]

Did you even read the article?

No?

Go read it.


Yes, i read it before i replied to you. If you want to draw a conclusion, draw the pro-life/pro-choice one at least.

Married women arent concerned with the abortion issue, at least not in the way that single women are. Having said that, even my conclusion is sloppy as hell without additional supporting data.

I understand your theory, you've just failed to demonstrate it convincingly by any stretch of the imagination. You have at least two women telling you(rather politely), that you're off base, but somehow you're confident that you've transcended their personal experience by a reading a sloppily written article and concoting a formula that "explains" how women vote.

You don't think that's a bit presumptuous?

[SlapItHigh]

I really think that YouTube has become a powerful ally in our Ron Paul efforts. We need something addressed to women, preferably narrated by a woman or otherwise woman to woman "seeming" that addresses;

Good point - it would mean more coming from a woman.


War, devaluation of our money, our children in debt at birth, Pro-life/pro-choice issues on the state level where we have easier access to lobby either way, health freedom, leaving us to take care of our own $$, etc...

Good topics.

[chrismatthews]

ckhagen pretty much covered it. The main thing that sets this type of parenting apart from the rest is that it centers around respecting each child as an individual and therefore rejecting one-sized fits all parenting methods. MDC Is mothering dot commune, the forum for the magazine and unfortunately I don't think you can access the politics forum unless you are a member for 60 days with x amount of posts.

~Erin


I wouldn't even try to swim in those waters, I do my part on dailykos and freerepublic. I think im around 11 people that have emailed me and promised to check out these forums and a few youtubes i link.

[ckhagen]

If it were completely true that getting married somehow magically makes you so secure that you no longer need the government to feed you and it's the only reason... the switchover rate would be way higher.

Seriously though, the draft is a big point. I can't think of a single non-military wife who likes the idea of her husband being yanked out of his home and job to be sent off to war (remember, I'm 25 and this would be a real possibility for me and the majority of my friends who are young mothers). If that doesn't wreak of insecurity, I don't know what does. Then, bring in the idea of her sons being subject and then tell her there's a President that just plain won't let it happen, and infact he'd bring home all the husbands who're already gone, you'll have a sold constituent. No wife likes the idea of her husband, who did not volunteer, being sent to fight in a war, perhaps poorly trained, and for terrible reasons.

[rodent]

Summary: If you read the article, you'll see that women need big government until they get married, and then they rely on their husbands to become the 'government'

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/polls/2004-08-25-female-vote_x.htm

All women (From a gallup poll, 2004 election)
Bush: 45%
Kerry: 50%
Democratic advantage: +5% points

Married women
Bush: 54%
Kerry: 41%
Democratic advantage: -13

Unmarried women
Bush: 35%
Kerry: 60%
Democratic advantage: +25

Marriage gap:
Democratic advantage: +38

That's an interesting theory, but you'd really have to conduct out a statistically sound hypothesis test and take solid samples from different populations and countries to prove whether that hypothesis is correct (to a statistically significant event, anyway).

Interesting theory worth testing, though.

[SlapItHigh]

I wouldn't even try to swim in those waters, I do my part on dailykos and freerepublic. I think im around 11 people that have emailed me and promised to check out these forums and a few youtubes i link.


kudos, 11 is great!

[SlapItHigh]

That's an interesting theory, but you'd really have to conduct out a statistically sound hypothesis test and take solid samples from different populations and countries to prove whether that hypothesis is correct (to a statistically significant event, anyway).

Interesting theory worth testing, though.

Yeah, it needs a lot of testing especially considering unmarried men are also more likely to vote democrat. Is that because unmarried men want government to pamper them until they get married and then they are forced by their wives to take care of themselves and their family? If that sounds ridiculous to you then please understand why framecut's theory sounds ridiculous to many of us.

Anywho, I just googled to find out the difference in unmarried men v married men in that same election and this was the first link that came up - http://www.vdare.com/Sailer/050123_vindicated.htm

an interesting analysis:


Nonetheless, while marriage has a bigger impact on women’s Republican voting than men’s’, it strongly affects both sexes. Hence that 13 point gap between single and married white men’s GOP propensity.

It's not hard to make up a long list of reasons why marriage inclines people to vote Republican:

Married people are more likely to be homeowners than renters.

Children make you more culturally conservative.

Having children to protect encourages you to move away from "diverse" (i.e. dangerous) neighborhoods.

[framecut]

uh, yeah...women do that too.

~Erin

yeah, I suppose so.

Some people also like putting peanut butter on their pizzas.

[user]

A few women in Nevada might like his Tax Free Tips Bill... ;)
If you mean what I think you mean, LOL.

[Danny Molina]

He needs to get on The View.

[DXDoug]

He needs to get on The View.

How many times would that make it!:p

[speciallyblend]

hmmm stop playing video games,plenty of women support Ron Paul,like my wife and daughter

[Cyclone]

You are all ignoring the abortion issue. That has been the number one issue with all women I have spoken to as to why they would not even consider voting for Ron Paul. Now, since not all women are one and the same, this issue will also bring a lot of women in. However, it has been my experience that the majority of women are pro-choice and they don't buy Ron Paul's state's rights issue. The pro-choice women see it as a 9th amendment issue and he has no right to take that right away from them.

The pro-life women, a smaller group, also do not like him because he is not anti-abortion enough. He is willing to throw the issue to the states and let the babies die when he should be protecting them through the 9th amendment.

The best item I have found to bring women in is the draft, but that is only for the women for whom abortion is not their top issue or close to the top.

As far as the rest of some of the comments on this board, I think it is attacks like these on women's character in general that keep some women out of politics. Frankly, some of the comments on here have been down right insulting and I think that any new supporter reading this would most likely leave.

Women will tend, in my opinion to fall toward the candidate that they think will take care of the most people. That is why I believe the important item is to explain to many how Ron Paul's policies, that look unsupportive on the outside are actually the most nurturing to the public as a whole. But it takes time and a great deal of understanding of economics to make the argument.

[Eric21ND]

This is where having a great 30 min documentary/infomercial showing Dr. Paul's impressive bio would help with female voters.

[soapmistress]

I heard about Ron Paul from my crunchy-granola-mom friends in a debate group on Myspace. :)

[Cleaner44]

We need a liberty mansion kinda like Hefner has. Ron could spread his message to hot chicks and then send them out into the world to grow the revolution. Sow the seeds of liberty Ron!

[amy31416]

We need a liberty mansion kinda like Hefner has. Ron could spread his message to hot chicks and then send them out into the world to grow the revolution. Sow the seeds of liberty Ron!

Already tried that with the Bunny Ranch--apparently hookers are not very good at stumping. . .good god that's one of the most bizarre sentences I've ever uttered.