jump to last post 1-3 of 3 discussions (19 posts)

What would the national map look like if only men or only women votes?

  1. Credence2 profile image86
    Credence2posted 8 weeks ago

    Most interesting: seems to be a fundamental difference in how men and women see things.

    http://www.salon.com/2016/10/12/repealt … men-voted/

    Seems like the real differential for party or political preference is gender, not even race, ethnicity or age seems to have this effect.

    One thing for sure, I get to learn which states are reliably 'true blue' without reservation.

    Now the extreme rightwinger speaks of repealing the 19th amendment, good luck with that.

    1. GA Anderson profile image85
      GA Andersonposted 8 weeks ago in reply to this

      Nothing to see here folks... move along... It's just locker room talk.

      ps. I think you should consider replacing your "Right-Winger" label with the trendy new "Alt-Right" one. It could define the difference between knuckle-head and knuckle-dragger - and be a more accurate description.

      GA

      1. Credence2 profile image86
        Credence2posted 8 weeks ago in reply to this

        Well, well, Locker room talk?

        Is there a difference between a knuckle head and knuckle dragger?

        Don't you find the differences between the genders in this regard interesting? Although, hypothetical.

        1. GA Anderson profile image85
          GA Andersonposted 8 weeks ago in reply to this

          Yes there is a difference. A knuckle-head might think a woman is not politically smart enough to vote intelligently. A knuckle-dragger would think a woman should not have a vote.

          I don't think the gender point offers any new revelations. Especially with regards to Trump. We might be equal as people, but that famous book title; Men are from Mars and Women are from Venus, nails the truth of our reality.

          ps. my reference to "locker room talk" was relative to silliness. Like Trump's assertion that his comments weren't really what they were - chauvinistic signposts.

          GA

          1. Credence2 profile image86
            Credence2posted 8 weeks ago in reply to this

            That is another book that I need to read, that I have heard so much about

            Both the knuckle head and knuckle dragger share the same trait in common, not being terribly bright in the face of the current world.

            Today, we acknowlege that one can be different and still be equal, pretty clever of these blue guys?

            1. GA Anderson profile image85
              GA Andersonposted 8 weeks ago in reply to this

              Gesh! One step forward, and three steps back...

              "...not being terribly bright in the face of the current world."

              That sure sounds like folks that don't agree with you are just stupid. Hmm... you are probably right about some of them, but how many? All, a few, a minority, a majority, most?

              About that "today" part, Even if we do agree with your basic premise of equal but different, do we have to agree to all those other "blue guys" ideas to be part of your "we?" I mean, if we were a bit confused about you "blue guys" bathroom thing, would that disqualify us?

              GA

              1. Credence2 profile image86
                Credence2posted 8 weeks ago in reply to this

                But, GA, you are the one that defined stupid, isn't that what a knuckle head or knuckle dragger is?

                I never said that we all have to be blue, but there is a distinction. My point is that different is to be seen as equal, as opposed to the idea of an amalgamated melting pot.

                Yes, I have gender bathroom use issues. But from what I have seen, conservative and liberal/progressive points of view are obvious and consistently held over a variety of topics by the same people. I don't see very many 'purples'.  Look at our forum, there is no question as to who identifies with conservatives vs otherwise.

                1. GA Anderson profile image85
                  GA Andersonposted 8 weeks ago in reply to this

                  Welll, yeah, I did introduce "stupid." I thought that is what you meant, given the context of your "not so bright" use. Did you just mean less intelligent?

                  Knuckle-draggers can be intelligent and successful, (not just the brute thugs implied by the term), and, have the social mores and morals of a caveman. They know it, and don't care.

                  Knuckle-heads do dumb things when they should have, or could have known better. They can be intelligent too, but probably not very successful. Too many dumb decisions. But, a chuckle-head, on the other hand; who does dumb things and knows better, but does them anyway, can be successful if he wasn't too much of a knuckle-head before he became a chuckle-head.

                  A Conservative might know that acceptance of the LGBT, (or the flag burning, or the...) issue is right, but he doesn't want it to be right, so he makes dumb decisions. That is a knuckle-head. 

                  ps. I think an amalgamated melting pot is exactly what we must be to move along.

                  GA

    2. Greensleeves Hubs profile image95
      Greensleeves Hubsposted 8 weeks ago in reply to this

      That is a somewhat bizarre statistic Credence, and it does suggest that something is seriously wrong with the way many Americans prioritise issues. After all, on most traditionally important issues - the economy, health and education, defence, welfare and most others, surely men and women benefit or suffer together?

      I'm all for equal opportunities and an absence of discrimination, but does this suggest that there are clear gender-based psychological reasons why men favour Republicanism and women favour the Democrats? If so, my feminine side must be coming out, because in this election, I'm definitely on the side of the women! smile

      1. Credence2 profile image86
        Credence2posted 8 weeks ago in reply to this

        Hi, Greensleeves, it is bizarre, but if only a fraction of it is true there has to be a lot of family altercations and plenty of guys who are consigned to the sofa at bedtime.

        I can't explain the stark difference and it would be interesting to see if this gender disparity shows up in say the British Isles? Is there information out there that has ever considered the idea? Is this gender difference universal or just a peculiarity found among AMERICAN women?

        1. Greensleeves Hubs profile image95
          Greensleeves Hubsposted 8 weeks ago in reply to this

          I understand it happens in many countries Credence, though seemingly not so marked as in America. In the UK, apparently it's fluctuated over time. In the 1950s, women used to support the Conservatives more, but then gradually swung towards Labour. Now it's fairly even. In the last general election a slightly greater proportion of men than women voted Conservative, though for both sexes the Conservatives won out overall. The figures were:

          37% Conservative, 29% Labour among men
          38% Conservative, 33% Labour among women.

          (The rest voted for minority parties).

          One reason there was a general shift to the left in past decades was because more women started going out to work (and at that time would have been underpaid), and therefore became more concerned with child support and welfare - priorities associated more with Labour than with the Conservatives. But whether there is also an inbuilt difference based upon natural evolutionary roles as wilderness suggests, or whether it's just down to social conventions, who knows for sure?

          I bet you're right about one thing though - I bet there's going to be a few frosty double beds in houses across America come November! smile

          1. Credence2 profile image86
            Credence2posted 8 weeks ago in reply to this

            The introduction of women to the work force can explain a lot of left leaning votes as well. Back in the days of 'Ozzie and Harriet', a 1950's era AMERICAn sitcom, the concept of the primary breadwinner dominated culture and politics. Well, today we have move passed the 'hunter-gatherer' scenario within our culture. There are new realities and new problems to contend with. The combination of nature combined with nurture might explain the female take on things, politically. The differences are so overwhelming that explantion has to be also. So the mix of the two genders as for political outcomes is better that the sole influence of either one or the other, in my opinion.

      2. wilderness profile image96
        wildernessposted 8 weeks ago in reply to this

        Unadulterated speculation, but going back many thousands of years, into evolutionary forces and physical differences...

        males = eat or be eaten, competition, self reliance and I will provide for myself and my family.

        females - nurture of others, work together, be provided for by mate.

        Which very roughly follows party lines, does it not?

        1. Greensleeves Hubs profile image95
          Greensleeves Hubsposted 8 weeks ago in reply to this

          You may be right wilderness! If so, it's uncomfortable for those who see no difference in terms of thought processes between the sexes. But whether it's down to unchangeable evolutionary / biological inheritance, or whether it's down to socially defined roles which could change in the future, but haven't yet changed - I think the jury's still out smile.

          1. wilderness profile image96
            wildernessposted 8 weeks ago in reply to this

            There are absolutely differences, including physical ones not so obvious.  And they most certainly come from both nature and culture

  2. colorfulone profile image88
    colorfuloneposted 8 weeks ago

    I won't go to Salon...or any site that promotes a pedophile.

    1. Credence2 profile image86
      Credence2posted 8 weeks ago in reply to this

      This information is from the 538 polling site. Just like you say about infowars, closing your eyes to information does not make it less worthy of consideration.

      But, what is the problem? If only men voted, your man would be a shoe-in. But, alas......

    2. Alternative Prime profile image87
      Alternative Primeposted 8 weeks ago in reply to this

      U must be refering to "Delusional Donald" because ACCORDING to Reports, he's the ONLY "Political Figure" to my knowledge who has Pending Litigation for "Pedophilia & WORSE" ~ sad ~ INVESTIGATE ~

      Proceedings Commence December 12, 2016

      https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/201 … pe-lawsuit

  3. ahorseback profile image45
    ahorsebackposted 8 weeks ago

    Liberals and especially pseudo -intellectuals  always drop that label .   To them  all conservatives are knuckle-draggers ,   Neanderthals , closed minded ,  under-informed ,  on and on ......If one doesn't swallow the cool -aid pill ,   you become just that .   You are" brushed off " as being one of "them ".
    All you have to do today to know this is to turn on a mainstream media news outlet ,   I remember well back in the  late sixties and early seventies in high school ,  there was a major shift in new teacher hires in our school ,  a changing of the old guard teachers   from the regimental teachings of the "old school " to the new way of teaching , Sal Alinski  unleashed...... ,  in the interests of the social , cultural,  ,political revolution then  ---- and it happened overnight .

    Todays media  perfectly mirrors the change then in the education system  -to the reality now across our popular culture .    We are re-living it now.

 
working