Friday, March 9, 2012

Trolling For Women (Voters)

Another one of Barack Obama’s major constituencies is a lot shakier than it was in 2008. He won the women’s vote by a heavy margin. That’s not such a sure thing this time. His numbers fell seriously over the past few months, although it seems to have had a temporary bump since Rush Limbaugh called the Georgetown Law student a prostitute, sort of. It also seems that Rick Santorum is scaring moderate and liberal women (fairly or unfairly).

Obama sewed up the women’s vote in the 2008 election. In the affluent suburbs, replete with moderates and independents, his margin among women was thirteen percent. Without winning the women’s vote by a healthy margin, Barack Obama would not be president today. But following the election, and after three years of a pathetic economic recovery and unemployment stubbornly holding at above eight percent, the dew was off the rose. Women were turning to economic issues, and Obama was not fulfilling any his promises about reinvigorating the economy.

Among independent and moderate women, generic Republicans were pulling very close to The One in approval and disapproval polls. The slide was slow but sure. But the Democrats have gotten a temporary reprieve. Rick Santorum, Republican candidate for the nomination, has made social issues a major part of his campaign. Polls clearly indicate that this has no effect on conservative women, but is starting to have an effect among moderates and independents. They may not reject social conservatism, but they don’t want it at the top of the list, and they’re unsure that other Republican candidates don’t harbor the same views.

Then came the Obamacare birth control/abortifacient mandates. Democrats were losing ground on the religious freedom issue, so they cleverly turned it into a debate about women’s rights. In fact, Obama’s minions had started to declare the conservative and religious objections to the mandates as “a new war on women.” When the issue was brought up in the Senate as a rejection of the mandates imposed on religious institutions, the Democrats said “this is a Republican attempt to roll back long-established women’s rights.”

Failing to get a witness approved who had nothing valuable or germane to say at the hearings on the mandates, Nancy Pelosi put on her own dog and pony show in the House. Her witness was Sandra Fluke (pronounced Fluck, for some strange reason), a ditsy Georgetown Law student who was too stupid to figure out how to get free contraceptives. This Georgetown Dunce is attending a very expensive private law school, but thinks that the public and religious objectors should pay for her birth control and abortifacients. It might have died a quiet death, if not for a nasty (though accurate) comment by Rush Limbaugh.

“Aha!” said the Democrats. Our big opportunity to detour the religious freedom debate and make it all about mean white male woman-haters who want women barefoot and back in the kitchen. The fake indignation spread like wildfire. Barack Obama, who recently couldn’t take time out of his golf games to talk with the Israeli Prime Minister suddenly felt it necessary personally telephone the Georgetown “slut” to apologize for a remark that he didn’t make and which wasn’t being attributed to him. Exactly on whose behalf he made the apology is unclear. But he felt it was imperative that he console this thirty year old helpless woman whose life was being ruined by the alleged lack of free birth control.

The whole social issue, “gimme my free condoms and pills” debate has had a negative effect on independent and moderate women. The gap that was narrowing is opening again. It may just be temporary if Republican candidate Rick Santorum will pay less attention to social issues and more attention to economic issues, but so far he’s showing no sign of doing so.

The deleterious effect on the women’s vote can be demonstrated by the results of exit polls after the Ohio primary. Married women leaned toward Santorum. Unmarried women leaned toward Romney. Conservative women said that the Fluke incident had no effect whatsoever on their choice. But when men were asked the same question, there was literally no significant difference between married and unmarried men.

This controversy will probably blow over. And it’s a long time until November. But I must commend two Republican women for refusing to cower under the Democratic attacks. First of all, Ann Romney, wife of candidate Mitt Romney, made it clear that Republican women were not going to be silenced because of a manufactured issue. Defiantly, Mrs. Romney addressed her comments directly to the leader of the Obamists: “Do you know what women care about? Women care about jobs. They’re angry and they’re furious about the entitlement debt we are leaving to our children.”

Alaska Senator Lisa Murkowski also made a definitive statement. “I’m right along with Ann Romney. There is clearly a direction we can take as Republicans that gives confidence and assurance.” She added: “Women in Alaska are worried about what they’re paying in energy costs. They’re worried about whether or not they’ll be able to put their kids through college, whether their savings are secure.”

Now those are the real women’s issues, not whether or not a Georgetown law student is a slut or a prostitute. And of course the mainstream media have jumped on the bandwagon, touting both Fluke’s innocent helplessness and Obama’s great empathy for women who can’t afford free birth control. If the Republicans, and particularly the women Republicans, can stay on message and keep the issues revolving around a woman’s desire for economic stability in her home and at work, the Democrats’ poster girl for entitlement and government largess will fade from memory. And then Sandy Fluke can go cry on Anita Hill’s shoulder. Another attorney who couldn’t take the heat.

26 comments:

Joel Farnham said...

Nice Job, LawHawk.

Did you know that Slutty Fluke is being represented by a PR firm? Obama's old firm. Anita Dunn's firm. Anita Dunn is a devout admirer of Mao Tse Tung, you know. SKDKnickerbocker.

LawHawkRFD said...

Joel: Yes, Anita Dunn loves Jesus and Mao, her two favorite philosophers. We did an article on her way back when, but we had hoped she had faded from the scene. Obviously, she hasn't.

tryanmax said...

I wonder how much of Barack's women troubles stem from Michelle's popularity? I haven't heard a word about her favorability ratings in quite some time, which can only mean one thing. In fact, the last thing I recall was shortly after she started taking the girls globetrotting. It wasn't a poll, but rather an op-ed decrying first ladies' popularity as a "political tool" and that we should all be ashamed for even caring about it.

Tennessee Jed said...

Hawk - I may also have been guilty of trolling for women a few times in my youth, but never as voters and never as president. Seriously, I had seen the details on this, and as such, it is frustrating to see transparent is pandering is. Not too long ago, on a day I was listening to Limbaugh's first 45 minutes, he brought up Dick Morris' explanation of the whoe coordination of this issue between the White House and the media. It all started with that bizarre debate question by the noted objective journalist former Clintonista. After I heard Morris, the coordination really did hit me in the face. So it came as no surprise when this whole Fluke thing turned out the way it did.

Tennessee Jed said...

hope you can understand the above. Like most commenters, not only do I often hit the wrong key, but if I get interrupted while typing, am likely to omit whole words or sentences.These never get corrected because of the first rule of "Comment Club":

"The first rule of Comment Club is that there is no proofing in Comment Club." :)

LawHawkRFD said...

tryanmax: Michelle's a tool, all right. She is the modern version of Marie Antoinette. She has $1,000 luncheons on the taxpayer, but when a real woman from a real working family complains that she can't afford peanut butter and jelly sandwiches for her kids, Michelle suggests that they eat cake.

LawHawkRFD said...

Tennessee: Morris is a bit too full of himself for my tastes, and he is often wrong on his pundit predictions. But he was an insider, and when he tells tales of media/administration message coordination, I believe him. Particularly since the facts bear out his assessment.

Lady Michelle said...

Cake? I don't think so! That better be a bran muffin.

LawHawkRFD said...

Tennessee: LOL. You have no idea how many times I've hit "publish," only to say "what the hell did I just do?" One day when we had a particularly lengthy comment stream and I was trying to keep up, I developed a massive case of fumble fingers. Later in the day, a friend and follower of the site called me to ask (seriously) if I had had a stroke.

LawHawkRFD said...

Lady Michelle: I sit corrected. I'm still running behind the current round of culinary correctness.

BevfromNYC said...

"Culinary Correctness" syndrome - Do you think I can get a government grant to study that?

LawHawkRFD said...

Bev: You're in luck. Women are once again an oppressed "minority" so there's money galore for women's projects. Be sure to include a chapter on arugula so I'll finally know what the hell arugula is.

BevfromNYC said...

Oh, boy, I've always wanted to be an oppressed minority! It was on my bucket list!

Oh, btw - "arugula" - a/k/a dandalion greens or weeds that one spends a fortune pulling up in one's lawn otherwise.

That is one of the problems with this entire argument. The Right is arguing that it is about religious freedom and the Left is arguing that it is about "women's health/rights" issue. And since the sides will never agree with what we are arguing about, the argument can never really end. Very clever of the Obama/MSM camp. And we keep falling for it...

AndrewPrice said...

Santorum's poll numbers have been consistently bad with women through his career. That's not changing, Fluke or no Fluke.

LawHawkRFD said...

Bev: Omigod, I'm rich. The snow has melted, and the dandelions are in bloom, dahling, rally they are (apologies to Katherine Hepburn). Thanks to you, I now have my own cottage industry--a dandelion farm.

Old legal dictum: If you can't dazzle them with your brilliance, baffle them with your bullshit. The Democrats are experts at the latter.

LawHawkRFD said...

Andrew: In other words, you're saying it's a SNAFU--situation normal, all Fluked up. A FUBAR, even--Fluked up beyond all recognition. LOL

T-Rav said...

I saw Megyn Kelly on O'Reilly (which I don't normally watch) last night, and she just destroyed poor Sandy. She made a lot of good points, but I thought the best one was "Are we really supposed to believe that a Georgetown law student, who on average immediately starts a job after graduation with a six-digit salary, can't scrape together enough money to pay for birth control?" Uh, no, no we're not.

LawHawkRFD said...

T-Rav: The more information that comes about about this Fluked-up woman, the clearer it becomes that this was a long-planned agenda. She's a radical feminist who intentionally picked a Catholic law school so she could impose her absolutist secular views about birth control on an institution she despises--namely, the Catholic Church and all its manifestations. As far as I'm concerned, she has absolutely proven with her idiotic statements about not being able to afford birth control without the school providing it that she is not only a consummate liar, but that this truly is a purposeful attack on religious freedom. But you won't see it played that way in the MSM.

StanH said...

Anyone who bought into that horse twaddle that slut…errr, student, was shucking is, and can only be a member of Team Parasite, whose only concern is “what’s in it for me?” The ladies in my life would walk over hot coals to rid themselves of Barry.

LawHawkRFD said...

Stan: This will be a big change for me. In 2008, I was right in the heart of Obamamania in San Francisco. Now I live in a place where the women never trusted the s.o.b. in the first place, and sure as hell aren't going to vote for him this time around.

Joel Farnham said...

Speaking of Trolls, Gloria Alred, the defender of the defenseless has chimed in with wanting to sue Rush and SKDKnickerbocker has decided, out of the goodness of their hearts, to represent Slutty Fluke pro bono. I can only think of one reason to do it pro bono. To perpetuate the idea that S. Fluke is just a poor student with no money for condoms let alone a PR firm.

Patti said...

fluke. i have to be so careful saying her name...

she about as innocent in all this as the msm is in the support of barry and crew. they tire me so.

LawHawkRFD said...

Joel: Actually there are two reasons. The one you mentioned, and all that free, free, free publicity for the ambulance-chasing lawyers. It's a win-win for the shysters. If they win, they're heroes. If they lose, they took on a noble cause, but the cards were stacked against them. Either way, you'll remember their names. Lawyers have ceased being servants of the law and have gone show biz. Every knock is a boost, every pan is a puff.

LawHawkRFD said...

Patti: If you pronounce it fluke, she's a parasitic worm. If you pronounce it fluck, she's a cheap date. I'd rather simply not have to say her name at all.

Joel Farnham said...

Someone mentioned that Mark Levin could defend Rush Limbaugh. That would be Great! I would pay to see that! Mark Levin hates Gloria Alred with a purple passion.

LawHawkRFD said...

Joel: He does, and he should. This one's a no-brainer. Legal Dictum: "You can't defame a snake."

Post a Comment