Republicans how are you going win national elections with minority vote growing?

[Rikurzhen]

Link to the "most of them are utterly dependent on government"....please.

Democratic party research as reported by the liberal rag Politico:

What unmarried women (widows, never-marrieds and divorcées) share—and what makes them lean so heavily for Democrats—is being on their own, vulnerable economically, at a time when jobs that pay enough to live on are very scarce. . . .

And for the 25 percent of unmarried women with children under 18 living at home—the median income is just $23,000 and 82 percent do not have a college degree – the economy is particularly tough.​

The fact that you're demanding evidence of such a widely acknowledged phenomenon doesn't speak well of your understanding of political dynamics.

The simple truth is that a woman who is a single mother and raising a child on $23,000 per year is going to have a far tighter budget than a married woman who is also earning only $23,000 per year but adds that income to that earned by her husband.

A husband and wife are a more stable economic/family unit than a single mother, hence that single mother marries Big Government and her new man provides her with food stamps, day care, school lunches for her kids, etc and allows her to go onto internet bulletin boards and roar about how she is an independent woman who doesn't have to rely on a man in her life.

 

[candycorn]

Link to the "most of them are utterly dependent on government"....please.

Democratic party research as reported by the liberal rag Politico:

What unmarried women (widows, never-marrieds and divorcées) share—and what makes them lean so heavily for Democrats—is being on their own, vulnerable economically, at a time when jobs that pay enough to live on are very scarce. . . .

And for the 25 percent of unmarried women with children under 18 living at home—the median income is just $23,000 and 82 percent do not have a college degree – the economy is particularly tough.​

The fact that you're demanding evidence of such a widely acknowledged phenomenon doesn't speak well of your understanding of political dynamics.

The simple truth is that a woman who is a single mother and raising a child on $23,000 per year is going to have a far tighter budget than a married woman who is also earning only $23,000 per year but adds that income to that earned by her husband.

Again, what you fail to understand is that if society/biology expected/demanded that the male be the primary care-giver to the child; you would be able to simply replace "mother" with "father" in the diatribe above.

It's not a gender thing; it is a income thing. And, of course, who opposes equal pay for women? The GOP....another weapon in their war on women.

A husband and wife are a more stable economic/family unit than a single mother, hence that single mother marries Big Government and her new man provides her with food stamps, day care, school lunches for her kids, etc and allows her to go onto internet bulletin boards and roar about how she is an independent woman who doesn't have to rely on a man in her life.

"He provides her..."

Gee, isn't the food stamps, day care, and lunches for "her" kid also for "his" kid as well?

You do know how babies are made, don't you? You probably never had the chance to personally take part in it but it takes a male's involvement. You, of course, only blame the female for something both genders created.

 

[Rikurzhen]

Again, what you fail to understand is that if society/biology expected/demanded that the male be the primary care-giver to the child; you would be able to simply replace "mother" with "father" in the diatribe above.

It's not a gender thing; it is a income thing. And, of course, who opposes equal pay for women? The GOP....another weapon in their war on women.

I expect that this will come as a shock to you, but I do understand how human reproduction works.

What we're talking about here, let's stay on focus, is why single women so favor Democrats. This is because Democrats send goodies to single women, especially single mothers.

Married women rightly see that income is being distributed from their family to the single women and so they are less supportive of Democrats because these Democratic polices actually harm married couples with children. When a government engages in income redistribution some group benefits and another group gets taken to the cleaners.

A husband and wife form a more resilient household - only one rent to pay instead of two, two people keeping up the household and parenting instead of one. There is little need to marry the government and bring a third partner into the marriage, but single mothers do in fact marry the government and rely on what the government provides them as they would similarly lean on what a husband brings into the family home.

Gee, isn't the food stamps, day care, and lunches for "her" kid also for "his" kid as well?

A sizable proportion of the Obama single-woman voting demographic are happy to be mothers but don't find the fathers of their children to be good enough husband material. This means that for many there was a forthright decision to be a single mother knowing that the other man in her life, the government, would be there to provide.

I'm happy to have these women hound these men to support their kids, better the fathers than strangers like me.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Rikurzhen does what the emotionally inadequate males has always done in history.

Makes fun of the female to make himself feel better.

That is what a good portion of the GOP does toward women.

The women's vote will not improve at for the GOP until it tosses the Rikurzhen's to the curb.

 

[candycorn]

Again, what you fail to understand is that if society/biology expected/demanded that the male be the primary care-giver to the child; you would be able to simply replace "mother" with "father" in the diatribe above.

It's not a gender thing; it is a income thing. And, of course, who opposes equal pay for women? The GOP....another weapon in their war on women.

I expect that this will come as a shock to you, but I do understand how human reproduction works.

To say the least.

What we're talking about here, let's stay on focus, is why single women so favor Democrats. This is because Democrats send goodies to single women, especially single mothers.

We'll vet and hire approximately 800 nurses in my region of the hospital system. Approximately 700 will be female.

Here is the lunacy of what you're saying. That these women making an average of $47,000 a year--the ones who are single--are married to the government because they don't have a man.

The reason you guys lose the women's vote is because of stances such as yours. You are a professional idiot.

Married women rightly see that income is being distributed from their family to the single women and so they are less supportive of Democrats because these Democratic polices actually harm married couples with children.

As was proven to you already, Obama and Romney had a 7% difference in the married women's vote. Statistically this could be presented as a statistical dead heat if you consider the 3% margin of error. If what you said was true, the margin would be much greater--like the 36% that see the GOP trying to limit their pay, their healthcare choices, their upward professional mobility, and wondering if rapes are "legitimate".

When a government engages in income redistribution some group benefits and another group gets taken to the cleaners.

A husband and wife form a more resilient household - only one rent to pay instead of two, two people keeping up the household and parenting instead of one. There is little need to marry the government and bring a third partner into the marriage, but single mothers do in fact marry the government and rely on what the government provides them as they would similarly lean on what a husband brings into the family home.

Nice to know people like Megan Kelly have to rely on her husband so she can eat and cloth herself.



Or perhaps Ms. Kelly and her husband (assuming she has one) see the income as "their" income.

I would like to be a fly on the wall when a Republican man tells his woman; "you need me to eat".

Gee, isn't the food stamps, day care, and lunches for "her" kid also for "his" kid as well?

A sizable proportion of the Obama single-woman voting demographic are happy to be mothers but don't find the fathers of their children to be good enough husband material..

Your "Most single women are on welfare" turned out to be 25% on the high end. I'm sure when you present proof to your "sizable portion" of women will be equally as inaccurate.

This means that for many there was a forthright decision to be a single mother knowing that the other man in her life, the government, would be there to provide.

I'm happy to have these women hound these men to support their kids, better the fathers than strangers like me.

Ahh, the old GOP schtick of "it's the woman's fault"...as if no guy ever lied to a woman to get in her pants.

 

[candycorn]

Rikurzhen does what the emotionally inadequate males has always done in history.

Makes fun of the female to make himself feel better.

That is what a good portion of the GOP does toward women.

The women's vote will not improve at for the GOP until it tosses the Rikurzhen's to the curb.

Nothing to add to your synopsis. Only to reiterate, I though dementia such as his was the exception. According to the board...its the rule.

 

[Malamute]

A sizable proportion of the Obama single-woman voting demographic are happy to be mothers but don't find the fathers of their children to be good enough husband material. This means that for many there was a forthright decision to be a single mother knowing that the other man in her life, the government, would be there to provide.

I'm happy to have these women hound these men to support their kids, better the fathers than strangers like me.

That's where the problem for the liberals will be.

Right now, Obama has essentially a blank check so he can promise unemployed and welfare recipient Americans all the free government handouts they could ever want, but at the same time, he's encouraging millions of Central Americans to come for their life of welfare handouts, free health care immediately upon arrival, free housing, free transportation to the destination of their choice, even free legal services for their sham asylum claims.

The national debt is over $17 trillion and rising very rapidly -- the huge influx of very impoverished illegals will drive it up much faster than it was going up.

At some point, the liberals' promises are going to have to be cut back -- the number of babies born into welfare households is rising fast. Taxpayers are already less than half the population. It's not sustainable.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Continue to insult women voters and wonder why they reject you at the polls.

The old male "beating the chest 'I am male'" has no value in today's society.

 

[bripat9643]

the US is becoming too urbanized for the GOP's rural dominated agenda. It's quite clear that the more urbanized a state becomes the more democratic it becomes.

Why did Virginia shift toward the democrats? The DC suburbs which are heavily urban.

What made Colorado trend democratic? The Denver Metro.

What red states have the largest urban areas? Georgia, Arizona, and Texas. Guess which three are trending blue and are targeted by democrats? Yep.

Urban areas don't have the same policy needs as the more rural parts of the country. Urban areas are also where literally all the country's growth is. I don't think the GOP will have any answer for this problem since they need to hold onto their rural base which is so far detached from the urban vote.

Urban areas ---> economic area's. They are all about science, tech, infrastructure and education! The tea party is all about toughing it out in the countryside.

You mean they are all about ticks on the ass of society. The "rural areas" you refer to included suburbs where a lot of well paid middle class professionals live.

 

[Stephanie]

The GOP is toast after 2015. The only way they can even approach the party they once were is to change all blacks, Hispanics, and Women to Old White Men. Good Luck with That!

another ugly American who doesn't care about people, just their color, race and gender
that's the base of the Democrat party's standard of politics

 

[JakeStarkey]

Stephanie does not care about Americans or America.

She believes only her narrow, restricted little bit of society should rule America.

 

[Samson]

Continue to insult women voters and wonder why they reject you at the polls.

The old male "beating the chest 'I am male'" has no value in today's society.

So, following your "logic," older men in authority positions should continue to seduce female interns with cigars in order to not be rejected at the polls by women voters.

 

[Nyvin]

the US is becoming too urbanized for the GOP's rural dominated agenda. It's quite clear that the more urbanized a state becomes the more democratic it becomes.

Why did Virginia shift toward the democrats? The DC suburbs which are heavily urban.

What made Colorado trend democratic? The Denver Metro.

What red states have the largest urban areas? Georgia, Arizona, and Texas. Guess which three are trending blue and are targeted by democrats? Yep.

Urban areas don't have the same policy needs as the more rural parts of the country. Urban areas are also where literally all the country's growth is. I don't think the GOP will have any answer for this problem since they need to hold onto their rural base which is so far detached from the urban vote.

Urban areas ---> economic area's. They are all about science, tech, infrastructure and education! The tea party is all about toughing it out in the countryside.

You mean they are all about ticks on the ass of society. The "rural areas" you refer to included suburbs where a lot of well paid middle class professionals live.

Suburbs are pretty much split close to 50-50 partisan-wise. It's small town America and Rural areas that form the base of the GOP where they can pull out large victory margins.

The sad thing for the GOP is that small town and rural are both declining in population, while urban areas, particularly large urban areas, are growing fast. It's a pretty bleak picture.

More Minorities....Bigger Urban Areas...less old white people....

Where is the GOP going to go???

 

[JakeStarkey]

Continue to insult women voters and wonder why they reject you at the polls.

The old male "beating the chest 'I am male'" has no value in today's society.

So, following your "logic," older men in authority positions should continue to seduce female interns with cigars in order to not be rejected at the polls by women voters.

No, Samson, that is the silly logic of a silly person.

Hint: don't insult women voters if you want t hem to vote you.

This is not hard, buddy.

 

[bripat9643]

Urban areas ---> economic area's. They are all about science, tech, infrastructure and education! The tea party is all about toughing it out in the countryside.

You mean they are all about ticks on the ass of society. The "rural areas" you refer to included suburbs where a lot of well paid middle class professionals live.

Suburbs are pretty much split close to 50-50 partisan-wise. It's small town America and Rural areas that form the base of the GOP where they can pull out large victory margins.

The sad thing for the GOP is that small town and rural are both declining in population, while urban areas, particularly large urban areas, are growing fast. It's a pretty bleak picture.

More Minorities....Bigger Urban Areas...less old white people....

Where is the GOP going to go???

Urban areas are growing in population, but not the cities. People are rushing to the suburbs that surround the urban areas. A lot of major cities have actually declined in population. You see, people get tired of paying for ticks on the ass of society. The laws of economics overrule your belief that the number of ticks can expand indefinitely. We've already reached the tipping point. That's why the economy is no longer growing.

 

[JakeStarkey]

sigh. bripat, put down the bottle.

keep insulting women, and they will vote against the insulter.

of course, you, as an anarcho-commie, do not believe in elections

 

[Nyvin]

You mean they are all about ticks on the ass of society. The "rural areas" you refer to included suburbs where a lot of well paid middle class professionals live.

Suburbs are pretty much split close to 50-50 partisan-wise. It's small town America and Rural areas that form the base of the GOP where they can pull out large victory margins.

The sad thing for the GOP is that small town and rural are both declining in population, while urban areas, particularly large urban areas, are growing fast. It's a pretty bleak picture.

More Minorities....Bigger Urban Areas...less old white people....

Where is the GOP going to go???

Urban areas are growing in population, but not the cities. People are rushing to the suburbs that surround the urban areas. A lot of major cities have actually declined in population. You see, people get tired of paying for ticks on the ass of society. The laws of economics overrule your belief that the number of ticks can expand indefinitely. We've already reached the tipping point. That's why the economy is no longer growing.

No, since 2008 large cities are actually growing faster then Suburbs.

 

[Meathead]

Explain?

Obviously you think all minorities will vote like blacks into perpetuity. Wrong, therein the countries hope for a decent future.

 

[rightwinger]

Explain?

Obviously you think all minorities will vote like blacks into perpetuity. Wrong, therein the countries hope for a decent future.

Republicans need to convince minorities why they should vote for them. Why have they been unsuccessful?

 

[Samson]

Explain?

Obviously you think all minorities will vote like blacks into perpetuity. Wrong, therein the countries hope for a decent future.

Republicans need to convince minorities why they should vote for them. Why have they been unsuccessful?

They haven't inflated a mullato to fill an empty suit.