Today an article in the Washington Post supports my theory, based on some fabulously fun polling data:
Let's hope we can help tip the scales, ladies!The consistent lead that Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York has maintained over Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois and others in the race for the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination is due largely to one factor: her support from women.
In the most recent Washington Post-ABC News poll, Clinton led Obama by a 2 to 1 margin among female voters. Her 15-point lead in the poll is entirely attributable to that margin. Clinton drew support from 51 percent of the women surveyed, compared with 24 percent who said they supported Obama and 11 percent who said they backed former senator John Edwards of North Carolina.
Clinton is drawing especially strong support from lower-income, lesser-educated women -- voters her campaign strategists describe as "women with needs." Obama, by contrast, is faring better among highly educated women, who his campaign says are interested in elevating the political discourse.
Campaign advisers say they expect Obama to pick up support from all categories of voters once they get to know him better, and that could change the structure of the race. But for now, women appear to be playing an outsized role in shaping it and could tip the scale toward the winner.
1 comment:
I really am against voting for a candidate based on sex or gender.
The thing that really sucks is that if a woman were elected president and did a terrible job...her sex/gender would be wrapped up in the judgment. although no one blames bush's stupidity on his penis.
it's nice to visit oh kermie again! have a great summer
Post a Comment