Obama’s Volley in the War to Get Women Voters
President Obama’s Forum on Women and the Economy today was not just his Good Friday opportunity to tout a mixed-bag job report but a platform from which to release a dossier on women’s policy that essentially amounted to a 70-page campaign flier.
“There’s been a lot of talk about women and women’s issues lately, as there should be,” he said. “But I do think that the conversation has been oversimplified. Women are not some monolithic bloc.”
But the event, hosted by senior adviser and chairwoman of the White House Council on Women and Girls Valerie Jarrett, and accompanying materials were a crystal-clear effort to seize upon that bloc in light of the stumbles that the presumptive GOP nominee, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, is having with women voters.
A USA Today/Gallup poll released this week showed Obama with the support of more than six in 10 women under 50 while Romney’s support in that group has dropped by 14 points, to 30 percent, since mid-February.
The women on stage behind the president included Karma Cottman, the executive director of the DC Coalition Against Domestic Violence; Victoria Rockwell, the president of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers; and two women involved in workplace discrimination cases. But the real backdrop was this morning’s Labor Department report that showed unemployment dropping to 8.2 percent even as the number of those not participating in the workforce hit an all-time high.
“Right now, no issue is more important than restoring economic security for all our families in the wake of the greatest economic crisis since the Great Depression,” Obama said. “…And that includes addressing challenges that are unique to women’s economic security — challenges that have been around since long before the recession hit.”
The unemployment rates of men and women have evened out this year, though men initially had a tougher time in the recession. In June 2009 the jobless rate for men was 9.9 percent, with women at 7.6 percent. In January 2012, 7.7 percent of men were unemployed, and the same for women.
Today’s report showed that in March the unemployment rate for women was 7.4 percent and for men it was 7.6 percent.
“Women’s unemployment rate finally has come down since the start of the recovery, but progress remains slow,” said Joan Entmacher, vice president for Family Economic Security at the National Women’s Law Center. “The modest job gains reported today underscore the importance of continued investment in programs that create jobs and help families get back on their feet.” She proceeded to slam House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan’s budget plan as one that would “take us backwards.”
The event coincided with the release of a White House report titled Keeping America’s Women Moving Forward, 70 pages of 2012 campaigning wrapped in administration policyspeak. It broke down how many women received Pell grants, thanks to the president; how much compensation has been obtained for victims of gender-based wage discrimination since January 2010, thanks to his administration; how many women on Medicare got improved prescription drug coverage, etc.
“The Payroll tax cut provided an average of $1,000 of tax relief for nearly 75 million women,” states the report. “…President Obama has committed to protecting Social Security for an estimated 30 million women beneficiaries.”
The 2009 Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, which was the first bill Obama signed into law, is highlighted in the report. It has been mentioned by Barack and Michelle Obama in nearly every campaign speech so far this season.
So, Obama is courting the women’s vote now? Of course he is! Romney could learn a thing or two because he is letting a big part of half of the electorate slip away. With the primaries all but over, it’s past time to stop talking about social issues and focus on the economy.
Romney has not been talking much about social issues.
His focus has been on the economy and the related issue of energy.
You may have Romney confused with Santorum.
How can ask us to do such a thing? If we would lose by running on social issues, then screw the economy, because we deserve to live under communists if we can’t have a basic respect for human rights.
Someone will have to explain to me how any woman could be so “dumb”…
Can they not read the stats on how women have faired with this administration?
???Maybe Ann Romney should make a special effort to point these facts out to all of America..
Women simply cannnot be this naive
“Someone will have to explain to me how any woman could be so “dumb”…”
You people really don’t get it do you? Guess you’re gonna learn the hard way … again. Maybe you’re the dumb one?
You people? Whatever do you mean? C’mon, Sugar Britches, let it out.
Troll.
Unfortunately, the Republican Party has yet to fully understand that delving too deeply into the social issues is a loser for women. IOW, there cannot be much political capital gained by getting between women & their reproductive rights.
The GOP can kiss the women’s vote buh, bye this election cycle just like all the others and they have nobody to blame but themselves. They are so out of touch with women’s issues. Mitt Romney’s latest campaign video, for instance, simply titled “Family,” has a decidedly retro feel — and not just because it consists mostly of silent Super 8 footage and old yellowing family photographs featuring some spectacular ’70s fashions. Whereas, President Obama highlights the issues that contemporary women deal with (i.e. working and raising a family), and he speaks to them directly rather than using Michelle as a surrogate like Mitt does with his wife Ann.
I’ve long suspected that one of the reasons the Rs hate Michelle so much is because she’s everything that both terrifies them and exhilarates them about a woman. She’s widly intelligent, stunning, sexy and yet alarmingly down to earth. She’s the total package. They, on the other hand, are so often married to Stepford Women who make great mothers, lovely spouses and that’s about it. They’re insanely jealous that they married their moms while Barack married his dream girl.
It’s kind of like Leave it to Beaver vs. Life in the Present. And the Rs can’t deal with life in the present or the change that encompasses it, which is why they are always trying to romanticize past eras or even turn back the clock.
“I’ve long suspected that one of the reasons the Ds hate Sarah so much is because she’s everything that both terrifies them and exhilarates them about a woman. She’s wildly intelligent, stunning, sexy and yet alarmingly down to earth. She’s the total package. They, on the other hand, are so often married to Womyn who make great professional grad students at expensive liberal arts colleges in obscure subject matter, and that’s about it. They’re insanely jealous that they married someone with a bigger brass set while Todd married his dream girl.”
FIFY, Cynical.
“while Todd married his dream girl”
The important thing lili is that most women would agree with my assessment and not yours and they will be taking that opinion to the polls in November. You Betcha!
Bye the way, look like your heroine bombed on her latest gig … lol
Who said she was my heroine? I just was struck by the absolute pomposity of your post, and having read Iowahawk’s latest opus regarding homonculi….well, I couldn’t resist. I’m certain he had your type in mind when he wrote it, Cynical.
But you go right ahead and think Michelle is a looker. Reasonably attractive, yes. But not in Sarah’s/Tina Fey’s or Carla Bruni’s ballpark when it comes to looks, or Hillary’s when it comes to intelligence (love her or hate her….can’t say she’s dumb. Her college paper runs circles around Michelle’s.) She married well. That’s it. Sorry.
I never said Sarah was dumb. She’s certainly smart enough to ride this gig as long as it puts gas in her SUV (or helicopter). But your mentioning of Sarah Palin (Sarah who at this point) is really a false equivalent and a straw woman. Most Republican men DO seem marry their mothers (Reagan did, as well as both Bush presidents, and now Romney). Say what you want about Michelle Obama’s academic acumen, the fact is she has a very compelling life story that appeals not only to the general public but to women (and not with a Y). They can relate to her and her experiences. She is real. I don’t think the same can be said about Ann Romney, who seems like a very nice lady but is kind of a Stepford Wife (albeit not quite as bad as Calista Gingrich). Ann Romney is lucky that she married well and could live in wealth and luxury, so that she didn’t have to work. I don’t fault her for being a stay at home mom (a luxury these days), good for her and all the maids and servants that helped her do it. Anyway, my point is that women relate more to the type of women Michelle Obama is because she is accessible. The same can’t be said for Ann Romney, so let’s stay on topic.
I refuse to compromise my values in order to “win” an election (quotes because such a win is no win at all). If we can’t win on a human rights campaign, or we’re too cowardly to try, go ahead and destroy the economy, because I don’t care anymore!
The GOP is unquestionably now working on a plan that requires a trans-vaginal probe for women before they enter the voting booth, speaking of violating “human rights.”
Michelle (Robinson) Obama never accomplished a damn thing in the public arena except to milk the system. I am sure that she is a wonderful mother and devoted wife but otherwise she is nothing more than an ultra-liberal Democrat hack. Try researching her background before you try to sell her as something she isn’t.
The First lady’s ‘wildly intelligent.. down to Earth’? Really?
I wish I could see/read of her intellectual prowess but am only privy to her moronic thesis (heck it may be better than her ‘intellectual equal’ Barack Obama alas no one knows), receiving a nearly 300% pay raise in a job that was 86′d altogether when she left the hospital (‘oddly’ her husband provided funds to said hospital where his wife cashed in. Cronyism, graft doesn’t begin to touch what occurred).
As for being, ‘..’down to Earth’ – few First Lady’s use/ abuse the taxpayer provided aircraft than our present has engaged in. The frequent getaways, both domestic and foreign junkets sold as, ‘international political necessities’.
I see the First Lady is even on, ‘The Biggest Loser’. Wouldn’t it be cool to see mediocre cook and newly anointed diabetic Paula Deen in attendance as well on the program?
Whereas Ms. Deen spoke of the First Lady, ‘constantly eating’ when on Ms. Deen’s program recently.
I’ll wager you think Mrs. Obama is in shape as well, right?
Thanks for the chuckles, my friend.
What planet are you from? I think Michelle O is a dog mostly.
“…Michelle so much is because she’s everything that both terrifies them and exhilarates them about a woman. She’s widly intelligent, stunning, sexy and yet alarmingly down to earth. She’s the total package.”
LOL. A testimonial to the fact that there is certainly no accounting for taste. I do think though that if it were not for Michelle’s miserable disposition, she could possibly be somewhat attractive, but alas, she is so steeped in cynicism & hatred for this country she simply doesn’t come off as a bit appealing in the least, sexually or otherwise. Oh, & her fashion “sense” leaves much to be desired.
Look at the Gallup polls on the male vs. female vote over the past year.
The gender gap just increased dramatically starting in February 2012, with a major shift of female voters to the Dems.
And there are possible reasons why that happened.
According to the latest Gallup poll, the issue that female voters care most about is: Health care. (Unlike male voters, who care more about the Federal deficit and debt.)
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/story/2012-04-01/swing-states-poll/53930684/1
It’s easy to see why the GOP may be alienating female voters on the health care issue. So far, the GOP has been all negative (“Repeal ObamaCare”) rather than positive (“Here is how our party can do a better job with health care than ObamaCare”). Romney has been guilty of that too.
I don’t know if some of Santorum’s more intemperate comments on things like birth control are hurting the GOP with female Independent voters. But they’re definitely not helping.
I would suggest you take a look at a short piece by Joan Walsh over at that liberal rag Salon. Before you discount the message because you don’t like the messenger digest what she says because it is the truth. Here’s a snippet:
“But really, when Republicans are repealing equal pay laws and proposing federal budgets that disproportionately hurt women, as well as restricting funding for contraception, who’s playing politics with women’s issues?”
http://www.salon.com/2012/04/06/republicans_just_dont_get_it/
Can you blame President Obama for essentially taking advantage of a political opportunity that was handed to him on a platter? Any good republican would do the same.
Did you ask your husband if you could comment on articles not written by Media Matters or the Center for American Progress, Michelle?
Just promise free everything and you have it made.
Greece, here we come.
Art Laffer: Obama Doesn’t Get It — ‘Government Spending Destroys Jobs’ Friday, 06 Apr 2012 07:43 AM By Julie Crawshaw
http://www.moneynews.com/StreetTalk/Laffer-Obama-Budget-republican/2012/04/06/id/435035?s=al&promo_code=E990-1
So as Uhbama points out, “Women aren’t a monolithic, interest group” he juxtaposes this at, ‘The White House Forum of Women and the Economy’.
I echo comment #2′s position.. are Uhbama female zombies TRULY this dumb?
The pandering in politics to this demographic and that.. it’s beyond ridiculous.
So when speaking of the economy/ jobs it’s putting the female demographic in the rear view? Wow.
I’m an Independent Conservative and find this political theater to be asinine.
golly geez. obiwon wants to give women free stuff that other folks earned to buy their support?
wonder where (coughdivorcecourtcough) did he get an idea like that?
i guess he could maybe institute a new program for women only hiring and such. he could call it affirmative action. yeah, and then we could all start calling men bad names, and constantly making fun of men and boys on t.v. it’ll work. then he could promise to make the schools hostile to boys. oh wait, that has already happened.
If women want to stop domestic violence they should learn how to use a firearm. How is the Federal Government going to help when a violent person is coming at you? This administration wants to micro manage everything, and will lie through their teeth to get what they want. Republicans are really no better, but they are more friendly to allowing law abiding citizens the right to protect themselves.
Yeah!
Obama’s health care package is wonderful for women,
if the Supreme Court says it is.
But tell me how you will get to the government health care clinic on 6 dollar a gallon gas,
ride the bus, take a taxi?
No wait!
Walk to the health clinic,
walking is supposed to be good for you.
Romney is doing good avoiding Women’s issues. I think the left is going to hold off until the peak campaign season, but I look for an attack on how Mormon Women are treated. The left does a good job playing to many women’s instinctual desire to be take care of. (Gonna catch hell for that one, I’m sure)
–two days Axelrod will have him speak on something else just to keep changing the subject and divert attention from his record.
Regarding this war on women, does Islamic honor killing of women get a waiver?
With all due respect, I think the relevant data is the rate of unemployed married males, currently at 5%. No modern American President has been re-elected with that rate at 5% or over, and trending up. Bush was re-elected with 3%, trending down. Clinton ditto at 3%, trending down. The first Bush was not re-elected at 5% trending up and winning a war. Reagan was re-elected at about 4.2%, trending down. Carter was not re-elected at 7% and trending up. Ford was not re-elected at 5%, trending up. Nixon was re-elected at 3.1%. However, Johnson declined to run for another term even while the rate was at 2% and trending down with the war going badly. And Kennedy won his first term with the rate at 5%, which is currently the rate now. Stats courtesy of the St. Louis Fed. However, since this about the first black American President not running on his record with a war going badly, all bets are off.
The fact is that both parties are attacking women; just that Obama is more sly and hidden about it.
President Obama would have us believe that there is some kind of war on women, just in time for his re-election effort. But he is the one who made sure that China’s monstrous population effort would be fully supported by the UN Fund for Population Activities (UNFPA).. Example of what he signed: Chinese women have no choice. If they had a second child (an “illegal” child) they women are rounded up, thrown in the back of a two-ton truck, and carted off to the local infirmary. There, they can be held down and forcibly aborted. Many of these unfortunate women are in their last trimester of pregnancy.
If the abortion produces a live child, it’s often the practice for them to drown the newborn baby. Since these brutal policies in effect limiting Chinese couples to only one child, the rural Chinese felt further pressure to make sure that child was a boy. That’s because sons are the only social “safety net” for hundreds of millions of Chinese.
How does this apply to Obama? In his time in office, he and his administration has routinely cited the authority of the United Nations over the US Constitution, the United States of America. President Obama sent a letter to Speaker of the House John Boehner in which he boldly asserted the “Authority” of international powers (UN) over and above the US Constitution. Obama, Panetta, and Dempsey openly declared that they do NOT represent the American people and instead represent a global dictatorship (UN) that has usurped the sovereignty of the United States.
The Pentagon, Gen. Martin Dempsey, President Obama along with US. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta have been trying to declare a Coup D’etat (takeover by a foreign entity, person, or nation) on our Constitutional government by giving the United Nations “Supreme Authority” over the US. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta gave testimony asserting that the United Nations and NATO have “supreme authority” over the actions of the United States military.
That means UN has been using our military for their military actions, that H. Clinton and Obama have given the UN “Authority” over guns, zoning, water, food in the USA.
So females will have no choice at all soon. How do we stop this? We arrest and prosecute all domestic enemies of the USA. (Domestic enemies pursue legislation, programs against the powers of the US Constitution. They work on destroying and weakening the Rights of the People guaranteed by the Constitution. Plus they create laws, amendments, etc that goes against the restraint on the three branches of our government by the Constitution)
Smoke and mirrors! Better yet, “Right Hand/Left Hand Rule.” Kabuki theatre.
While We The People (the masses) are being entertained with this ‘flim-flammery,’ nefarious attempts at wresting 2012 elections from America, thus guaranteeing Mr. Obama and his fellow travelers (read: Cass Sustein, Organizer-in-Chief), re-election are underway.
How so? one asks. Well, remember Mr. Obama’s press meeting the week of April 5-6 when his famous faux pas of “give me some space until re-election” was aired from an open mike?
Since 2008 a little known company in Tampa. FL, has been tabulating voter results for some 900 jurisdictions in some 26-odd states across America. This has covered overseas votes, voter ID’s, primary and general elections. SOE Software.com has provided election management solutions in the USA. Their track record includes:Absentee ballot fraud, voter ID fraud, voter registration fraud in some (or all) of the states this program is in use.
Program name is “CLARITY” and comes in a package of 8 modules.
While SOE software was busy contracting with USA electoral processes, another unknown company, in Barcelona, Spain was busy organizing venture capitalists: Nauta Capital, offices in Barcelona, SP/Boston, MA;Balderton Capital, offices in London, UK; and Spinnaker Capital LLC, offices in Boston, MA to ‘invest’ in capital, land (buildings,etc.) large amounts of electronic equipment and hardware and skilled technicians…in Barcelona, Spain.
This company’s name is SCYTL headlined in MarketWatches April 8, 2012 press briefing. See, SCYTL bought SOE Software.
Today, SCYTL has been awarded (by whom, We The People don’t know) America’s contract for 2012 Presidential elections tabulations (in November)by a central electronic processing system located in Barcelona, Spain, owned and operated by SCYTL.
One senses Messr. George Soros’ fingerprints are all over this ‘behind the scenes’ slight-of-hand operation. He has covered his fingerprints with so many layers of “front” organizations, hard to peel back these financial flows.
Congress MUST investigate, immediately, this travesty of justice. America’s electoral process tabulations of 2012 Presidential Elections are to be reported from Barcelona, Spain???? A country notorious for past electoral transgressions???? What ‘bat-in-the belfry’ flim-flammery is this all about? HUH! Guaranteeing Mr. Obama’s re-election (promised to Messr. Medvevdev)?
Stop this insanity, now! Write your Congressperson. Fax,email, snail mail, a protest to this chicanery.God Bless America.
Vivek SaraswatKabhi ho sake to prem ki uss paribhasha ko bntaaa jo ek kitab ke akhiri panne par hum dono ko mili thi Ankho main halki si thirkan aur bas