The Female Electorate Splits, Men Carry the Election
Leading up to Tuesday’s election, all the pundits were predicting this would be the Year of the Woman. And true to form, the female electorate outnumbered men, 53% to 47%. But after the polling places had closed and the ballots had been counted, in race after race it was men who cast the deciding vote.
How could this be true?
The reason is the female vote split right down the middle — 49% going for the Republicans and 48% for the Democrats. In contrast, the male electorate was far more unified, with 56% giving the nod to the GOP candidate and 42% going Democratic, as highlighted by this CNN poll. (The percentages don’t add to 100% because of third party candidates.)
So in Florida, 64% of men pulled the lever for Rubio, while only 44% of women did the same, handing Rubio a convincing 20-point gender gap advantage with men. In New Hampshire, 65% of men supported Kelly Ayotte, compared to 55% of women. In Pennsylvania, Republican Pat Toomey scored a 10-point advantage with the male electorate. And in Wisconsin, insurgent GOP candidate Ron Johnson edged out incumbent Russ Feingold thanks to an 8-point lead with the guy team.
For sure, the female vote appeared to be decisive in some senatorial races, such as in Arkansas, Illinois, and South Carolina. But far more often, a look at the exit poll numbers reveals men were the electoral king-makers, such as in Indiana (Dan Coats), Ohio (Rob Portman), and in countless House races.
Despite the euphoria of the moment, one sobering fact remains: Despite heady pre-election predictions, the Republicans did not take the Senate. There the Democrats still rule the roost with a solid 53-47 majority.
Let’s look at the four races where Republican candidate ran neck-and-neck with the Democratic opponent throughout the campaign, but in the end faltered: Nevada, Colorado, California, and Washington.
In the closely watched Nevada contest, Harry Reid’s web site featured a six-page “Working for Women’s Issues” promo, festooned with 13 “Highlights of Senator Reid’s Women’s Issues Record.” Yes, Harry is a swell guy!
So how did Sharron Angle counter in order to attract the male vote? Well, do a web search on the words “Sharron Angle” and “men’s issues,” and you’ll come up drier than a red-spotted toad marooned on the macadam in a Nevada heat wave.
So in the end, 53% of women went for Harry Reid, and 48% of men voted for Sharon Angle. First Lost Opportunity.
In Colorado, the contest featured weeks of Democratic Party ads hitting Buck for his supposedly less-than-progressive views on women’s rights. “Ken Buck. He’s too extreme for Colorado” became the Democratic sing-along.
And what was Buck’s proactive approach to attracting men? Among campaign strategists, it’s known as the 3-Z strategy: Zip, Zilch, and Zero. As a result, 56% of women voted Democratic and 53% of men went Republican.
So in the end, 53% of women went for Harry Reid, and 48% of men voted for Sharon Angle.
What does that say about women in Nevada?
That “Make lemonade!” strikes them as flippant, indifferent advice to pregnant rape victims? (Don’t lecture me on the small numbers that actually get pregnant — that’s beside the point and you know it.) That’s my guess. If I had voted in Nevada, I would have left the Senate slot blank. If I wanted flippant and indifferent I’d be supporting Obama.
Nice piece. So when will the Republican Party stop taking the male vote for granted? That happened with the McCain campaign in 2008, now we see the results.
Let’s hope the testosterone surge continues. Because unless the men of this country, for the most part, can overcome decades of “feminization” we are doomed. Which is why it was launched on the unsuspecting public in the first place.
I really don’t see the point of this article, I think you shound’t introduce this kind of demagoguery in this website. Who cares about this “splits” ? What’s next, a study if blacks or hispanics are more or less blue or red?
I hate identity politics.
On a serious note happy birthday Marine Corps and all my fellow leathernecks.
The Women’s Studies Departments will never be curious about why a jury of women would acquit a man of murdering his wife despite the abundance of proof, but it is the same psychology or if it weren’t the norm, psychopathy, that would explain a lot about the women’s vote.
Obama won 70% of women’s vote because there was no one to challenge him in the sex appeal department. Consider Peggy Noonan’s reverence for Ronald Reagan and her disdain for Sarah Palin. It makes no sense to the casual observer, but it does make sense to one who makes a living by it. There is a reason why trial lawyers like to stack their juries with women and it isn’t because they want justice for their client.
Great Comment. It’s a rare woman who prefers to think rather than feel. And acts upon it. Which is why the left loves them. Children feel. Adults thinks.
There are no “men’s issues” because men naturally revolt at being grouped into just another cohort that needs a little TLC from the Nanny State. Maybe it’s a bit cliche, but men are more rational and unsentimental, and that alone can explain this split.
Repealing the 19th Amendment would fix this mess faster than anything. And yes, I’m one of those girls with almost all male friends. The “sisterhood” annoys the s**t out of me.
I’m with you MissAnthropy. It took a lot of courage to make your claim and I’d also like to see a change to require an “investment” in this country before being allowed to vote. Like paying taxes. Owning property? I’m no history buff, but I’m under the impression that’s how the forefathers envisioned it.
Vagina or Penis? Is that what it comes down to?
Good gravy!
No, Delia, it is estrogen versus testosterone. It’s a matter of whether your testes have dropped or not.
So… tell me again why the nineteenth amendment was a good idea?
The writer is misinterpreting the results. Men were not the kingmakers, here. Women were.
The white male vote was similar to past elections. White women, however, trended more to the Right this time. Minorities, too, mostly voted the same or stayed home. For minorities, turnout was key. So, women were the Kingmakers, as usual.
In CA, women voted against Whitman and Fiorina, two strong, independent, self-made women. They voted for the polar opposites.
Buck and Rossi are both really nice, decent guys with solid track records. Absolutely nothing objectionable about either. Women voted for the dopey opposites.
In NV, well, the machine went to work for the vile Reid. Angle was just an average gal, certainly not stellar. O’Donnell was a poor candidate, but her opponent was vile. So women did not like stellar, but they did not like average or poor. They do like dopey and vile, it seems.
Women want to be pandered to and lied to. They want to hear the words they want to hear.
There are code words, too. Angle and O’Donnell were slammed with them. Dumb. Unsophisticated. Kooky. Whitman was a “whore” and “mean”. Women do not vote for a geeky guy. He has to be a hunk. It is still High School.
Women say one thing, but that’s not what they really want. They say the pious words, because they have to, societally. However, that’s not what they really want or mean. Every guy who is good at getting into women’s pants knows this.
Women are a contradiction. They want the Social Standing, because it offers security and stability. However, they also want the Alpha Male. An Alpha Male is not one who is generally tamed by society, but rather, one who tames it.
Women vote with their glands. Or something.
Hey Pedro
Happy Birthday to the Corps!! I’m 29 years (and retired) USN. Served many a tour with them.
You can’t really blame Sharron Angle. Males aren’t allowed to have “men’s issues”. IT’S SEXIST RAWRRRR!