From the Daily Paul:
Are women the problem?
Posted January 12th, 2008 by FoolshGame
I know it is politically incorrect to say so… but, are men the only ones that care about liberty?
Who are the vast majority of women going to vote for in November 2008? They’re either going to vote for Hillary or Obama. And, in the Republican primaries, which will decide the nominee on the Republican side, those that do vote Republican (and, they’ll be a small minority compared to those that vote Democrat), they’ll either vote “evangelical” for the Huckster or “neo-con” for Rudy.
Ron Paul does not catch the imagination of women like he does with men; certainly, not in California… and, there are more than a few delegates to be had here in California, since they’ve gone to district-by-district delegate allocation.
We could send a lot of delegates to the Republican Convention, but we need women on board for the Revolution.
So far, they’re not. The next Ron Paul campaign TV ad should be directed at women. He should tell them why they should vote for him.
FoolshGame is right in the sense that many of the “undecided” women voting have said in exit polls that they, at the last minute, felt compelled to vote for other Republican candidates because they seemed to care more about women and family issues.
In reality, they don’t understand that “seeming to care” is not the same as “caring” . Neo-cons offer a platform that is actually harmful and undermining to families.
In Democratic races, some of the women who voted were quoted as saying that they voted for Hillary because they didn’t see much difference between the candidates so they chose Hillary based on gender (YouTube clip!).
A few thoughts –
1. Delegates. The straw poll results have been good – but participants are not the same people who are delegates. The RP campaign has been working on having delegates for each state – so far, does anyone know how many RP delegates were present at the caucuses? Is this “plan” working?
2. Motherhood. Many conservative women have children and taking time off from this 24/7 job to be a delegate or to go to a straw poll is difficult .
Maybe some of the husbands out there would volunteer to to take care of their children for a few days, or be willing to dip into the vacation fund and hire a babysitter. This way, their strong, conservative wives could help shape the image of the campaign and maybe even help convince the undecided women’s vote of the truth.
I know a number of moms who would be more active in the campaign except that they love their children and would not be likely to shirk their responsibilities at home in order to attend a campaign event. For moms with newborns who are nursing, it’s pretty much impossible to attend these events.
3. Need for practical application. While I’m reluctant to “soften the message” of the campaign, I would like to see Ron Paul’s wife and female family members speaking more often. It would definitely help!
I do think that conservative women understand Dr. Paul’s message perfectly – I think that there is still a need, and I have said this before, for the campaign to show in their ads the practical application of the liberty message.
This current generation only knows the Bush / Clinton empires and Dr. Paul’s message is like comparing apples to oranges.
Many voters, men and women, have no concept of the practical implications of freedom.
Their cages have become security blankets, and breaking free is scary. They’re used to having a welfare state who provides free shots, medical care, food, housing, education, etc. The idea of personal responsibility is scary because the current system does not reward personal responsibility.
I work hard, yet there are habitually unemployed people I know who get vouchers for their mortgage payments that cost more than what my husband pays for our mortgage payment.
Sharon Jasper is classic example of this, and forgive me for quoting Michelle Malkin – I can’t find another site with the original “slum” picture, complete with 60″ TV, in the story.
Even people who are not currently depending on welfare are comforted knowing they have a lifeline to welfare access if they fail financially.
Perhaps this is a rabbit trail, but look at the example of income taxes. How many people people do you know are comfortable with giving their money to the government each year as if it’s a bank? They otherwise would not have the discipline to put aside money. They see their tax return as an investment dividend! Think of all the feature articles during tax time with suggestions for whimsical ways to spend the tax return. You’d think they were talking about winning the lottery! The average person, groomed under current system, has no concept of being disciplined throughout the year to invest the same money to yield a greater return than they would if they let the government sit on it.
If the RP campaign wants the undecided vote, they need to show how this different (and to those who don’t study history or who have studied history with the current textbooks available, the Bush/Clinton way is the modern way vs. Ron Paul’s ideas which are the “old way”) way of doing things is beneficial to them.
Undecided voters are undecided because they don’t understand and can’t imagine the benefits of freedom. There is a fear of learning the hard way. The current system bails them out – like when they commit to stupid mortgage decisions that allow them to have their cake (house bigger than they need) and eat it too (government enforced deals from lenders to allow the idiots to refinance even if their credit is in shambles).
Freedom = responsibility.
4. Be encouraged!
Citizen Jane members for Ron Paul
Ron Paul discussion at IVillage
Sarah Joy Albrecht
(Mom to five children, ages six and under.. and I’d be a delegate in a heartbeat if I had a babysitter! ;-) )