fucktoyprincess
Posts: 2337
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: TreasureKY First, if this election were truly as polarized by race as you've suggested, Romney would have won. To be honest, McCain would have won his second term as President Obama would never have been elected. In 2010, the census reports that there are 137,263,000 registered voters. 114,482,000 (83%) are white. Polarized simply means tending towards one side versus another. It doesn't mean everyone white voted for Romney. And while those may be the figures for registered voters, not all registered voters actually vote on election day. quote:
If, as you say, "most white people generally tend to vote Republican" were true, don't you think we'd be looking at a completely different political landscape right now? Definition of MOST 1 : greatest in quantity, extent, or degree <the most ability> 2 : the majority of <most people> Definition of MAJORITY 1: obsolete : the quality or state of being greater 2 a : the age at which full civil rights are accorded b : the status of one who has attained this age 3 a : a number or percentage equaling more than half of a total <a majority of voters> <a two-thirds majority> b : the excess of a majority over the remainder of the total : margin <won by a majority of 10 votes> c : the greater quantity or share <the majority of the time> 4: the group or political party having the greater number of votes (as in a legislature) 5: the military office, rank, or commission of a major So, by these definitions of most and majority, most means 50% or more. 50% or more of white males and females voted for Romney. That is a fact. That was not enough to carry the election. That is also a fact. Please correct me if I'm wrong. quote:
As far as how women voted, it is kind of naive to think all women focus on the same limited issues. I'm rather insulted to think that I have to be pandered to on very special issues related to "female things". Like I shouldn't worry my "pretty little head" over the real issues of economy and foreign policy. Sure there are some Republican idiots out there who say some pretty stupid things, but I don't appreciate being lumped in as supporting them simply because I'm fiscally conservative and identify as Republican. It would be nice to be given credit for having half a brain... but apparently women aren't supposed to think for themselves and need someone to tell us what we need to be concerned about. I can see where someone accepting that guidance might be confused by the results. Everyone is free to vote however they want. Where did I suggest otherwise. I think voting against self-interest is illogical, but you are entitled to your opinion. So you don't think issues like equal pay, which I specifically mention in my post, are economic? What is equal pay to you then? There is nothing wrong with being fiscally conservative but I believe women deserve equal pay for equal work. Here is the congressional voting record for a particular bill that related to equal pay - The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009. As you can see, all but three Republicans voted against it. It is only law because Democrats voted for it. http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2009/roll037.xml Please explain to me why an ECONOMIC act of this nature should not matter to women? Why does your fiscal conservatism support a party that does not believe women are entitled to the same pay as men? Do you not believe women are just as worthy in the economy as men? Or do you not work so these types of issues are irrelevant to you? Again, I'm not asking you to be on the side of equal pay. I just want to understand why you don't care that women are paid fairly. You claim to be worried about the economy. I guess just on behalf of men? And just to be clear, I am not confused about anything.
_____________________________
~ ftp
|