CNN – 9/9/08: When it comes to support for Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin, a new national poll suggests men and women don’t see eye to eye.
Men figure strongly in the support for Sarah Palin. Here, supporters gather Monday in Lee’s Summit, Missouri.A CNN/Opinion Research Corporation survey out Tuesday indicates that 62 percent of men questioned have a favorable opinion of the Alaska governor, nine points higher than women.
The gender gap is also apparent when it comes to whether
Palin is qualified to serve as president. Fifty-seven percent of male respondents said Palin was qualified, 14 points higher than women. A majority of women polled, 55 percent, said Palin is not qualified.
2
Support the Blog — Buy This Book!
For Kindle and with free ePub version. Only $9.49 Great reading.
Here is what Gary Shapiro CEO of the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) said: Dvorak's writing sings with insight and clarity. Whether or not you agree with John's views, he will get you thinking and is never boring. These essays are worth the read!
Put this ad on your blog!
Syndicate
Subscribe to Main Blog feed here:
Subscribe to Comments too (below):
Junk Email Filter
#15 In what way is the republican VP candidate a minority. Afaik more than 50% of US population is female, she is white, christian and conservative.
That makes her the absolute majority voter.
Or did you mean that she is a minority because she is Alaskan?
#31 – Jess Hurchist
>>Mustard
>>“looks like” = “is”?
Pretty much. Sometimes, looks can be deceiving. But in this case, Dumbya and President Cheney are just what they appear to be.
132 days left.
#32 “In what way is the republican VP candidate a minority. ”
In what way is Omama a minority? Is it because he is of African descent? Aren’t we all of African descent? So, by your reasoning, Omama is in the super majority of 100%…?
Voting for Biden as VP would prove, beyond all doubt, that men had NO brains at all, better to vote with their trouser mausers for a Babe with Brain.
26, It was in the context of adding to previous “reporting” of McCain’s earlier comment where he could not recollect how many homes he owned (legally). The liberals made it out to be that he was so rich that he couldn’t remember how many homes he owned (even though some of his homes are under his wife’s name only).
Regardless, you can scroll down near to the bottom and look at the chart under the heading of “Fewer See Pro-Republican Bias in Campaign Coverage”: http://tinyurl.com/66lfwh
Like it or not, the media has a liberal slant. There is no objectivity since we are all biased individuals. But when a news network is strongly biased due to their dislike towards a particular political philosophy, it stands out.
This headline is sexist and demeaning to men and the author should apologize, Dvorak should fire you, and seek anti-sexism therapy immediately. The notion that men think with their wieners is the oldest and most insulting prejudice out there. Sorry to disappoint those who think men should be barefoot and hunting, but we have grown beyond this.
# 36 Guyver
“It was in the context of adding to previous “reporting” of McCain’s earlier comment where he could not recollect how many homes he owned (legally). ”
First off no one claimed he didn’t own his homes legally.
Second NO!! It was referring to a comment that had just been made by Biden I believe. SORRY THANKS FOR PLAYING. TRY AGAIN! Technically it was breaking news.
“The liberals made it out to be that he was so rich that he couldn’t remember how many homes he owned (even though some of his homes are under his wife’s name only).”
NO!! The media did not make it out like that. HE DIDN’T FUCKING KNOW!!!!!! It is on tape!!!! He was asked the question and he DIDN’T KNOW!!!!! Do you know how many homes you own? I know how many I have and I have more than he does!
“Like it or not, the media has a liberal slant.”
The evidence shows otherwise. That link you just provided in not evidence it is opinions. The only thing the media is bias about is money. They don’t give a fuck about which story they do. They just want it to be Juicy so it brings them money. That start back when news no longer was allowed to be the money pit it once was for television.
38, The line of questioning in his frame of reference was legal. He did not want to go on the record and be wrong for the news to exploit. And yes, it was caught on tape. http://tinyurl.com/5r75ll
If you believe the evidence shows otherwise, you obviously didn’t read the evidence I just sent you. According to Pew Research Center, their most recent survey from December 27 indicates a 25% Pro-Democratic bias vs. 9% Pro-Republican bias.
Suck it up. There’s a bias. How much has the news discussed about Obama’s shady real estate dealings?
I’m not voting on the issues. Caribou Barbie is just a flash in the pan. She’s not hot, she’s a bitch, snake, barracuda. Anyone who has ever dated a pathological narcissist knows what I am talking about, and she is one. Someone who thinks that her fecal matter is perfumed, and she is the gods’ gift to the universe.
No way would I vote for a bitch like this, even if she agreed with me on the issues. They’re just way too high maintenance for me.
# 39 Guyver
“The line of questioning in his frame of reference was legal. ”
Oh quit with the babbling bullshit. It was a straight forword question. There is nothing “LEGAL” about it. If asked would you know how many homes you have? I know how many I own. I wouldn’t need to consult my attorney to answer the question.
“If you believe the evidence shows otherwise, you obviously didn’t read the evidence I just sent you. ”
No I read it and YOU simply don’t understand what it is you posted. THEY ARE OPINION POLLS!!!!! Not empirical evidence!!
“How much has the news discussed about Obama’s shady real estate dealings?”
How much have they discussed McCain being one of the Keating 5. About as much, don’t you think???
I can’t help but notice that my question hasn’t been answered.
It’s easy to talk shit when you don’t have to back it up.
41, LOL. Yeah you’re probably right. McCain not recollecting the number of homes he owns is probably more juicy than Obama’s shady real estate dealings.
An annual report on American Journalism probably wasn’t a good approach nor was Pew Research survey poll asking people their opinions of bias. Sounds like typical elitism where your argument is that people are too dumb to understand what a bias was if it was flashing in front of their face.
Regardless, the MSNBC breaking news comment was sarcastic commentary during the VP’s acceptance speech. It’s an overt bias. Getting your panties in a bunch doesn’t change that. But hey, if it gets MSNBC their 5 seconds of fame because Fox News / O’Reilly has a larger audience than they do then I suppose that’s great.
42, Probably because the liberals who usually dominate these forums have no desire in proving themselves wrong.
#13 – Nope. Allen Keyes. Allen Keyes. Allen Keyes.
If you don’t know who he is in relation to Obama, you don’t understand enough politics to be posting commentary about why people vote for Obama.
The Republicans in Illinois also thought Obama was only popular because he was black. Exactly what you said. So they just found “some” black guy to run as a Republican. IF what you say is true, that would totally counteract the ‘black’ effect, then it would just be experienced vs non-experienced. Wanna guess how that worked? Yeah…turns out folks were NOT voting for Obama just because he was black, but because of what he was saying. If being black was SUCH a big bonus, and led you to filling stadiums with political supporters, Jesse Jackson would be President. Just being ‘black’ isn’t important, and in our nation, is almost certainly NOT a “bonus”, but a negative (re: West Virginia)
Palin isn’t a joke because she’s a woman, she’s a joke because of her positions (which don’t match ANY of her actions, taking LOTS of Fed pork for example). There are many good qualified Republican woman. How about Christy Todd Whitman? Nope, they pick this nut.
This was the plan, wasn’t it? At first, blah blah came, that she was picked for getting Hilary’s supporters – mainly women, of course, but after all this rumoring and scandaling, it is clear, that she is boosting amount of McCain’s men.
http://www.votetheday.com/polls/palin-boosts-mccain-campaign-by-attracting-men-235/
How many houses do you own?==I don’t know.
How much money does it take to be rich?==around 5 Million.
Hows the economy doing?==We are on a sound basis and things are going pretty well.
Yep.
# 43 Guyver
“Regardless, the MSNBC breaking news comment was sarcastic commentary during the VP’s acceptance speech.”
HOW FUCKING DUMB ARE YOU??? It was a report headline on a comment that had just been made by a candidate!!!!!!
“Yeah you’re probably right. McCain not recollecting the number of homes he owns is probably more juicy than Obama’s shady real estate dealings.”
Sure as hell is because there is nothing to the Resco story.
“Sounds like typical elitism where your argument is that people are too dumb to understand what a bias was if it was flashing in front of their face.”
No, it is because peoples opinions are not FACT. Fact is backed up by evidence. Opinions are not! Are you so simple you don’t understand that?
“It’s an overt bias. ”
No it is reporting the news about a comment a candidate made.
“Getting your panties in a bunch doesn’t change that.”
Hey! I don’t know what you are into but I were boxers.
“Fox News / O’Reilly has a larger audience than they do then I suppose that’s great.”
LOL keep dreaming!
# 44 Guyver
“Probably because the liberals who usually dominate these forums have no desire in proving themselves wrong.”
Typical backwards thinking Republican. The burden is on those who made the claim.
Re: “Lipstick on a Pig” – shows you how DUMB THE REPUKES are !!! They apparently don’t know the difference between Palin’s “Pit Bull” and Obama’s (and many others – including McCain) “Pig” !!! Seems don’t know their A$$ form their ELBOW !!! Fit to LEAD ??? NO WAY, JOSE !!!
#1 mentioned it but why didn’t anyone pull the photo. It is a confirmed photoshop per Snopes.
#45 Kidder – If the Republicans had a bootylicious black woman they could have stood up, they would have. That would have been a trifecta for them. The best they could come up with is some unknown female pol from the Alaskan Territories fresh from fighting off the Commie Hoard threat.
Specifically – appearance should not be a criteria for high office – no matter how emotional the appeal may be. For me the choice is simple and fact based. The democratic candidate is not ready to be President. The Junior Senator from IL has no credentials, no accomplishments, no meaningful legislation and no plausible mission that would earn my vote. He rarely took a stand on anything – choosing to vote “present” rather than be recorded against anything. He did want to cut and run on a war that is all but won now.
Further he has never represented issues pertinent to my demographic. Indeed he seems to be so one sided toward the one demographic, he calls “his people”, that I feel excluded. Certainly, if he were a white man, obsessively focused on white issues only, many would call him a bigot. As it is – we are afraid to mention that the proposed “emperor has no clothes” for fear the we would be plastered with the infamous label of “white bigot” ourselves. As Dennis Miller phased it: “The man is all smoke and mirrors an no one seems brave enough to point that out.” His running mate, Joe Biden, is competent to be President, but Joe trailed so far in the primaries that it is hard to see him as a leader representing the consensus of his party or the nation. Surely there must be someone more generally acceptable – perhaps the next runner up? Whatever did happen to Hillary Clinton?The actual issue here is that Hillary would have upstaged Obama, with considerable help from her husband – making Obama smoke and mirrors that much more obvious. And if the contrast isn’t visible enough now, just wait until the 2012 campaign begins the day after the 2008 inauguration. Most of all, it concerns me that neither Obama or Biden has managed so much as a 7-11 on second shift; nor have they ever been an employee of anyone. That does distance them from the majority of us and especially anyone who is capable of leading the world’s largest bureaucratic democracy. Leading the Republican side we have someone that exceeds the democratic offering in every category. He is a highly revered veteran of both the House and Senate with an earned reputation for causing progress, reform and change – even if it meant challenging his own party or joining with an opposing party. He comes from generations of war heroes, but eschewed a long military career in favor of making his own mark independently. Perhaps he gets too much credit for being a POW; it wasn’t his choice after all. However, the experience and resolve he showed help shape him into who he is today; Someone singularly focused on service to his country, who suffers fools badly. Sarah Palin has more executive experience than either democratic candidate – indeed even more than her running mate – which makes her a perfect complement to the Republican ticket. She has an expertise with both energy and environmental decisions. Unlike just about everyone else in the executive branch lately, she comes from modest beginnings, has never had servants, and is not a millionaire. It gives her a unique perspective on middle income family values. Perhaps she gets too much credit for being a attractive; that wasn’t her choice either. But it gives her confidence – and to her credit she has remained humble, popular and accessible to everyone. Does she have extensive foreign affairs experience? No – but neither did Bill Clinton, Harry Truman or even Franklin Roosevelt when they entered office. Would the Democrats call them incompetent? It should be noted, all of these neophytes rose to the challenges quickly, because they were highly intelligent, competitive in behalf of their country, tenacious and were not easily intimidated by forces domestic or foreign. Just like the current Governor of Alaska. And to correct the record – Sarah is not the first ethics reforming, sports-person, trust-busting, naturalist, oval office aspirant to fell and field dress a moose. – Just the first since Teddy Roosevelt.
#13 GiG has it nailed. The more Palin is criticized for being inexperienced while racking up the votes because she is a babe and a good speaker, the more it highlights Obama’s similar situation. Except his sex-appeal is that he is black, and more critically he’s running for the top office.
Even I could handle Obama winning – but only because he’s black. So… will men vote for Obama with their brains or their racist demeanors?
The GOP has just out-Obama-ed Obama.
RBG
Mike its funny how you expect one side to “rise to the challenge” of its inexperience, while it makes the other side “not fit to lead.” The experience issue is bogus and only meant to distract from real issues.
And where was good ole “maverick” McCain when he was rubber stamping neo con policy and in general sucking up to win the nomination? I had a lot more respect for him 8 years ago.
Still no links for up my question from #9.
#16
There are lots of great speakers out there. They all aren’t one term sentors that have made it to the finals.
RE TCC3
In the best of all worlds, voters should be offered executive and legislative experience in all candidates from both parties. We didn’t get that this time. As a consolation, it would be nice to (at least) get it in combination between two candidates on the same ticket.
This year one side offers average executive experience in one individual and strong legislative experience in another. There is hope that this is enough.
The other side offers meager legislative experience in it’s lead candidate – but makes up for it with strong legislatitive experience in it’s second offering. However it offers NO EXECUTIVE EXPERIENCE in either.
To say that experience governing a state is not adequate – rules out many many previously sucessful past presidents – many of them liberal Democrats.
Would you hire an individual with no executive experience to be CEO of even a small company? Why then would you do that with the largest most powerful organization on earth.
Repeating the topic sentance: “appearance should not be a criteria for high office” So neither sex appeal nor white guilt should be a factor in the decision. Nor should dislike for a third party who will not be a member of our government after January.
If the Democrats offer a lead candidate with inadequate legislative experiance – AND inadequate executive experience, I will not vote for him no matter what names liberals may call me. I will take the best combination available.
48, OMG you’re about as dumb as Conservatives who thought Obama talking about his Muslim faith with George Stephanopoulos somehow proved it was a Freudian Slip.
Measuring bias whether left or right leaning will have some degree of objectivity because you will probably not have everyone agreeing on what is positive or negative. The clear thing here in the surveys is if there is some degree of consistency and if so, what the general trend is. Now you can argue that this is strictly perception, but I have a little more faith in that people can spot Pro-Obama / Pro-McCain stuff from the Anti-Obama / Anti-McCain stuff. What this really boils down to is you don’t trust Pew Research Center or their methodology.
For someone who claims to wear boxers, you seem to scream like a little girl starved for attention. Nah, you got your panties in a bunch.
To address your disagreement over ratings and overt bias (at least with respect to MSNBC)… albeit reported by Fox: http://tinyurl.com/65bsb4
Speaking of backwards thinking and dumb, just because someone is anti-Liberal doesn’t mean they’re a Republican. Maybe if you didn’t scream like a girl and talked tough about wearing boxers you’d know that. Grow up kid. 🙂
Meant to say “subjectivity:
Measuring bias whether left or right leaning will have some degree of objectivity because you will probably not have everyone agreeing on what is positive or negative.
GOOD GOD FOLKS!
Am I the only chick that reads this blog? Does that also make me a “pit bull” since I hang with the “good ol’ boys club” here?
First, so much for all the shit talking that Obama is trying to be a celebrity… for Palin is now in those ranks (officially might I add) for having her own action figure. Of course, you know it was some creepy lonely man who came up with that idea. That is why you see blow up dolls only for men!
Men are clearly creatures of the visual world while women go for more emotions and feelings. Hello, this is basic Biology 101 at work. Our society is very appearance focused which is why cosmetic surgery, diet pills, make-up and fashion are billion dollar industries. This blog doesn’t seem to me to be the target market for any of the above mentioned industries.
It just dawned on me that I might inadvertently be contributing to the McCain/Palin campaign thanks to this site. I mean clearly Mr. Dvorak is accepting advertising from the McCain party. And by clicking on links to Mr. Dvoraks website, I am lining his pockets more money. Then Mr. Dvorak could be taking that money and donating to the McCain campaign.
I may not be able to (in good conscious) visit this site until this f’n election is over…
I don’t remember “must have been a Governor or a CEO to be eligible for the Presidency” in Article II of the constitution.
With the number of foundering companies run into the ground by greedy men who’s only interest is in their own wealth, I wouldn’t say CEO is all that great of a qualification.
GWB had both business and government Executive experience and I don’t think that was a very good indicator of his presidential performance.
Why do we demand change and then elect the same “experience” that got us into trouble? Why do we rail against politicians and then keep electing career politicians to high office?
I almost want less experience, frankly. Its a shame the system basically precludes the ascension of more grassroots “average joe” type candidates. Sometimes it seems like out of touch politicians do things your average, well educated, common sense fellow would never dream of – to our detriment.
Regarding how many houses McCain owned:
Many couples with one wealthy spouse and one who is not have a firewall of sorts between their finances, often protected by a pre-nup. Why should he know or care how his wife’s real-estate is enumerated? The libs are making a bonfire out of a match-head. Can’t they criticize something of substance?
Regarding McCain’s $5 million comment, again another molehill made into a mountain by desperate lib zombies. If you actually watched the orignal quote, McCain makes it clear that he’s throwing “$5 million” out as a joke (everyone laughs) in response to a stupid question and follows it up by saying .. “seriously….that comment will be distorted” He previously defined rich as having a good job, a house and an education. Anyone without an ideological blinder on knows what he was saying.
In general a rich person is anyone making more than you are, no?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mP-0pedQeGw