Can Harper Seduce Women?

[tml12]

Aside from the relatively hilarious way canada.com chose to publish this article , I think that the female vote may decide this election.

http://www.canada.com/topics/news/politics...79f03db&k=59426

A lot more women I know seem to be voting Conservative this time...

[Biblio Bibuli]

http://www.canada.com/topics/news/politics...79f03db&k=59426

The last paragraph of John Ivison's article in today's NP says it all:

"Mr. Harper's campaign team may have advised him to project more emotion, modesty and confidence. Unfortunately for the Conservative leader, many women voters still seem to believe that he's only after one thing -- their vote."

You see, women are generally used to men's peeping glances, and since Stephen Harper is a gentleman plus and thus doesn't have that dirty little habit they feel that there is something missing.

It's obvious that Mr. Harper's team have their work cut out for them, teaching him how to ogle women's behinds, boobs etc. ..... like the rest of us do.

If today's debate moderator is a woman, watch him carefully. He may even give her a lewd whistle once or twice, if they advised him properly.

GO STEPHEN GO!

[mowich]

The last paragraph of John Ivison's article in today's NP says it all:

"Mr. Harper's campaign team may have advised him to project more emotion, modesty and confidence. Unfortunately for the Conservative leader, many women voters still seem to believe that he's only after one thing -- their vote."

You see, women are generally used to men's peeping glances, and since Stephen Harper is a gentleman plus and thus doesn't have that dirty little habit they feel that there is something missing.

It's obvious that Mr. Harper's team have their work cut out for them, teaching him how to ogle women's behinds, boobs etc. ..... like the rest of us do.

If today's debate moderator is a woman, watch him carefully. He may even give her a lewd whistle once or twice, if they advised him properly. GO STEPHEN GO!

There are times when I simply don't understand what my fellow female citizens are thinking or if indeed they are at all. Countless times I have heard them respond to a reporter's inquiries about Mr. Harper by stating that they: don't like his hair; don't like his eyes; don't like his smile; think he is sneaky; and thus they won't vote for him. How absurd, how shallow, how stupid. Yet these same types would be screaming to the heavens should Mr. Harper decide to say have bot-ox for his lips, or dye his hair or have his eyes done, which thank the Goddess he never will. How can anyone base their vote upon the physical attributes of a person? No wonder our country is such a bloody mess if these are the reasons behind a voters choice of candidate.

I happen to think wee Jackie Layton is a real cuddle-bug and sexy as hell. Doesn't mean I like or agree with his policies or that I would ever vote for him. Giles is pretty good eye-candy too, wouldn't vote, can't vote, for him either.

Wake up people!!!! Do a some investigating, make an effort for pete's sake, find out the policies of all the parties make your vote one based on a clear understanding of your candidates platform. I would prefer of course that you vote Conservative however I realize that not every one is as enlightened to the benefits of a CPC government as myself and fellow CPC supporters, so whatever party you decide to vote for make sure your vote is intelligent.

[August1991]

The Harper Conservatives, traditionally neglectful of women and their issues, plans to go a-courting.

Reports retired Conservative senator Pat Carney: "Stephen Harper has reviewed the numbers and realizes this isn't a gender issue, it's a political issue."

The long-time B.C. politician -- a powerful minister in Brian Mulroney's government in the 1980s, is a board member of Equal Voice, a seven-year old national organization promoting women in politics. She says Harper has decided to "bite the bullet."

To date Harper has shown zero sensitivity on the issue, doing little to encourage female candidacies and less to advance women within his caucus.

Women comprise no better than 11 per cent of the caucus. Of 32 cabinet jobs, six are held by women, none representing a heavyweight portfolio such as finance, health, defence or foreign affairs.

Harper also performs poorly when it comes to appointing women to senior posts on boards and commissions.

In preparations for the next election, 36 per cent of Liberal candidates nominated so far and 38 per cent of NDP candidates are women. This contrasts with just 16 per cent for the Conservative.

Barbara Yaffe

[rant]In my view, this isn't about percentages. In general, for many reasons, women don't want to be firemen, fishermen or politicians. OTOH, go to any ECE class and look at who's there. IOW, let people, women and men, be free to choose.[/rant]

To get a majority, Harper has to get more votes from one of three groups: women, city people or French Quebecers. French Quebecers and city voters are concentrated. At a certain threshold, they'll deliver seats. Women votes are spread across the country. They only matter in tight ridings.

How to deal with this? Harper could take the risky route and concentrate a message on one group. Or he could to try to diversify by sending one message to all three groups. But then, what is common to these groups?

----

Let's ignore urban voters and concentrate on women and French Quebecers. I'll go out on an outrageous limb, use North American leftist ideology and say that they are victims who want paternalistic protection. Harper has the credibility to offer this (although the very idea is contrary to Harper's libertarian streak).

Rather than be the husband many woman are glad they divorced, Harper should become the rich uncle who assures a divorced niece that she's doing well on her own and she need not fear finishing as a bag lady.

As to Quebec, Harper should do the same. (Of course, the Tories need some strong names as candidates in Quebec.) But while Harper's a WASP, he should also make it plain that he has a soft spot for Quebec. IOW, Harper should make it known that he trusts Quebecers will manage but he'll give a good word if necessary. They're not alone.

Stephen Harper has to become a sponsor. Like a good father, that's what government is.

[Carinthia]

It really does boil down to "personalities" more than it does about platforms if you ask me. Now take for instance, the day the camera caught Harper dropping his kids off at school and he shook their hands upon saying goodbye instead of giving his wee ones a hug. This spoke volumes to me. Yes, I was once married to one of these anal, keep the emotions in check types, so this resonated negatively for me. Funny how you just can't get a simple thing like that out of your mind and it just stays with you...right to the voting booth.

Edited February 23, 2008 by Carinthia

[myata]

Wake up people!!!! Do a some investigating, make an effort for pete's sake, find out the policies of all the parties make your vote one based on a clear understanding of your candidates platform. I would prefer of course that you vote Conservative however I realize that not every one is as enlightened to the benefits of a CPC government as myself and fellow CPC supporters, so whatever party you decide to vote for make sure your vote is intelligent.

Yes and I'm all for that too. And having done all the reading and listening of the platform, also don't forget to take a minute to check the actual record too. Like that on the environment (one of the big five, remember?); or death penalty (being moderate, mainstream Canadian); childcare; gun control; you know all those little things that matter for your urban female voter; these people being in power for two years now, it's time to take them on their record more than their sweet talk.

[noahbody]

Yes and I'm all for that too. And having done all the reading and listening of the platform, also don't forget to take a minute to check the actual record too. Like that on the environment (one of the big five, remember?);

Hard to remember a figment of your imagination.

Edited February 24, 2008 by noahbody

[Topaz]

You know you don't have to be a woman NOT to vote for Harper. As far as looks go, he's trying too hard to appear perfect. Not a hair out of place, thanks to the hair spray. He looks like he's wearing eyeliner on the bottom part of his eyes and when he walks he reminds me of Charles De Gaulle. Tall, pot-bellied and long nose and stiff. That's not why I wouldn't vote for him. One, I don't trust him, he broken alot of promises, I don't like the way he talks in Question Period, he doesn't come off as a leader but as a bully.He allows his ministers the break the rules and does nothing about it. He spends money( our tax dollars) like Mulroney!! I don't think he was really ready to be PM and he really only got the minority government because of the Liberal Quebecers scams probably leftover from Mulroney's Quebec friends. I think Harper should have gone for the Alberta elections and the Premiership. He's not bring the country together, he's dividing it.

[Carinthia]

You know you don't have to be a woman NOT to vote for Harper. As far as looks go, he's trying too hard to appear perfect. Not a hair out of place, thanks to the hair spray. He looks like he's wearing eyeliner on the bottom part of his eyes and when he walks he reminds me of Charles De Gaulle. Tall, pot-bellied and long nose and stiff. That's not why I wouldn't vote for him. One, I don't trust him, he broken alot of promises, I don't like the way he talks in Question Period, he doesn't come off as a leader but as a bully.He allows his ministers the break the rules and does nothing about it. He spends money( our tax dollars) like Mulroney!! I don't think he was really ready to be PM and he really only got the minority government because of the Liberal Quebecers scams probably leftover from Mulroney's Quebec friends. I think Harper should have gone for the Alberta elections and the Premiership. He's not bring the country together, he's dividing it.

Likability is everything! Look whats happening in the States? They're all voting for Obama and nobody knows why! He is very likable and most of the time that's all it takes.

[bush_cheney2004]

Likability is everything! Look whats happening in the States? They're all voting for Obama and nobody knows why! He is very likable and most of the time that's all it takes.

I guess.....comparisons to Americans pop up in the strangest places on this forum. Still, "they" are not all voting for Obama, and those that do have good reasons....he is not Hillary Rodham Clinton, and unlike her constant use of "I"...he uses the inclusive "We" far more often.

George Bush was more likable than Gore or Kerry too. LOL!

....back to Canada....

[Carinthia]

George Bush was more likable than Gore or Kerry too. LOL!

Don't forget that Gore won the POPULAR vote and Bush ended up being appointed. Kerry sunk himself by insulting the troops. I guess Americans didn't think that made him very likable.

Yes, and now back to Canada.

Edited February 24, 2008 by Carinthia

[bush_cheney2004]

Don't forget that Gore won the POPULAR vote.....

So what....Gore was still a condescending bore who learned a lesson in American civics. Hell, he didn't even win his home state.

.....back to Canada.... (if that's possible)

[Guest American Woman]

Likability is everything! Look whats happening in the States? They're all voting for Obama and nobody knows why! He is very likable and most of the time that's all it takes.

No, we're not "all" voting for Obama by any means. And no, those who are voting for him aren't voting for him because he's "likable." Furthermore, people do know why. It's because he stands for change. That has nothing to do with his "likability" and everything to do with people wanting change.

[kuzadd]

can harper seduce women?

do we have a barfing icon?

He's like a cold gust of wind on an already frosty day. Frigid.

and sneaky.

[Keepitsimple]

Perhaps you should judge him by the person who he married - Laureen Harper. She's well educated, ran her own Graphic Design business, and rides a motorcycle. She's a woman who has blended career, family, and personal development. In choosing her (and she choosing him) for a life partner, I think that says a lot about his attitude towards women.

Edited February 24, 2008 by Keepitsimple

[margrace]

Outside apprearances can be very well managed. I don't think things are as black and white as they appear even some of his family have commented on the fact that it might be just an annomoly that he is Prime Minister.

[scribblet]

There are times when I simply don't understand what my fellow female citizens are thinking or if indeed they are at all. Countless times I have heard them respond to a reporter's inquiries about Mr. Harper by stating that they: don't like his hair; don't like his eyes; don't like his smile; think he is sneaky; and thus they won't vote for him. How absurd, how shallow, how stupid.

Exactly

I guess having the most ethnically diverse MP's, including the first handicapped MP, just isn't enough.

[Carinthia]

No, we're not "all" voting for Obama by any means. And no, those who are voting for him aren't voting for him because he's "likable." Furthermore, people do know why. It's because he stands for change. That has nothing to do with his "likability" and everything to do with people wanting change.

Funny, I keep seeing and hearing the words charismatic, tall, good looking, and nice, over and over again in relation to Obama. Hillary wants change too and the change strategy between the two of them is not a whole lot different. So what do you think the difference is? She had it in the bag until he came along.

Edited February 24, 2008 by Carinthia

[bush_cheney2004]

Funny, I keep seeing and hearing the words charismatic, tall, good looking, and nice, over and over again in relation to Obama. Hillary wants change too and the change strategy between the two of them is not a whole lot different. So what do you think the difference is? She had it in the bag until he came along.

PM Harper looks nothing like Senator Obama....besides, they live in different countries.

[scribblet]

Just wondering - but if Harper really did start seducing women imagine the bitchin over that

[kuzadd]

Perhaps you should judge him by the person who he married - Laureen Harper. She's well educated, ran her own Graphic Design business, and rides a motorcycle. She's a woman who has blended career, family, and personal development. In choosing her (and she choosing him) for a life partner, I think that says a lot about his attitude towards women.

Laureen always seems like a stepford wife, IMO.

bland and kept in the background.

[Carinthia]

PM Harper looks nothing like Senator Obama....besides, they live in different countries.[/quote

My second post in this thread consisted of my using an analogy (re Obama) to support my theory that personality and likability seems to outweigh platform. Please get off your defensive soapbox.

Edited February 24, 2008 by Carinthia

[bush_cheney2004]

PM Harper looks nothing like Senator Obama....besides, they live in different countries.

My second post in this thread consisted of my using an analogy (re Obama) to support my theory that personality and likability seems to outweigh platform. Please get off your defensive soapbox.

Your theory? You must be joking! I'm not a woman, but will he seduce me as well? LOL!

[Oleg Bach]

Outside apprearances can be very well managed. I don't think things are as black and white as they appear even some of his family have commented on the fact that it might be just an annomoly that he is Prime Minister.

Harper can seduce woman...and from my female side - Yes Oleg has a female side..that's what makes me so sexy to woman is that I can think like one...now little Stevie Harper has that whole teddy bear boyish thing going on...but if you say put his features in comparision to that other sex symbol of boyish quality..Mr Geroge Bush...I do notice a similarity in facial structure...IF you look at the setting of the eyes and nose and mouth..you will see that these mentioned orifices would all fit on to a pack of king size smokes...with a lot of useless flesh and bone surrounding them...looked at John Tory's face today...never took the time to actually pay attention to what he looked like so I did not have a clue..Tory has got the tough masculine anglo thing going on..he looks like a leader..where as Harper is an over grown kid..but some weak and foolish woman like that look..makes the control freaks feel they are in control - if you know what I mean - Harper looks manageble on an emtional level so - yes - he is suductive - but will he still love me in the morning after he has had his way..that's what I am wondering - so far it's been wham bam thank you ma'am. Persoinally if I was a woman - I would have to be the top and Harper would have to assume the position of pillow biter - ooh - that sound numero uno homo erotico.

[Wilber]

No, we're not "all" voting for Obama by any means. And no, those who are voting for him aren't voting for him because he's "likable." Furthermore, people do know why. It's because he stands for change. That has nothing to do with his "likability" and everything to do with people wanting change.

Do they really know what that change is? Not all change is progress and can just as easily be a disaster. After all, the people who voted for Hitler wanted change as well. I don't think most of them got the kind of change they were looking for. Be careful what you ask for.

Obama may be everything people hope for (I hope so if he makes it) but I can't help but think he is getting a bit of a free ride because his record isn't long enough to present a real target. He really needs to be pinned down more on specifics. Just promising change isn't anywhere near good enough. The Trudeau phenomenon was very similar and he went a long way to polarize Canadians like few politicians in our history. I'm very wary of phenoms.

If Obama becomes President I can't help but think that there will be a few surprises in store, not all of them expected by many who voted for him.