jdobbin Posted October 20, 2006 Report Share Posted October 20, 2006 And this is even before they heard Peter MaCkay's comments. http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/tories_women_poll I'm not sure what it means but maybe they don't like that Harper eats kittens. It seems that while Harper was courting the Jewish vote, he was losing the vote from women. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MightyAC Posted October 21, 2006 Report Share Posted October 21, 2006 Not surprising since women tend to be slightly more socially progressive, environmentally conscious, pro-equality, and anti-war. Wow…we definitely need more women in politics. Bring on proportional rep. A great side effect of PR is that usually the sex and race of elected officials usually tends to more closely match that of the population….and voter turn out increases. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted October 21, 2006 Report Share Posted October 21, 2006 And this is even before they heard Peter MaCkay's comments.http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/tories_women_poll I'm not sure what it means but maybe they don't like that Harper eats kittens. It seems that while Harper was courting the Jewish vote, he was losing the vote from women. Conservatives ALWAYS score lower with women: here, in the states, in the UK, everywhere. Conservatives are generally known as a hard-nosed bean counters interested in solid, economical, efficient government. That's not the most appealing thing to women compared to the soothing, touchie-feelie, love the children, money for everyone big-daddy-will-watch-over-you mentality of the left wing parties. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricki Bobbi Posted October 21, 2006 Report Share Posted October 21, 2006 Bring on proportional rep. A great side effect of PR is that usually the sex and race of elected officials usually tends to more closely match that of the population….and voter turn out increases. Really? Are there any studies showing this before and after the implementation of PR in the same country? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted October 21, 2006 Report Share Posted October 21, 2006 Not surprising since women tend to be slightly more socially progressive, environmentally conscious, pro-equality, and anti-war. They also tend to be less educated, and far less knowledgeable or interested in politics. I work with a lot of women, and only 1 in 10 even reads the papers or is the slightest bit interested in politics. They're much easier for a style over substance party like the Liberals to sway than the more pragmatic men. Tell a woman (especially a young one) that you have a plan to combat greenhouse gases and she'll beam and nod her head approvingly. The man is more likely to ask how much it costs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drea Posted October 21, 2006 Report Share Posted October 21, 2006 Ask any young man and you'll get the same glassy-eyed nod. Women, I believe (look it up), now outnumber men in post secondary education. Girls are also outperforming boys at both the elementary and highschool levels. What field are you in, btw? If you are surrounded by waitresses (for example) your experince with women would be different than if you work in law, finance or marketing. (No offense intended to waitresses, I was one for years -- before I got me my edukashun ) Perhaps you need to expand your sphere of influence... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted October 21, 2006 Author Report Share Posted October 21, 2006 Conservatives ALWAYS score lower with women: here, in the states, in the UK, everywhere.Conservatives are generally known as a hard-nosed bean counters interested in solid, economical, efficient government. That's not the most appealing thing to women compared to the soothing, touchie-feelie, love the children, money for everyone big-daddy-will-watch-over-you mentality of the left wing parties. Do you think that Harper's policy on the war in Lebanon and Afghanistan has turned off some women voters as some radio stations were saying today? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted October 21, 2006 Report Share Posted October 21, 2006 Ask any young man and you'll get the same glassy-eyed nod. Quite possibly. Young men are pretty stupid. They tend to grow out of it, though. And they tend, when older, to be less sentimental than women. Sentimentalism has its uses. I can get pretty sentimental at times, myself, but it's not something that should affect your vote. Women, I believe (look it up), now outnumber men in post secondary education. Girls are also outperforming boys at both the elementary and highschool levels. I wonder why it is no one wonders about that. I mean, when female numbers were down it was a national crisis which called for task forces of educational and sociological experts to figure out how to change teaching methods, testing procedures and to encourage girls so they'd catch up. Now there are serious allegations that education is failing boys, that it has become too female-centric, and nobody much cares. What field are you in, btw? Government. About half the young women I know are university grads, half not. But only 1 out of ten really has any interest in politics, enough to actually follow what's going on, talk about it, advocate policies, etc. However, the rest are dismissive of the Tories, even though they frankly admit they really hate politics and don't follow it. Well, except one. She's the tough as nails dragged herself up from the bootstraps one. And she votes Conservative :-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted October 21, 2006 Report Share Posted October 21, 2006 Conservatives ALWAYS score lower with women: here, in the states, in the UK, everywhere. Conservatives are generally known as a hard-nosed bean counters interested in solid, economical, efficient government. That's not the most appealing thing to women compared to the soothing, touchie-feelie, love the children, money for everyone big-daddy-will-watch-over-you mentality of the left wing parties. Do you think that Harper's policy on the war in Lebanon and Afghanistan has turned off some women voters as some radio stations were saying today? I'm sure it has. Women tend to be more sentimental and emotional (I know that sounds sexist but it's also true). Women seeing all those crying families as the bodies are shipped home are more likely than men to say "Let's stop this and leave Afghanistan!". Men, by contrast, are more likely to say "Look, we have an important job to do here, and we're not about to back down and be chased away." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikedavid00 Posted October 21, 2006 Report Share Posted October 21, 2006 Not surprising since women tend to be slightly more socially progressive, environmentally conscious, pro-equality, and anti-war. They also tend to be less educated, and far less knowledgeable or interested in politics. I work with a lot of women, and only 1 in 10 even reads the papers or is the slightest bit interested in politics. They're much easier for a style over substance party like the Liberals to sway than the more pragmatic men. Tell a woman (especially a young one) that you have a plan to combat greenhouse gases and she'll beam and nod her head approvingly. The man is more likely to ask how much it costs. true. most women I know don't really care about politics at all. If they do, they are liberal activist types.. ..that might even be dykes.. hehe.. Else they are just voting with what their husbands or men around them feel they should vote. When my fiance met me she had no clue what was going on. Last election she voted conservative of course becuase myself and her Dad were conservatives. I feel that if we were NDP or something she just would have voted NDP.. she really doesn't care to learn the issues of politics. You know, there WAS reasons why females were not able to vote at one time in history. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted October 21, 2006 Report Share Posted October 21, 2006 Ask any young man and you'll get the same glassy-eyed nod. Quite possibly. Young men are pretty stupid. They tend to grow out of it, though. And they tend, when older, to be less sentimental than women. Sentimentalism has its uses. I can get pretty sentimental at times, myself, but it's not something that should affect your vote. Women, I believe (look it up), now outnumber men in post secondary education. Girls are also outperforming boys at both the elementary and highschool levels. I wonder why it is no one wonders about that. I mean, when female numbers were down it was a national crisis which called for task forces of educational and sociological experts to figure out how to change teaching methods, testing procedures and to encourage girls so they'd catch up. Now there are serious allegations that education is failing boys, that it has become too female-centric, and nobody much cares. What field are you in, btw? Government. About half the young women I know are university grads (mind you, in things like history, sociology and psychology), half not. But only 1 out of ten really has any interest in politics, enough to actually follow what's going on, talk about it, advocate policies, etc. However, the rest are dismissive of the Tories, even though they frankly admit they really hate politics and don't follow it. Well, except one. She's the tough as nails dragged herself up from the bootstraps one. And she votes Conservative :-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
betsy Posted October 21, 2006 Report Share Posted October 21, 2006 I wouldn't have had this much interest in politics....had it not been for my dad and husband. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gerryhatrick Posted October 21, 2006 Report Share Posted October 21, 2006 Support for Tories among women deteriorating, new poll suggestsat 17:27 on October 20, 2006, EST. OTTAWA (CP) - Foreign Affairs Minister Peter MacKay apparently isn't the only Conservative with woman troubles. A new poll suggests a chill has set in among some female voters toward the Conservative party, with the Liberals reaping the rewards. The numbers suggest that overall the two parties are running neck and neck nationally. The Decima Research survey, released Friday to The Canadian Press, points to a decline in Tory support by women voters since mid-July. The Tories had led the Liberals among women since the January election, but that changed in late summer when the Liberals overtook them. A rolling three-week average between Sept. 28-Oct. 16 suggested 34 per cent of female voters supported the Liberals, 28 per cent the Tories, and 16 per cent the NDP. http://www.cjob.com/news/index.aspx?dir=na...=./n102049A.xml Women are so smart! So are young and urbanites: The Decima poll also suggested that the Conservatives are losing ground to the leaderless Liberals among voters 18-34 and among urban voters. The Liberals have also surpassed the Conservatives in the key electoral battlegrounds of Ontario and Quebec. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geoffrey Posted October 21, 2006 Report Share Posted October 21, 2006 And this is even before they heard Peter MaCkay's comments.http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/tories_women_poll I'm not sure what it means but maybe they don't like that Harper eats kittens. It seems that while Harper was courting the Jewish vote, he was losing the vote from women. Considering that no one but the opposition heard the comment... not even Milikan. Bring on proportional rep. A great side effect of PR is that usually the sex and race of elected officials usually tends to more closely match that of the population….and voter turn out increases. I forgot how important sex and race are for qualifications for public office. When will you join the 21st century and realise the credentials are more important? Demographic makeup is really invalid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
margrace Posted October 21, 2006 Report Share Posted October 21, 2006 And this is even before they heard Peter MaCkay's comments. http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/tories_women_poll I'm not sure what it means but maybe they don't like that Harper eats kittens. It seems that while Harper was courting the Jewish vote, he was losing the vote from women. Considering that no one but the opposition heard the comment... not even Milikan. Bring on proportional rep. A great side effect of PR is that usually the sex and race of elected officials usually tends to more closely match that of the population….and voter turn out increases. I forgot how important sex and race are for qualifications for public office. When will you join the 21st century and realise the credentials are more important? Demographic makeup is really invalid. Interesting posts on here. A lot of predjudice against women. I wonder why so many men are negative towards women. I do not know these bimbos you are talking about in my family. Our conversation around the supper table when I was growing up was very political. My sister was a strong Union Rep, when she was working for the school boards, she was a cleaner. All the women in our family are very politically active. They also are volunteers in a lot of organizations helping others. If the women who bore you acted as a lot of men do then a lot of men would not be here today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
betsy Posted October 21, 2006 Report Share Posted October 21, 2006 Not surprising since women tend to be slightly more socially progressive, environmentally conscious, pro-equality, and anti-war. Wow…we definitely need more women in politics. Bring on proportional rep. A great side effect of PR is that usually the sex and race of elected officials usually tends to more closely match that of the population….and voter turn out increases. Most notable women who ruled throughout history did not shy away from using force and might. They were not anti-war! They were for defending their countries and their way of life. Some had been more aggressive...and were not above doing violence in the name of vengeance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted October 21, 2006 Author Report Share Posted October 21, 2006 Considering that no one but the opposition heard the comment... not even Milikan. The Speaker can only respond to what Hansard records or what he hear or sees personally. You don't believe MacKay said what he said and gestured as he did and that Liberals, Bloq and NDP who saw it are all lying to make him and the government look bad? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
admclark Posted October 21, 2006 Report Share Posted October 21, 2006 I don't think anyone shuld be offended by Makays comment, Belinda is a dog. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
betsy Posted October 21, 2006 Report Share Posted October 21, 2006 As Craig Oliver put it, McKay did not actually say the word "dog." That's why McKay is saying it's nowhere in the transcript. But the implication is there. I think the break-up of McKay and Stronach had been rather ugly. Of course we are not privvy to all the sordid details. McKay should just apologise for letting his personal feelings spill over. Break-ups could bring out the worse in anyone....so it should not really be a major issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted October 21, 2006 Report Share Posted October 21, 2006 Interesting posts on here. A lot of predjudice against women. I wonder why so many men are negative towards women. Who says they're negative towards women? These are observable traits. Both genders have them. Saying women are less interested in politics and less likely to support wars is nothing more than truth. Saying women go for different types of politicians, have different likes and dislikes is basic fact. I do not know these bimbos you are talking about in my family. Our conversation around the supper table when I was growing up was very political. My sister was a strong Union Rep, when she was working for the school boards, she was a cleaner. That's nice, and your family represents all women, does it? I did not refer to women who are uninterested in politics and who don't pay much attention to the news as "bimbos". In fact, most are quite intelligent. They just don't care about those things. They have their own world, and they don't see those things as really affecting their world. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted October 21, 2006 Author Report Share Posted October 21, 2006 I don't think anyone shuld be offended by Makays comment, Belinda is a dog. In what way? Her looks? Because she has been divorced? Because she has been accused of breaking up a marriage? Or because she left the Conservatives? Be specific. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
admclark Posted October 21, 2006 Report Share Posted October 21, 2006 I don't think anyone shuld be offended by Makays comment, Belinda is a dog. In what way? Her looks? Because she has been divorced? Because she has been accused of breaking up a marriage? Or because she left the Conservatives? Be specific. The fact that she crossed the floor just for a cabinet post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drea Posted October 21, 2006 Report Share Posted October 21, 2006 we wimin shood stay home and not worrie our prittie little heads about such important topiks as politiks. Us wimin shood stay home and cook dinner for our men. Or us wimin shood just vote like our men... after all men are so much wizer n strongr than we ar. Without our men we woodn't have a cloo as to how to vote. We'ed probably vote four the nalepolish party if it were left up to wimin by ourselfs. i gotta go groshery shopping tooday -- shood i ask hubby to drive me? i mite drive off the rode looking at my lipstik in the meer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rovik Posted October 21, 2006 Report Share Posted October 21, 2006 They also tend to be less educated, and far less knowledgeable or interested in politics.I work with a lot of women, and only 1 in 10 even reads the papers or is the slightest bit interested in politics. They're much easier for a style over substance party like the Liberals to sway than the more pragmatic men. Tell a woman (especially a young one) that you have a plan to combat greenhouse gases and she'll beam and nod her head approvingly. The man is more likely to ask how much it costs. Really? The trend lately is for women to more educated then men. And in my experience, many women I've talked to know a lot about politics, young ones as well. I found that women tend to be more balanced in their poltical analysis, unlike some men who tend to have a very narrow focus and don't look at the whole picture. A few months ago, a crowd of us went out to dinner and we ending up talking about Global warming. The one person with the most passion was a women who believed that the Conservatives were sacrificing future generations' health and the environment's health by not doing what was necessary to combat Global warming all in the name of creating jobs and keeping "Big Oil" happy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted October 21, 2006 Author Report Share Posted October 21, 2006 The fact that she crossed the floor just for a cabinet post. You want a list of people who crossed the floor? How many political parties did Stephen Harper belong to? Liberals, Progressive Conservatives, Reform, Alliance and now the Conservatives. Can't the man make up his mind? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.