Sign in to wowOwow

Enter the email address that you used when registering at wowOwow.
The password field is case sensitive. Click here if you have forgotten your password.

Please register for wowOwow

Newsletter subscriptions
Sign up to receive wowOwow's weekly newsletter and get our best picks delivered right to your inbox. Our newsletter content is hand-picked by the wowOwow editorial team and provides the top features, news, and commentary from our site. Subscribing to our newsletter is free and safe. We will never share your email or other information with a third-party without your direct consent.
By registering, you indicate that you have read and agree
with our privacy policy and terms of service.

Politics | 08/19/2008 9:03 am

McCain Not a Ladies' Man?

By The Staff at wowOwow.com
© AP

Barack Obama’s campaign is trying to convince Americans that John McCain won’t be successful in wooing women voters.

Dana Singiser, who oversees Barack Obama’s women’s outreach efforts, issued a memo Monday, arguing that the Republican presidential hopeful made a major effort to reach women voters in June because he’s so far behind his Democratic opponent in garnering the female vote.

"Despite his campaign’s outreach efforts, McCain’s attempt to bridge the gender gap has fallen flat," wrote Singiser. "He fares worse among women than any presidential candidate since Bob Dole in 1996."

Singiser, who is a former Hillary Clinton aide, noted that women have outvoted men in every election since 1964, and that during this year’s Democratic primaries, the women’s vote reached at least 59 percent in 14 states.

"During the Democratic National Convention next week we will mark Women’s Equality Day, the anniversary of women’s suffrage in the United States,” she said. “Eighty-eight years after the right of American women to vote was written into our Constitution, the women’s vote will make the difference in this election."

CBS News and CNN note that McCain spokesman Tucker Bounds did not respond directly to the Singiser memo, but said: "Barack Obama is spinning this issue to disguise his support for higher taxes, and refusing to acknowledge that the legislation he’s promoting has more to do with paychecks for trial lawyers than the struggles of working women."

Bounds said the Equal Pay Legislation, which Obama supports, would benefit trial lawyers in part because it could lead to frivolous lawsuits.

Here are five reasons, according to the Obama campaign, that McCain can’t get the women vote:

1.) Women voters don’t trust McCain because of his extreme positions on the key issues important to them. Obama leads McCain by 10 points (42% vs. 32%) when it comes to which candidate women trust more. (The August 5 poll also found that 14% said they trust neither, and 5% trust both.)

2.) Women want change from the last eight years of neglect for America’s middle-class families and women’s economic security.

3.) Equal Pay: 77% of women believe the next president should address the issue of providing women with equal pay for equal work. McCain has opposed legislation to provide more effective remedies to victims of pay discrimination, and legislation to overturn the Ledbetter decision — a pay discrimination case filed by Lilly Ledbetter against Goodyear. The case was thrown out last year by the Supreme Court in a 5-4 decision delivered by conservative Justice Samuel Alito.

4.) Health Care Costs: McCain’s health-care plan "isn’t expected to make a major dent in the number of uninsured Americans," and he would – for the first time in our nation’s history – tax health-care benefits. Only 27% of women are very confident that they will be able to afford health care for themselves and their families. There is a disproportionate number of women who are uninsured or in danger of losing their coverage.

5.) Women’s Reproductive Rights: 62% of women believe that Roe v. Wade established a constitutional right, but McCain has bragged about consistently receiving a zero rating from pro-choice group NARAL during his 25-year voting career. McCain has repeatedly voted against federal funding for family planning, and accessibility of contraceptives for women. McCain’s support among Republican pro-choice women dropped by 9% after hearing his positions.

188 Reader Comments (so far…) Sign In or Register to comment

Diana T
Susan, Your post brought tears to my eyes. Thank you for your kind words. The thing is, I hate to ruffle feathers. But this go-around, I feel very confident in my decision as to whom I am voting for. I think when we look at the history all the way back to the beginning of our country, we hit times that are pivotal, and this is one of them. This election is either a turning point for the better or the worse, there is no other way to arrange my thoughts. I have researched hundreds of position papers, think tanks, well respected historians and diplomats, and when I see that they are saying the same thing we are, and they have the identical worries about their children and grandchildren, then I know in my heart that I am not wrong. My generation and the women before me walked through fire so that women everywhere would have the personal choice of what to do with their bodies and with their minds and with their ambition. We fought long and hard so that if a woman/girl decides to terminate her pregnancy, it won’t be in a dark alley or with a bloody coat hanger. And, women in the world are the people to this day that bear the burden of poverty and abuse and starvation….and war. I have 3 grandchildren, Ben who is 21, and Laura 15 and Emily who is 10 yrs. old. All have been excellent students. They are full of love and beauty and hope. What kind of world are we going to leave them? What are we going to do with the environment and why, oh why, can’t we be willing to make sacrifices so that these kids will be able to have some sort of life that was as good as our own? We are involved in a horribly expensive war brought on by lies and greed for power, and this war is sucking our economy dry on the backs of these kids. They are the ones that will bear the burden of debt. In my opinion, this White House is callously and knowlingly conducting its business knowing full well who will have to pay for it in the future. And, when I see the abuse of our Constitution, this precious document that thousands and thousands of our best and brightest have given their lives for to protect it, I cannot imagine even taken a chance that history will repeat itself yet again. So, I apologize for going on and on, but I made a promise to my grandchildren that I would try with every ounce of courage and energy I have to try to do my part to make this a better place when I leave it than it was when I got here 66 yrs. ago. So, Susan, thank you so much. We just have to create new avenues so that our kids can have chances to soar and fly like we did.
By Diana T on 08/20/2008 10:39 pm
Bonnie Oliver
James when some of the wOw women were on the Charlie Rose Show a few months back they did stress that wowowow.com was founded by a bi-partisan group of ladies and that the website did not cater to any one political side. They named Peggy Noonan as one of the original creators. My question to you is: Did you hear any similar rhetoric during the CNN interview? I think the non-Democratic members of the wOw leadership are rare participants here. I don’t think I have see one discussion initiated by Peggy. Thanks.
By Bonnie Oliver on 08/21/2008 1:01 am
James the Game
You raise a couple of interesting points, Bonnie. I assume you’re referring to John Roberts’ interview of Lesley Stahl and Liz Smith on CNN the other morning: http://www.cnn.com/video/?/video/politics/2008/08/19/am.intv.obama.vp.an… . As the video shows, it was a pretty straightforward discussion about the Wow.com readers’ poll as to who the participants think should be the candidates’ running mates. As far as non-Democratic members of the wOw leadership not initiating political discussions, I think that goes to the larger issue of sporadic participation by certain members of the leadership, period. I mean, there are 16 women’s faces beneath the wOw banner/nameplate, but only about six of them appear to be regular participants/contributors. By ‘regular’, I mean commenting at least once a week. Several of them don’t post anything whatsoever for a month at a time. I’m sure their busy schedules are a prime factor, but if they’re posting that infrequently, then their photos & names should not be displayed at the top of the website. That’s just an opinion, and I’m not complaining or upset in any way. But that’s just a simple observation I’ve made.
By James the Game on 08/21/2008 1:33 am
Bonnie Oliver
I agree with you, James. Perhaps Joni does envision a more diverse group of contributors while, at the same time, inviting many guest contributors to join in and/or to make up for the slack created by the non-participation of some of the original 16. It isn’t a problem, as you said. Simply an observation.
By Bonnie Oliver on 08/21/2008 1:46 am
James the Game
Right. It’s become a very good site; much, much better than when I first logged on in early May. However, I’m disappointed that some of the stars so infrequently contribute. One way to accomplish that very expediently would be to have certain “star” contributors call in to a central phone number at a designated time for a weekly group conversation (multi-party telephone call), which could be tape-recorded. An editor could then type out the comments onto the website. In order for there to be no vocal confusion as to who’s making a given comment, each person could say their name before making a comment. For example: “This is Liz. I believe such and such.” Then, “This is Lesley. I agree, Liz, blah, blah.” Or, rather than type all the conversation comments out, simply put the entire interview on wOw in the form of an Mp3 audio clip that readers could click on to listen. It may not have the pizzazz of the video Vancouver conversations, but it would allow all of the stars to contribute once a week. That would make it an immensely better site.
By James the Game on 08/21/2008 2:01 am
Frannie Em
Bonnie Peggy used to post, as well as did one article, but hardly anyone responded to it. There weren’t as many repubs on the site at that time or they were afraid to speak up. Remember what happened to Monica Crowley? And then Coulter? I kind of feel they were bullied off of the site. I think Coulter would not be a good fit for the site, but Crowley was fine. Many people were up in arms about it saying they would not return to the site, or expressing that it made them sick. Or whatever. I was really disappointed in many of the posters because they just couldn’t let it go, and let the conservatives have their representatives. It seemed double standard to me. I think, if you are not interested in a thread, don’t post on it. It makes me kind of laugh that so many people show up, hijack the thread with negative comments, and complain that they don’t have free speech, or that they are being bullied. C’mon!!!!! What???? I believe that everyone has a place here if they want to be here. If someone doesn’t want to be bullied, then don’t bully. Simple as that. Ask pertinent questions about the arguments that concern you. Over and over again, people come on and throw a bomb waiting to see who they can fight with, or how long it will take for their friends to show up. Then you scroll through pages and pages of the same people saying the same thing posting from the Huffington Post. Whatever. I love a great post from either side of the aisle from people who are familiar with like say the workings of education, like Maureen, or social work like Kelly Kelly. They have personal experience. I like to know what they have to say.
By Frannie Em on 08/22/2008 8:12 pm
theCHEROKEErose
barack…you better be careful…’ladies man’ has more than one connotation..i sure neither you nor your WIFE wants you to be a bill clinton ‘ladies man’…i dont like john mccain, but a PERSON does not need to ‘be’ something to be elected as president except trustworthy and reliable in running this country….
By theCHEROKEErose on 08/19/2008 10:07 am
Marjorie C.
McCain will probably pick up about 18-20% of Hillary’s voters — that’s about 3,500,000 votes for just being ‘anyone but Obama.’ A lot of those voters will be women. The issues matter and need to be discussed intelligently. Right now I don’t trust this site for any fair assessment of the issues. I hope Bonnie Olivers weighs in on the five reasons the Obama campaign feels McCain cannot get the women’s vote, just to get a Republican view. McCain has my vote, no matter.
By Marjorie C. on 08/19/2008 10:52 am
HA BIBI
Marjorie, He’s got my vote as well. AND, you’re not alone! :)
By HA BIBI on 08/19/2008 5:06 pm
Marjorie C.
Elaine. Better than that, I’m starting to like the guy. Matter of fact, I’m liking him more and more.
By Marjorie C. on 08/20/2008 6:07 am
DeBúrca obj
Marjorie, as far as I can tell by the majority of the McCain supporters in here, ALL McCain’s votes are ‘anyone but Obama” because most of you never say anything nice about McCain. Also, as far as the subject of McCain’s deplorable voting record on women’s issues this probably accounts for the fact that Obama is besting McCain 61 to 29 in the Unmarried Women vote… a vote that is extremely important and one of the fastest growing demographics which is considered a “sleeping giant” for Democrats.
By DeBúrca obj on 08/19/2008 8:37 pm
Marjorie C.
All I can say DeBúrca is that McCain must be attracting a helluva lot of men, because he’s neck and neck with Obama in most polls. McCain is the only choice in this election because he is the only one with the experience to govern, he stands by what he believes in, even if it might not be popular such as ‘life begins at conception’. No blah, blah for him, no ‘it’s above my pay grade’. Unfortunately, much of what goes on in Washington is above Obama’s pay grade. He simply never took the time or showed the interest to learn the ropes.
By Marjorie C. on 08/20/2008 6:30 am
DeBúrca obj
Obama is ahead in electoral votes and has kept his lead in the polls, not that national polls mean much anyway. And he has done this without being dragged down into the mud by McCains non-issue based negative campaigning.
By DeBúrca obj on 08/20/2008 6:39 am
Marjorie C.
The candidates are within the margin of error. Polls indicate trends, that’s about it. McCain is slowly gaining, and I think he’ll pull out ahead. Time is not on Obama’s side. The more people see of him, the more they are likely to drift towards McCain.
By Marjorie C. on 08/20/2008 6:59 am
DeBúrca obj
Actually, quite the opposite. The majority of Americans are paying little attention to the election and rarely do before the Conventions. Many people hardly know Obama and as they get to know him he does better. Also, many people only think they know McCain, a lot has not come out about him yet because his primary ended so early and he pretty much got a pass. Also, as has been said previously by many people in here, they do not poll cell phones and Obamas largest group of supporters are in the 18-35 year old range and most of those people use cell phones exclusively.
By DeBúrca obj on 08/20/2008 8:06 am