Kelly Ayotte: Romney will close the gender gap in the general

posted at 11:05 am on April 4, 2012 by Tina Korbe

New Hampshire Republican Sen. Kelly Ayotte pushed back this morning against the growing narrative that Mitt Romney will lose the female vote in November:

Speaking on MSNBC, Ayotte, a Romney backer, said that women voters are highly concerned with the economy which would play to Mitt Romney’s strengths given his background in business.

“I think that women voters very much care about the state of the economy,” Ayotte said. …

“I think that we’re a long way from this general election and polls right now aren’t going to dictate where we are in November,” Ayotte added. “So polls go up, polls go down and you have to bear in mind we’ve been in a tough primary fight and I think that as we shore up and I think that he’s now the sure winner of the nomination he’s going to have a much more ability to focus on the difference between he and president Obama.”

Ayotte said that the gap was partially because of Romney’s focus thus far of winning the Republican primary.

“Part of this gap is a reflection of where we are in the primary and now it’s going to turn around very much,” Ayotte said.

Ayotte’s comments come on the heels of a USA Today/Gallup poll that showed Obama with a swing-state lead over Romney — a lead very much propelled by the shifting loyalties of women. That poll prompted Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz to crow that women will win the 2012 election for Obama. Priorities USA adviser Paul Begala picked up the theme with a piece today that warns that “for Mitt Romney, November may be the cruelest month.” Romney’s “rightward lurch,” Begala suggests, will cost Romney with women, Latinos and seniors.

That’s the conventional wisdom, but Ayotte’s comments illustrate that it can be countered with an equally conventional idea: This election — still — will be about the economy, and Romney will be able to appeal to men and women alike on that issue. In her MSNBC interview, Ayotte also defended the Paul Ryan budget, noting that a platform to cut spending and the deficit resonated with her constituents when she ran for Senate so she has no reason to think it wouldn’t resonate with them now.

While I appreciate Ayotte’s message discipline in this instance, I still don’t think Mitt Romney lost women so much as Barack Obama gained them. He gained them by bringing up controversial issues and by personalizing them. His repeated mentions of Malia and Sasha, his personal phone call to Sandra Fluke, his tender comments about Trayvon Martin — he’s made an emotional appeal to women that is completely disconnected to his policies. The key is to personalize the GOP position on the same controversial issues. Let’s trot out our own Sandra Fluke, the college gal who won’t be able to afford to buy books because she’s having to pay for her peers’ contraception …

Of course, even if the GOP nominee succeeds at personalizing his platform, he still can’t let Obama off the hook for his negligence on the deficit and debt — and that is Ayotte’s primary point here. The president has done whatever he can to distract the American public from his lack of a plan to reform entitlements. The GOP nominee needs to refocus the electorate on the president’s lack of leadership.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

AAhhhh, Uuuuummm,

Ayotte said that the gap was partially because of Romney’s focus thus far of winning the Republican primary.

5 Bucks, Romney has a VP candidate in mind.. and it’s a female.

upinak on April 4, 2012 at 11:09 AM

I would like to think so. Being a great admirer of women, they, for the most part, are smarter than they are given credit for.

cozmo on April 4, 2012 at 11:10 AM

Romney is like the ultimate political procrastinator. Tomorrow he will surely do what he has failed miserably to do today. I think he will be the every man/woman candidate though. Every man and woman will find him boring and uninspiring.

NotCoach on April 4, 2012 at 11:10 AM

He has already closed the gap with married woman, out-polling Obama by 20 points, and as this ABC News story points out, those are the women WHO VOTE! Gee, wonder why this story out yesterday didn’t get the big play the USA Today poll did?

Rational Thought on April 4, 2012 at 11:17 AM

Go for the jugular

cmsinaz on April 4, 2012 at 11:17 AM

Romney Obama is like the ultimate political procrastinator. Tomorrow he will surely do what he has failed miserably to do today. I think he will be the every man/woman candidate though. Every man and woman will find him boring and uninspiring.

NotCoach on April 4, 2012 at 11:10 AM

FIFY. As to Romney, the female voters who only vote on the basis of gender have already made up their mind. That is why Obama is waging war on Christ because he knows he has a better shot with females who find common cause with the slutty Sandra Fluke than those who identify with religious organizations and denominations.

But there are many more thoughtful females out there who see the way Obama and Democrats are destroying this nation and (most importantly) destroying economic opportunity for their children. These women will actually look at the candidates and decide that any candidate is better than handing Obama another four years. Put another way, if Obama is willing to attack Christ before the election, what do you think he will do once the election is over.

Obama is too damned dangerous to give a second term. Besides, he hasn’t earned it.

Happy Nomad on April 4, 2012 at 11:18 AM

7 months to go. Plenty of time but I hope Romney doesn’t wait too long.

Obama isn’t helping himself either, though.

22044 on April 4, 2012 at 11:20 AM

his tender comments about Trayvon Martin —

Now what on earth does Trayvon Martin have to do with women voters? Black voters, absolutely, but women voters? I suppose the case could be made that sensitivity in a president appeals to women, but I’m not seeing it.

Just as a personal anecdote, my mother is a reliable Democratic straight-ticket voter, for a variety of reasons. And she’s absolutely disgusted over Jackson and Sharpton getting involved and Zimmerman’s trial by media.

KingGold on April 4, 2012 at 11:20 AM

liberal4life on April 4, 2012 at 11:09 AM

Hey why don’t you post something resembling an original thought.

Oh wait, that’s like asking a cockroach to tell me about Einstein.

22044 on April 4, 2012 at 11:21 AM

Gov. Nikki Haley On The View: ‘Women Don’t Care About Contraception’

liberal4life on April 4, 2012 at 11:09 AM

Most rational people care about money.

But good luck with that.

Obama has given away or wasted hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars on his billionaire friends.

Most women provide for their families. They work, shop, and see prices rising while Obama throws money away to billionaires.

Good luck.

tetriskid on April 4, 2012 at 11:22 AM

Chicks will dig the hair. Rogaineguy know about these things.

rogaineguy on April 4, 2012 at 11:23 AM

And why should we believe her?

stenwin77 on April 4, 2012 at 11:23 AM

He gained them by bringing up controversial issues and by personalizing them. His repeated mentions of Malia and Sasha, his personal phone call to Sandra Fluke, his tender comments about Trayvon Martin — he’s made an emotional appeal to women that is completely disconnected to his policies.

You must be kidding.

Barack Obama gaining with women has got to be, pardon the pun, a fluke.

I don’t believe for one moment women are falling, en masse, for his fake electoral tripe, divisive comments and destructive policies. That’s just simply demeaning and insulting to believe “most women” are that shallow.

Women, as much as men, have seen the family income shrink, expense go up and in many cases, spouses lose their jobs. They have seen their kids future become more bleak. They ultimately also see the President’s policies have dug the economic hole deeper and provide no hope for the future.

You can certainly keep writing this nonsense- turning Ms Ayotte’s thoughtful, reality based comments into personal fiction. Just don’t expect the rest of us to keep reading it.

Marcus Traianus on April 4, 2012 at 11:24 AM

Let’s trot out our own Sandra Fluke, the college gal who won’t be able to afford to buy books because she’s having to pay for her peers’ contraception …

I think the President will remind us, though, that Warren Buffet’s secretary pays more for her contraception than Warren Buffet.

MessesWithTexas on April 4, 2012 at 11:24 AM

Hey why don’t you post something resembling an original thought.

Oh wait, that’s like asking a cockroach to tell me about Einstein.

22044 on April 4, 2012 at 11:21 AM

A prominent right winger saying women don’t care about contraception is relevant to this topic.

The war on women has been going on since Roe vs Wade.
Does Romney support the idea that most women don’t care about contraception? I would like to know as well.

liberal4life on April 4, 2012 at 11:25 AM

that usa today/gallup poll was for woman

41 percent democrat
22 percent republican

gee, what a surprise they polled for obama.

when I see a poll with a confirmed 41/41 that shows that result then i might believe it

gerrym51 on April 4, 2012 at 11:25 AM

Again, Obama won women by 13 points in 2008. That is his ceiling. So all this non-sense about him being up by 20 when it comes to women is just a false narrative.

And once Romney is the nominee, and when he will refuse to talk about social issues, and focus on Obama’s record and the economy, he will cut into that 13 point number. If he brings that down to 6-7, and picks up even 5% of Latino voters because of Rubio, he is winning this election. If he does better than that, he will win by 3-5 points.

So, yes Ayotte is right.

milcus on April 4, 2012 at 11:25 AM

that usa today/gallup poll was for woman

41 percent democrat
22 percent republican

gee, what a surprise they polled for obama.

when I see a poll with a confirmed 41/41 that shows that result then i might believe it

gerrym51 on April 4, 2012 at 11:25 AM

They actually admitted such a disparity? The media is not even trying to hide that they are distoring polls to build a perception that Obama is doing better than he actually is anymore.

milcus on April 4, 2012 at 11:26 AM

5 Bucks, Romney has a VP candidate in mind.. and it’s a female.

upinak on April 4, 2012 at 11:09 AM

.

It better be a solid woman – or else the media will have a field day with 2 white guys trying to get rid of a White African American.

FlaMurph on April 4, 2012 at 11:28 AM

Hard to drive the kids to soccer practice if you can’t afford the gas.

Obama may have a bump in the polls right now but if we relied solely on the polls this far out… not too long ago we would have considered a republican having no shot of winning this year.

Ukiah on April 4, 2012 at 11:28 AM

Romney will mistakenly talk about policy, (which O’Bama has none), but the emotional will win and I don’t see how he effectively counters it. He better learn how to energize somebody soon.

Starlink on April 4, 2012 at 11:26 AM

You can’t teach an old dog new tricks.
The man has the personality of a brick wall, that is something which cannot be changed overnight. He is who he is.

liberal4life on April 4, 2012 at 11:29 AM

5 Bucks, Romney has a VP candidate in mind.. and it’s a female.

upinak on April 4, 2012 at 11:09 AM

Very risky strategy. Palin totally bombed with women. Sometimes they do eat their ‘own’.

CorporatePiggy on April 4, 2012 at 11:29 AM

Obama has given away or wasted hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars on his billionaire friends.

Millions? More like hundreds of billions and climbing fast.

slug on April 4, 2012 at 11:31 AM

Don’t take away my contraceptives. They’re the most important thing in my life.

a capella on April 4, 2012 at 11:31 AM

Gov. Nikki Haley On The View: ‘Women Don’t Care About Contraception’

liberal4life on April 4, 2012 at 11:09 AM

Hey, thanks for posting that. I had not seen it. Wow. Barbara Walters is a HUGE Nikki Haley fan — she even had to slap down the two fat liberals and remind them that the interview was about “the extraordinary” Nikki Haley, not Barack Obama. The two fat chicks sat there and seethed, watching it all slip away, and they got almost no applause from the lefty audience for their cheap shots. Great interview!

Rational Thought on April 4, 2012 at 11:33 AM

milcus on April 4, 2012 at 11:26 AM

yes-but they put it in a sentence that most women when prooded say they are democrats. if you read carefully it has that sentence.

I could not actually find their internals, what a surprise

gerrym51 on April 4, 2012 at 11:34 AM

Flash: Romney to announce Free Rubbers policy to excite female voters

faraway on April 4, 2012 at 11:34 AM

Gov. Nikki Haley On The View: ‘Women Don’t Care About Contraception’

liberal4life on April 4, 2012 at 11:09 AM

…your mom did!…it didn’t work!…she was peeved!…….and NOW, look at the result! A walking breathing drooling turd!

KOOLAID2 on April 4, 2012 at 11:39 AM

liberal4life on April 4, 2012 at 11:25 AM

You proved my point. That was easy.

22044 on April 4, 2012 at 11:41 AM

Gov. Nikki Haley On The View: ‘Women Don’t Care About Contraception’

liberal4life on April 4, 2012 at 11:09 AM

Bitter Clinger on Hotair: ‘I Don’t Care About liberal4life’s Inane Comments’

Bitter Clinger on April 4, 2012 at 11:41 AM

Let’s trot out our own Sandra Fluke, the college gal who won’t be able to afford to buy books because she’s having to pay for her peers’ contraception…

Yes, yes, and yes! The GOP must learn to personalize the message. Every ad that mentions national debt, wasteful spending, or corruption should not juggle trillions, but rather relate to the personal share of the amount.

“The stimulus boondoggle cost the country 800 billion dollars” creates a disconnect between the ad watcher and the astronomical amount in question. “The stimulus boondoggle took $8,000 out of your family pocket. If you had them, how would you spend them?” – a catchier message, isn’t it?

Archivarix on April 4, 2012 at 11:44 AM

A prominent right winger saying women don’t care about contraception is relevant to this topic.

The war on women has been going on since Roe vs Wade.
Does Romney support the idea that most women don’t care about contraception? I would like to know as well.

liberal4life on April 4, 2012 at 11:25 AM

Where to start? First, I can tell you that my wife and sister-in-law don’t give 2 rips about this phony contraception business. They know that no woman is being denied contraception. Second, just how has there been a war on women since Roe v Wade? That SCOTUS decision was supposed to be the holy grail of the “women’s movement”. So, abortion on demand has been the law of the land for nearly 40 years. Where’s the war?

Bitter Clinger on April 4, 2012 at 11:45 AM

Flash: Romney to announce Free Rubbers policy to excite female voters

Only if their ribbed

lol

gerrym51 on April 4, 2012 at 11:46 AM

Now what on earth does Trayvon Martin have to do with women voters? Black voters, absolutely, but women voters? I suppose the case could be made that sensitivity in a president appeals to women, but I’m not seeing it.

KingGold on April 4, 2012 at 11:20

It really isn’t all that hard to figure out. They are two different fronts in the same divisive war designed to pit groups against each other in true Alinsky fashion.

The slutty Sandra Fluke represents one such front with the theme “War on Women.” This is important enough a front that Obama is willing to attack Christians to keep this one going.

Trayvon Martin represents another front that stirs up racial hatred- primarily black hatred of whites.

Then, of course there are other fronts going on as well.

Refusal to enforce the DOMA to send the message that homosexuals will be taken care of after the election.

Defacto amnesty for illegals via DHS sending the message that full amnesty will be on the agenda in the future.

And the attacks on oil companies and squandering of public money on “alternative energy” to keep the tree huggers onboard.

The OWS-type rhetoric concerning the more affluent.

Bottom line, Obama needs to keep groups hating each other in order to distract from his failed record, lack of meaningful (positive) accomplishment, and the unpopularity of Obamacare.

Happy Nomad on April 4, 2012 at 11:46 AM

Very risky strategy. Palin totally bombed with liberal women. Sometimes they do eat their ‘own’.

CorporatePiggy on April 4, 2012 at 11:29 AM

FIFY

Bitter Clinger on April 4, 2012 at 11:47 AM

“If you like your contraception, you can continue using your contraception.” –Obama

Archivarix on April 4, 2012 at 11:48 AM

Yes, yes, and yes! The GOP must learn to personalize the message. Every ad that mentions national debt, wasteful spending, or corruption should not juggle trillions, but rather relate to the personal share of the amount.

Archivarix on April 4, 2012 at 11:44 AM

I agree with the “make it personal” strategy but it needs to still be about the numbers. I do not want to see images of sad people talking about how they had to choose between gas for the car or food for the kids. That kind of anecdotal approach (a typical Dem tactic) makes it too personal. What the GOP needs to do is lay this out for what it is- The case against Barak Hussein Obama.

Happy Nomad on April 4, 2012 at 11:52 AM

Very risky strategy. Palin totally bombed with envious liberal (but, I repeat myself) women. Sometimes they do eat their ‘own’.

CorporatePiggy on April 4, 2012 at 11:29 AM

h/t Bitter Clinger

ShainS on April 4, 2012 at 11:54 AM

Gov. Nikki Haley On The View: ‘Women Don’t Care About Contraception’

liberal4life on April 4, 2012 at 11:09 AM

Haley totally messed up the messaging on this issue. We may very well lose this election if we don’t stop playing into the Democrat’s hand like this.

Overall, I do think Ayotte is right and Romney can win over women voters. It will be helpful when Santorum is no longer in the race reminding women voters what they fear about the GOP.

thuja on April 4, 2012 at 11:54 AM

Now what on earth does Trayvon Martin have to do with women voters? Black voters, absolutely, but women voters? I suppose the case could be made that sensitivity in a president appeals to women, but I’m not seeing it.

Just as a personal anecdote, my mother is a reliable Democratic straight-ticket voter, for a variety of reasons. And she’s absolutely disgusted over Jackson and Sharpton getting involved and Zimmerman’s trial by media.

KingGold on April 4, 2012 at 11:20 AM

I was in CVS yesterday and happened to glance at the cover of People magazine. It’s the Trayvon Martin story — but they’ve got a HUGE picture of him from, like, 5th grade on the cover. I could not believe it. Did they use THIS picture of him as he looked in 2012? No. They used THIS picture. This is the kind of media corruption that will destroy this country. A whole lotta low-interest voters will see that and believe a 10-year-old kid was shot.

Rational Thought on April 4, 2012 at 11:55 AM

yes-but they put it in a sentence that most women when prooded say they are democrats. if you read carefully it has that sentence.

I could not actually find their internals, what a surprise

gerrym51 on April 4, 2012 at 11:34 AM

Yeah, that is non-sense too. Single mothers who have 5 kids with 5 fathers are democrats. College educated girls who want abortion are democrats. But other than that, it is not so clear cut.

Yeah, polls not having internals are becoming the norm. That is how they get away with saying Obama is up by 12 and the like, when that is statistically nearly impossible considering each candidate practiocally starts with 45 and goes from there.

milcus on April 4, 2012 at 11:58 AM

I was in CVS yesterday and happened to glance at the cover of People magazine. It’s the Trayvon Martin story — but they’ve got a HUGE picture of him from, like, 5th grade on the cover. I could not believe it. Did they use THIS picture of him as he looked in 2012? No. They used THIS picture. This is the kind of media corruption that will destroy this country. A whole lotta low-interest voters will see that and believe a 10-year-old kid was shot.

Rational Thought on April 4, 2012 at 11:55 AM

Screwed up the link: THIS the picture people magazine has on its cover, as opposed to THIS more current picture. They know exactly what they’re doing. Very evil. Very, very evil.

Rational Thought on April 4, 2012 at 11:59 AM

Yes, yes, and yes! The GOP must learn to personalize the message. Every ad that mentions national debt, wasteful spending, or corruption should not juggle trillions, but rather relate to the personal share of the amount.

Remember when Hillary-Care was pushed? The GOP ran ads of a young married couple wondering who was going to make medical decisions. I can’t remember the fictitious names but the ads did really well.

rhombus on April 4, 2012 at 11:59 AM

that usa today/gallup poll was for woman

41 percent democrat
22 percent republican

gee, what a surprise they polled for obama.

when I see a poll with a confirmed 41/41 that shows that result then i might believe it

gerrym51 on April 4, 2012 at 11:25 AM

Thank you for the info! It would have been nice if Tina had taken the time to include this, rather than give credence to the Left’s talking points and quoting their idiot, lying pundits. It’s time to debunk the Left’s arguments, not treat them as legitimate.

We need Ed here, ASAP.

cicerone on April 4, 2012 at 12:02 PM

I hope it’s not Ayotte. She’s another “Maine Twin” in the making.

wildcat72 on April 4, 2012 at 12:07 PM

Somewhat off topic, but if a man has his penis cut open, turned inside out and sewn inside of him, then takes all sorts of female hormones, then that is a woman. If a woman who has given birth numerous times is against killing an unborn child, then she is not a woman.

Funny (in a sad way) how that works….

jeffn21 on April 4, 2012 at 12:08 PM

Romney’s foreign policy rhetoric is too bellicose. Most of the country believes little has been gained and much has been lost by the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. On the surface, Romney seems more likely than Obama to send US troops into battle.

That may not be the proximate cause of Romney’s slippage. But longer term it’s a problem he’ll have to do deal with from mothers who see their own children in our soldiers’ faces.

bobs1196 on April 4, 2012 at 12:08 PM

But there are many more thoughtful females out there who see the way Obama and Democrats are destroying this nation and (most importantly) destroying economic opportunity for their children. These women will actually look at the candidates and decide that any candidate is better than handing Obama another four years. Put another way, if Obama is willing to attack Christ before the election, what do you think he will do once the election is over.

Not to mention the women whose husbands have lost their jobs, and can’t provide for their families. Or the soccer moms who can’t afford the gas to drive their kids to soccer practice. Or those who are already married with children, and couldn’t care less about contraception.

Steve Z on April 4, 2012 at 12:11 PM

Very risky strategy. Palin totally bombed with envious liberal (but, I repeat myself) women. Sometimes they do eat their ‘own’.

CorporatePiggy on April 4, 2012 at 11:29 AM
h/t Bitter Clinger

ShainS on April 4, 2012 at 11:54 AM

Thank you. Your version was even better.

Bitter Clinger on April 4, 2012 at 12:11 PM

Screwed up the link: THIS the picture people magazine has on its cover, as opposed to THIS more current picture. They know exactly what they’re doing. Very evil. Very, very evil.

Rational Thought on April 4, 2012 at 11:59 AM

and that was next to the Newsweek (Holy Week timed) mag cover of a Jesus “look-a-like” joining in with the 99% occu-poopers raging against the machine.

The fourth estate indeed.

FlaMurph on April 4, 2012 at 12:12 PM

I hope it’s not Ayotte. She’s another “Maine Twin” in the making.

wildcat72 on April 4, 2012 at 12:07 PM

And we can Lisa Murkowski to that club already.

Bitter Clinger on April 4, 2012 at 12:12 PM

Thank you for the info! It would have been nice if Tina had taken the time to include this, rather than give credence to the Left’s talking points and quoting their idiot, lying pundits. It’s time to debunk the Left’s arguments, not treat them as legitimate.

We need Ed here, ASAP.

cicerone on April 4, 2012 at 12:02 PM

There have been some great fact based posts with good arguments made by the guest bloggers while Ed is on vacation. Any of them would make a good replacement for Tina.

thuja on April 4, 2012 at 12:13 PM

Once he gets near as much time as Obama, yeah, he’ll close and overtake alot of gaps.

Zaggs on April 4, 2012 at 12:17 PM

5 Bucks, Romney has a VP candidate in mind.. and it’s a female.

upinak on April 4, 2012 at 11:09 AM
.

It better be a solid woman – or else the media will have a field day with 2 white guys trying to get rid of a White African American.

FlaMurph on April 4, 2012 at 11:28 AM

I would hope she’s a Governor! Nikki Haley of SC? Susana Martinez oof NM? Or Jan Brewer of AZ?

Steve Z on April 4, 2012 at 12:17 PM

I hope it’s not Ayotte. She’s another “Maine Twin” in the making.

wildcat72 on April 4, 2012 at 12:07 PM

I wish she hadn’t said no- but Condi Rice has the foreign relations experience Romney sorely needs-(and way more than Slow Joe Biden “claimed” he had in 2008″- remember that ?) because Foreign Relations will be an advantageous selling point for team Oflexible in the GE with the Middle East burning down and the Iran BS, as opposed to the Rs being light on experience there.

Russia already hates Mittens.

FlaMurph on April 4, 2012 at 12:23 PM

kristi noem has a appeal. shes attractive and smart. libs will bring up the unquilified issue but guess what, they didn’t mind nominating a community organizer

gemini on April 4, 2012 at 12:28 PM

Thank you for the info! It would have been nice if Tina had taken the time to include this, rather than give credence to the Left’s talking points and quoting their idiot, lying pundits. It’s time to debunk the Left’s arguments, not treat them as legitimate.

surprisingly enough when the actual thread was originally posted tina Did include the line. But it was not STRESSED.

gerrym51 on April 4, 2012 at 12:58 PM

kristi noem has a appeal. shes attractive and smart. libs will bring up the unquilified issue but guess what, they didn’t mind nominating a community organizer

gemini on April 4, 2012 at 12:28 PM

A Republican can’t get away with being unqualified, as a democratic can.

slickwillie2001 on April 4, 2012 at 1:02 PM

Again, Obama won women by 13 points in 2008. That is his ceiling. So all this non-sense about him being up by 20 when it comes to women is just a false narrative.

And once Romney is the nominee, and when he will refuse to talk about social issues, and focus on Obama’s record and the economy, he will cut into that 13 point number. If he brings that down to 6-7, and picks up even 5% of Latino voters because of Rubio, he is winning this election. If he does better than that, he will win by 3-5 points.

So, yes Ayotte is right.

milcus on April 4, 2012 at 11:25 AM

..excellent analysis. Also, wait’ll they get a load of Anne Romney. I mean, compare her to that lobster-sucking, stevedore-armed broad-beamed mooch and it’ll be Katie-bar-the-door.

I mean which of those two would you prefer?

The War Planner on April 4, 2012 at 1:09 PM

The war on women has been going on since Roe vs Wade.

liberal4life on April 4, 2012 at 11:25 AM

Hey, I remember that case.

It was when a group of middle-aged (and older) Men decided they knew more about womens’ Health than the women themselves and issued a ruling forever changing the country.

Please define “Judicial Activism” for us.

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Del Dolemonte on April 4, 2012 at 1:12 PM

I hope it’s not Ayotte. She’s another “Maine Twin” in the making.

wildcat72 on April 4, 2012 at 12:07 PM

No she’s not. Absolutely not.

And yes, I live in New Hampshire, so I know what I’m talking about.

Snowe and Collins aren’t even fit to bring Kelly coffee.

Del Dolemonte on April 4, 2012 at 1:14 PM

Kelly Ayotte is my senator and she is another Rhino moron. She says she wants to reign in federal spending, but she wants to expand the military. She thinks we need to have alternative forms of energy. If she was any stupider and more inconsistent I’d wonder how she remembers to breathe.

woodNfish on April 4, 2012 at 1:39 PM

This is actually pretty good, because it doesn’t do him a bit of good with the left, middle or right.

8thAirForce on April 4, 2012 at 1:52 PM

If I were Romney, I’d be thinking about picking a mature, well-spoken Hispanic woman. The rest of the VP hopefuls could then forward his candidacy by campaigning for him in battleground States.

NuclearPhysicist on April 4, 2012 at 1:57 PM

Gov. Susana Martinez would probably be a good VP choice.

NuclearPhysicist on April 4, 2012 at 2:17 PM

When it all comes down to it, come November, this election is not going to be about Mitt Romney, the 1%, or whether or not Republicans are RAAAAAACIST, MISSSSSSSSSOGINOST, RIIIIIIIIICH, BIIIIIIIIG OIIIIIIIIL BACKERS. The election will be a refferendum on Barack Obama and his disasterous Presidency. If by November the economy comes roaring back, unemployment drops to 6%, foreclosures stop, real estate values go up, and gas drops to below $3/gallon, then Obama gets elected.

If the “recovery” is still anemic, unemployment is still stalled above 8%, foreclosures are still happening, real estate values are still in the crapper, and gas is above $4/gallon, Obama is toast. The economy is going to be an albatross around his neck and no distractions will get attention away from that come late October or November.

crazy_legs on April 4, 2012 at 2:39 PM

Gov. Susana Martinez would probably be a good VP choice.

NuclearPhysicist on April 4, 2012 at 2:17 PM

Everyone’s like openly saying, “Ah gee; we need to make sure our VP candidate is Hispanic.”

And I’m racist for — while hating no one for this reason and judging people still as individuals — accepting (reluctantly, originally, but in the spirit of scientific integrity) the scientific evidence that actually there are some differences other than cosmetic between humans that have been geographically separated for tens of thousands of years and have undergone both genetic drift and natural selection in response to quite different geographic environments.

Damn, my species is stupid.

Mitchell Heisman on April 4, 2012 at 3:07 PM

Yeah, women are just going to love it when they realize they can’t afford to go on vacation this summer, between the price of gas, and the inflation. No-beach Obama will have a special place in their hearts, you can bet.

smellthecoffee on April 4, 2012 at 3:48 PM

Maybe,but he won’t close the conservative gap.Another RINO will go down to defeat!

redware on April 4, 2012 at 7:38 PM

Hey why don’t you post something resembling an original thought.

Oh wait, that’s like asking a cockroach to tell me about Einstein.

22044 on April 4, 2012 at 11:21 AM

A prominent right winger saying women don’t care about contraception is relevant to this topic.

The war on women has been going on since Roe vs Wade.
Does Romney support the idea that most women don’t care about contraception? I would like to know as well.

liberal4life on April 4, 2012 at 11:25 AM

Pro-abortion philosopher Mary Anne Warren warned about the real “war on women” over 25 years ago:

“In this thought-provoking feminist study of the moral issues raised by new and emerging technologies of sex selection, Mary Anne Warren shows that these technologies could substantially undermine and ultimately reverse the progress women have made in today’s society.”

http://www.amazon.com/Gendercide-Mary-Anne-Warren/dp/0847673308/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1333584423&sr=8-4

“In 2007, the booming port city of Lianyungang achieved the dubious distinction of having the most extreme gender ratio for children under five in China: 163 boys for every 100 girls. The numbers may not matter much to the preschool set. But in twenty years the skewed sex ratio will pose a colossal challenge. When Lianyungang’s children reach adulthood, their generation will have twenty-four million more men than women. 



The prognosis for China’s neighbors is no less bleak: rampant sex selective abortion has left over 160 million females “missing” from Asia’s population. And gender imbalance reaches far beyond South and East Asia, affecting the Caucasus countries, Eastern Europe, and even some groups in the United States — a rate of diffusion so rapid that the leading expert on the topic compares it to an epidemic. As economic development spurs parents in developing countries to have fewer children and brings them access to sex determination technology, couples are making sure at least one of their children is a son. So many parents now select for boys that they have skewed the sex ratio at birth of the entire world. 



Sex selection did not arise on its own. Largely unknown until now is that the sex ratio imbalance is partly the work of a group of 1960s American activists and scientists who zealously backed the use of prenatal technologies in their haste to solve an earlier global problem. 



What does this mean for our future? The sex ratio imbalance has already led to a spike in sex trafficking and bride buying across Asia, and it may be linked to a recent rise in crime there as well. More far-reaching problems could be on the horizon: From ancient Rome to the American Wild West, historical excesses of men have yielded periods of violence and instability. Traveling to nine countries, Mara Hvistendahl has produced a stunning, impeccably researched book that examines not only the consequences of the misbegotten policies underlying sex selection but also the West’s role in creating them.”

http://www.amazon.com/Unnatural-Selection-Choosing-Girls-Consequences/dp/1610391519/ref=tmm_pap_title_0

ebrown2 on April 4, 2012 at 8:11 PM