All Comments

  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Hiraghm 10 years ago
    I can see how an objective observer could come to that conclusion, considering what's happened to the country since women got the vote.

    However, what's the saying? Coincidence is not correlation? Something like that...
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ AJAshinoff 10 years ago
    In 2008 I happened to be writing in a coffee house when I overheard two young women (early twenties) discussing O. When I asked them why they were voting for him their reply was: "He's cute. He's younger."

    The explanation the historian gave was just that, an explanation of past events. I do not see that he advocated the sentiment but only that it aligned it with two people being one through Christian marriage. In that was a husband and wife voting would be two votes, not one. An individual would be unfairly represented because he was not married and would only have one vote to give. Sensible.

    Considering what I witnessed, there is a modicum of validity to the idea. But my wife, daughter, sister, sister-in laws, cousins, and female friends certainly do not represent that antiquated notion.
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo