I am around many many more women daily than I am men...I actually have very little interaction with men (other than my husband and my Dad). So, other than a couple of husbands that I know who keep their wives brain washed that's all I can address....from personal experience. (The friend I had who would only regurgitate what her husband told her, and kept her sheltered to anything but what he told her...and she complied.. had blocked my emails from her after ONE email about bo... needless to say I'm no longer friends with her... I know one other who only gets info from her husband as well...).
I'm strictly talking on all of this from my personal experiences. Which is vastly different than yours. Anything I say about "women" is totally directed at those outside the gulch.. (of course). :)

who thought you were a guy

I realize that. Just not ALL the women you know. I can think of one specifically. I am more interested that you think men are more reasonable than women. That has not been my experience. I find men and women both mostly asleep at the wheel. The only thing I would say in distinction is that the women I know avoid confrontation more than men (talking about politics at a party for example).
the only other anecdotal stupid thing I heard women say and I didn't hear any men say when Obama was elected the first time was the statement regarding how wonderful it would be to have the first black president. I heard that a fair amount and not from any men.
I just don't see the hiding behind the husband thing you referred to.

(I've already mentioned the gulch disclaimer...don't make me find 'em..... and YOU KNOW what I mean.)

I just don't like phrases that can be used by both sides of an issue (common sense...fair... open minded) they mean completely different things to different people (hope and change, for another.) Plus this sort of sounds like, even though probably true, that women are wind socks....once the conditions are right they move in a certain direction of thinking. And women always looking for "security".... weak. You're probably right....it just really bothers me that women are so willingly in the dark... :( I'm not a big fan of women....and I am one.

Wait, two what? Or, to wit...

Khalling I am also scratching my head on this one, seems very suspicious...

"Also, I don't know ANY women who are more aware of what's going on around them"
you don't?

As will their progeny's progeny.

Why thank you. I do my best to listen, to read and educate myself on a daily basis. I acknowledge that I have so much more to learn as well. I do, in this forum, because of the wealth of information offered by the hugely diverse members here. Glad to have you commenting. And don't worry about the vocabulary. You get your point across clearly.

I have done so. Often. Some have acknowledged their misapplied non reasoning for choosing to vote the way they did. Others are firmly entrenched. The same applies to men though. And members of unions. They hold fast and firm to their ignorance.

As to your comment about job requirements being changed to make them more accessible to women this is one thing I do not agree with. This is not "equality" and I do not want it here is why! If a fireman comes to my house and it is burning down, I know there are guidelines (most of the time) for him to become said fireman he must be able to lift a certain amount of weight or run a certain distance in a certain time etc. I expect him to have fulfilled the criteria for the job because he may be there to save my life right?

Women should have to fill the same criteria at the same level. NOT ALL women will be able to do that but then again NOT ALL MEN can do this either. My sister could beat down most men she dates, she is really strong and has high stamina! She is so muscular I used to be jealous, but that is just her body type. If she went to fill a job position that has certain physical requirements she will tell you she wants to fulfill the requirements for the male position not the female!

When you are in an occupation where their are physical requirements they are there for a reason. I do not want a 100 pound female trying to life my 190 pound body if she can't do it. She wont be able to get me out of my burning house, it should not be HER job but it could be my 175 pound sister who could pick up over 200 pounds! that is more acceptable but then again she could fulfill the requirements that are set for males. She can do what the job requires!

Hope this response helps you understand my take on this situation. WE as a people need to make better decisions. We allowed things like lowering standards to accept more individuals into a profession, which has lead to less people being able to do what the job requires!

Yep NMA, we have many here who can spot a problem (which agree it could be a problem but it still cannot be labeled as an overlying gender problem) but cannot find a fix. I would be willing to bet that the major problem is not "women" and their voting patterns but the way women were treated by men and the effect this has on voting patterns.
My vocabulary may not be as extensive as many of the people who respond in here but at least I am more "open-minded" (there it is again) than most.
I giggle each time I read some of these individuals post about something that is not the problem but they think it is. They need to find the problem beneath the problem that really yields these results we are facing now.

Edit: I would also argue that many stay at home moms are MORE educated and aware (depending on their background) about how to vote than are women who are out there working as business women "taking the world by storm".

Love that you are one of our women that thinks using their own brain. In fact this is going to sound terrible but I was never able to tell if you were female or male until now because you have none of the stereotypes of either group that fit you totally. That is a good thing imho

hmm lets see, didnt think I would have to define this one but "open minded" means able to accept things that were difficult to accept before. For instance, women are put down and beat down by the hand of man, sorry truth hurts, for thousands of years in many cultures (sure you can find one or two where they weren't) now women are given voice so they vote to protect their voice and give themselves security.

Now that women as a "general" group (not all women just majority) have felt that security for some time, many of them are opening their minds (see there it is again) to the idea that you dont need to vote for security/protection by the government but instead now we will need protection from the government.

This all seems pretty easy to understand but there you go.. explanation.

Edit: LS you could say the same thing about students accepting everything that their teacher says. That to me would just be a small-minded person who does not question what they are told or perhaps correct me if I am wrong?

Are you proposing a fix to this "problem" of small-mindedness?

Lol

It's a whole new ballgame.

New perspectives...new objectives...and new subjectivity.

I am floating on the perimeters, and looking for anything that looks familiar.

When I say 'familiar', I am referring to anything that even resembles reality.

Getting harder to find....

lol

A classic post hoc, ergo hoc error.
I could mention a dozen errors in you argument though I will acknowledge probably more women are poorly informed about the subjects they are voting on.

What the font is your problem!!??

You don’t want to font with me.

Women are becoming more "open minded".. define open minded please...
Also, I don't know ANY women who are more aware of what's going on around them. Some in fact only believe what they're told by their husbands. 'Splain that! (I'm sure their husbands find that to be 'useful'.)

The troubling thing in the 2012 stats is how the young people voted. They wanted free stuff. I guess they don't realize they have to pick up the check.

Oh (rubbing hands together)...what is it??