NYT
The U.S. is in the midst of the most important presidential election campaign since World War II, and if there has ever been a time when women voters had the opportunity to decisively affect the nation’s future, it’s now.
Hillary Clinton’s historic candidacy has heightened the interest of women voters who would no doubt have been paying close attention to this election in any event because of its classic lineup of issues, including the war in Iraq, a highly uncertain economy and the makeover of the Supreme Court, with its implications for abortion, civil liberties and so on.
A national poll conducted for the Lifetime television network showed that nearly 40 percent of women feel that voting in the 2008 election will be more important than in previous years. And an overwhelming majority of women who are registered to vote say they plan to go to the polls.
But most of those voters are not yet committed to a particular candidate.
That means there’s a treasure trove of potential votes out there among women. But except for the recent flap over the treatment of Senator Clinton in last week’s debate, the campaigns are nearly all being waged as if the only votes that really matter are those of dimwitted guys fascinated by big guns and insecure in their masculinity.
Six years after Sept. 11 and nearly five years into the absurd war in Iraq, the election talk is still mostly mindless macho chatter about who’s toughest; who would be best at shoving Iran around; who would be most extreme in dealing with terror.
Incredibly, torture is still on the table.
Most of the candidates would rather be locked in a cell and forced to listen to endless loops of Rush Limbaugh monologues than spend quality time on issues like pay equity or child care or anything else that might be of particular interest to women.
The Lifetime poll was part of the cable network’s nonpartisan “Every Woman Counts” campaign, which is designed to encourage women to vote and speak out on important issues. The poll and an extensive series of interviews (unrelated to the poll) indicate that among women, Senator Clinton has an advantage but has not yet closed the deal.
Cautious to a fault (like most Democrats), she has not generated the kind of excitement among women that one might have expected from the first woman with a serious shot at winning the White House.
Among women who have already made up their minds, more than half — 56 percent — favor Mrs. Clinton. But, according to the poll, only 22 percent have made up their minds.
When you talk to women about how they feel about Mrs. Clinton, you find that their reactions are staggeringly complex. Some are obviously crazy about her. Some seem to like her and loathe her at the same time, and for reasons they have trouble articulating.
Many want to see a woman elected president, but would rather have someone other than Mrs. Clinton as the standard-bearer. And a substantial number will bring up, without prompting, Bill Clinton’s misadventures with other women.
If there is one word to describe the feeling of many women about Senator Clinton it might be: ambivalence.
A woman from Coral Gables, Fla., said: “I resent the fact that so many believe that Hillary speaks for all women. She does not. I admire her and I think she is well-qualified, but she lacks heart.”
It may be that George W. Bush and the Republicans are so unpopular now that Senator Clinton or just about any Democrat will be able to waltz into the White House. But that’s a dangerous belief for any Democrat to have a year in advance of the election.
If Senator Clinton is unable to generate tremendous enthusiasm among women voters she is unlikely to win. She needs a big turnout among Democrats in general and women in particular to overcome the built-in opposition to her candidacy on the right and among men and women who won’t vote for a woman under any circumstances.
Thirty-nine percent of the women who responded to the Lifetime poll said that they would not vote for Senator Clinton, and another 7 percent said that they would not vote for any woman under any circumstance.
The flaw in the Clinton campaign so far has been the absence of real leadership — the failure of the candidate to galvanize supporters with a vision so compelling as to be almost irresistible.
“She’s wishy-washy,” said one woman.
The problem for the terminally timid Democrats is that this is not just a flaw in the Clinton campaign, but a potentially devastating flaw in the entire Democratic presidential field.
No comments:
Post a Comment