Security moms

[Tgace]

On NPR today I heard a story about the Kerry campaign's problem getting Women's votes. It said that Women, typically Dem. voters, are polling out as Bush supporters solely on the security issue. What do you think is the reasoning behind this viewpoint, which (from what I read in the paper) is being called the reason Bushes Poll #'s are so strong?

And before we get into it, lets just skip all the "spin control", "ignorant masses", "media manipulated" yadda yadda arguements. There has to be a more basic human behavior and/or psychological reason that this is happening, even in spite of widespread dissatisfaction over the reasons we went to war and the prosecution of it.

 

[Tgace]

Although, to give the the "spin doctors" their due, the story did state that the "decisive leader vs. flip-flopper" spin is enhancing this effect. However I think its rooted somewhere else. Perhaps as basic as people not liking to switch leaders "mid-crisis".

 

[Spud]

Very Good question. I think there's a perception (enhanced by the Bush campaign) that the President is a consistent and strong leader who "doesn't do nuance" The whole your either with us or against us and Mission Accomplished thing. Some people want a concrete perception of security. On a gut level, we want things simple.

I believe that Kerry is seen as being overly-analytical with commitment based on a set of conditions and consensus. - that doesn't campaign well.

I'll bite my tongue on the spin, ignorant masses and lack of media scrutiny.... That's a whole 'nother can of worms.

 

[TigerWoman]

I'm a mom of soon to be - draft age kids but I think Bush has done a good job about security. I really don't know exactly what Kerry stands for except attacking Bush and flip-flopping. Known vs Unknown. Then whoever says we will get out of Iraq will get my vote. Kaith, did you say that? I will have to check his platform. Actually Kaith sounds like a better alternative anyway. TW

 

[Tgace]

BTW: "Security Moms" is the actual label being placed on the voter bloc in question. Not my appellation.

 

[Tgace]

I believe that Kerry is seen as being overly-analytical with commitment based on a set of conditions and consensus. - that doesn't campaign well.

I think thats an interesting point. I always hated the whole "decision by poll" impression I used to have of Clinton. Has Bush gone too far in the other direction? I dont know.

 

[PeachMonkey]

I really don't know exactly what Kerry stands for except attacking Bush and flip-flopping.

I'm guessing you're a Fox News viewer, then?

Seriously, though, what sources of news do you watch? I'm genuinely curious about the process that leads to the conclusion you've made.

 

[Tgace]

Interesting excerpts from...
http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2004-07-20-malkin_x.htm

I am not alone. Professors and political analysts have observed the remarkable conversion of "soccer moms" to "security moms" since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. According to GOP pollster David Winston, "security moms" now make up between 11% and 14% of the electorate. The trend has manifested itself in increased concealed-weapons-permit applications among women; the rise of national-security-focused Web logs published by hard-hitting female "war bloggers"; and an upsurge in political activism by women on core homeland-defense issues, such as immigration enforcement

No clear-cut leader

So far, neither presidential ticket quite measures up. Judging from the touchy-feely-fest put on by the John Kerry-John Edwards campaign recently, it is clear that the Democratic Party still thinks it can win by wallowing in the Sept. 10 politics of grievance, entitlement and passivity. The Democratic presidential campaign is softer than a Kleenex tissue, when its motto should be "No More Tears."

As for the Republicans, I have supported President Bush's war on terror overseas, but he continues to fight only a half-hearted battle to defend Americans on American soil from hostile invasion or attack. Recently, the White House revived an amnesty plan for millions of illegal aliens, and the Department of Homeland Security retreated on immigration-enforcement sweeps in Southern California. It is clear that the GOP elite gravely underestimates the wrath we security moms feel toward Washington's fatal addiction to "cheap labor" and "cheap votes" at the expense of secure borders.

To paraphrase the Iron Lady, Margaret Thatcher: Gentlemen, this is no time to go warm and fuzzy. Security moms will never forget that toddlers and schoolchildren were incinerated in the hijacked planes on Sept. 11. Murderous Islamic fanatics will stop at nothing to do the same to our kids. As they plot our death and destruction, these enemies will not be won over by either hair-sprayed liberalism or bleeding-heart conservatism.

Neither will we.

 

[rmcrobertson]

Oh, Michelle Malkin. That figures.

It's good to know that the kind of selfish yahoo who zooms up my tail pipe from Orange County because I'm only doing 78 and have no way to turn into the next lane, driving a Lexus SUV and yakking on the cell phone, also feels good about announcing that she's got a gun and is itching for a chance to use it.

Every time I read this kind of stuff, I think of all of my fellow citizens who are even more privileged with regard to the rest of the world than I am, and who strike me as idiot children who have been presented with toys that are much, much too powerful for them to be futzing around with.

I also reflect that in the unhappy event push REALLY came to shove, Mrs. Malkin is precisely the sort who would either a) drive over the bodies of the rest of us, or b) be first in line to collaborate with the Martian invaders.

Martial artists should think carefully about falling for this sort of chest-thumping by the wealthy.

 

[kenpo tiger]

I'm neither a soccer mom nor a security mom.

I am, however, a mom with two sons who could be draft fodder.

I have to pin my hopes on Mr. Kerry being elected in order to draw a logical and honorable conclusion to a very bad mistake on Mr. Bush's part (i.e., escalation of the Iraqi war) so that my sons don't become cannon fodder.

Do I feel safer because of Mr. Bush? Nope. I feel safer because of Rudy the G and Mayor Mike, thank you.

 

[Phoenix44]

I'm a mom of soon to be - draft age kids but I think Bush has done a good job about security. I really don't know exactly what Kerry stands for except attacking Bush and flip-flopping. Known vs Unknown.

I have to agree with PeachMonkey. Are you getting your info from Fox News? Because Fox is the outfit that keeps repeating the "flip-flop" wisecrack, as well as making the false and discredited assertion that Iraq had something to do with 9/11 and Al-Qaeda.

In fact, Bush has been TERRIBLE for security, and he has made us LESS safe than ever before. Having bankrupted our treasury in Iraq, he has failed to implement basic homeland security measures for which we no longer have money: cargo inspection, port security, airline security, rail security, food safety, border patrols, adequate protection of bridges, tunnels and dams. He has failed to secure leftover nuclear materials from the former Soviet Union. Failed to protect our nuclear plants. Bush has DECREASED spending on police. He has failed to implement the recommendations of the 9/11 commission. He has failed to provide necessary funds for translation of terrorist transmissions. He has failed to pursue Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. And of the 5000 people detained related to 9/11, only 1 went to prison--and he was recently released. Whatever happened to the Al-Qaeda cells in the US before 9/11? They're still here! The Bush administration has apprehended NONE of them. Even in Iraq, he failed to implement the recommendations of his own generals, and used a woefully inadequate approach.

Kerry has NEVER "flip-flopped" on Iraq. The statement Kerry made BEFORE he voted on Iraq (which has been played repeatedly on the radio) is EXACTLY the same as the statement he makes today--he was voting to give the authority to the President to use force in Iraq IF all other options were exhausted, IF additional weapons inspections were made, IF we had the backing of our allies. Bush asked for that authority, in BUSH'S own words, to "keep the peace" in Iraq. Bush met none of those criteria, threw out the weapons inspectors, and rushed to war. Bush flip-flopped, not Kerry. Bush had no intention of "keeping the peace" in Iraq. But in order to know this, you have to actually listen to what Kerry said, rather than the clever wise-cracks.

And if you want to know what else Kerry stands for, you can read the transcripts of his speeches, read his financial plan in the Wall Street Journal, or go to JohnKerry.com. As a concerned citizen, you really should do that before dismissing the entire election as "known vs unknown." In fact, you don't really know--and I'm sorry to say, that's because you haven't really looked.

 

[RandomPhantom700]

Wow, by the time I finished reading that article, I was summarizing it in a simple phrase: "I am mother, hear me roar".

 

[Flatlander]

Electoral college issues split off to here.

 

[Tgace]

Wow, by the time I finished reading that article, I was summarizing it in a simple phrase: "I am mother, hear me roar".

I wonder if this is a "chicken or the egg" type issue sometimes? Is there a voter block that requires naming? Or do campaign planners make up a name and see how many voters flock to it?

 

[Phoenix44]

It simply takes less brain-power to adopt a cutesy phrase like "security mom" or "flip-flop" than to actually know the issues. The spin-sters know this.

 

[Cryozombie]

I have to pin my hopes on Mr. Kerry being elected in order to draw a logical and honorable conclusion to a very bad mistake on Mr. Bush's part (i.e., escalation of the Iraqi war) so that my sons don't become cannon fodder.
.

Yet, Kerry Voted against providing extra funding for equipment to the troops already there to (in his own words) "Protest", thereby leaving the Soldiers who are there without critical equipment neccessary to stay safe... (I can't provide a link, heard this on NPR driving into work this am)

So many other mother's children will die because they lacked basic... neccessities.

 

[PeachMonkey]

Yet, Kerry Voted against providing extra funding for equipment to the troops already there to (in his own words) "Protest", thereby leaving the Soldiers who are there without critical equipment neccessary to stay safe... (I can't provide a link, heard this on NPR driving into work this am)

So many other mother's children will die because they lacked basic... neccessities.

Welcome to the world of mischaracterization.

Try reading this:

http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=155

 

[Phoenix44]

Here's another piece of reality:

National Guard and Reservists on duty in Iraq are getting killed with the same bullets as regular military. However, the regular military gets medical insurance for their families, while 90% of the activated reservist/guard families must obtain their own health insurance or pay out of pocket, to insure continuity of benefits. Senator Tom Daschle called this a "logic-defying" policy. The Lincoln amendment to the budget resolution would have allocated $20.3 billion over ten years (the appropriate amount as determined by the General Accounting Office) to achieve parity in health insurance for activated reservists. (We're tallking about the same budget resolution Bush wants to pay for his war in Iraq). The Lincoln amendment was to be paid for by reducing the Bush tax cut for the wealthy. Senate Republicans rejected the Lincoln amendment by a vote of 46-51. And just in case this provision had passed, Rumsfeld said he would recommend that the President veto the entire budget--you know, that same bill he supposedly wanted to support the troops.

So spending $100 billion/year in Iraq is OK, but $20B over 10 years for health insurance for soldiers' families is too expensive. AND Bush was planning on vetoing the entire budget resolution if this provision was included...do I hear the sound of flipping or flopping?

 

[Tgace]

http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20040923-121550-2873r.htm


Analysis: Security moms may swing election


By Peter Roff
UPI Senior Political Analyst


Washington, DC, Sep. 23 (UPI) -- Democratic Party nominee for president John F. Kerry has staked his bid for the White House on two wars: Vietnam and Iraq.

His emphasis may be misdirected.

For much of the campaign, Kerry has played his service in Vietnam as a shield against charges that he, unlike the other Democrats who sought the presidency in the years since 1972, was not soft on U.S. national security.

It was an interesting campaign strategy -- at least until the activities of the anti-Kerry 527 organization Swift Boat Veterans for Truth made his war record a liability almost equal to its value as an asset.

Now, after a flirtation with domestic issues like healthcare and education, Kerry is talking about Iraq almost around the clock while his campaign cedes states once thought to be competitive -- like Missouri and Arizona -- to the Republicans.

Polling data suggest the key voter bloc in the 2004 election, the successor to soccer and waitress moms and NASCAR dads, may be security-minded women for whom the war in Iraq is much less of a concern than the war on terror.

The idea of security moms holding the key to the White House in 2004 was evident at least as far back as February, when former Clinton administration and political strategist Morris Reid predicted the "Homeland Security Moms," which he defined as "30- to 55-year-old mothers living in and around major cities," could be the deciding factor in the election's outcome.

"A recent poll by the Pew Research Center revealed that 76 percent of women with young children are more concerned with national security than they were prior to 9/11," he said at the time while arguing the issue should work in the Democrats' favor.

Yet with the election weeks away, the terror war remains George W. Bush's strongest issue.

The Sept. 8 CBS News/New York Times poll of more than 1,000 adults showed that, by a ratio of 2-to-1 respondents approve of the way Bush is handling the war against terrorism. Sixty-two percent of those surveyed gave high marks to Bush for his job fighting terror; 31 percent said they disapproved.

In that same poll 71 percent of those asked said the threat of terrorism is a permanent problem for the United States -- something the nation must "always live with." Only 25 percent said terrorism could someday be eliminated as a threat to the American way of life.

The issue is still very much alive, pollster Kellyanne Conway says, but may be driving many of the women who heretofore were reliable votes for the Democrats at the presidential level into the Bush camp.

The founder and chief executive officer of the Polling Company, Conway is also the publisher of WomanTrends, a Washington-based quarterly newsletter analyzing information on how women create trends or are affected by them.

She says the trend toward greater concern about security -- personal and well as national -- has become very evident since the Sept. 11 terror attacks on New York and Washington, a view shared by other pollsters as well.

The Pew Research Center's Andy Kohut has previously noted that most polls "showed women feeling much more personally vulnerable, much more personally threatened" after Sept. 11.

"Security moms look at the world through the prism of their children. In 2000 that meant they were focused on issues like healthcare, education and -- to some degree -- the environment," Kohut said.

In that election, the exit polls said, Vice President Al Gore ran ahead of Bush among women by 11 points, with Bush showing a particularly acute deficit among the so-called soccer moms -- middle- to upper-class married women living child-centered lives in the suburbs.

The "security women" voter bloc, Conway says, represents an amalgam of soccer moms, the so-called waitress moms -- blue-collar working women, often single but supporting children and typically drawn to the Democrats because of their reliance on activist government in many aspects of their lives -- and single women seeking avenues to empowerment.

These two types of moms are bound together, Conway says, by two things: First, they all have school-age children, a fact that colors their political thinking; and second, their sense that the most important issue facing the country is security. And this, she says, is where Kerry is missing the boat.

"The war in Iraq is not nearly as important to these women as the war on terror," she says, "which screams 'homeland security' and is a critical issue where they too can play a vital role." In fact, she suggests, voters generally may not connect the two.

"For today's woman, the most important, most precious commodity they possess isn't time or money, it's control -- something they all lost a sense of on Sept. 11" -- which also makes the issue one of importance to women, especially highly educated women without children who nonetheless want to contribute in a meaningful way to the national priority of fighting terrorism.

For women, the terror war cuts across party lines and ideologies. Californian Debbie Carlson told Time magazine earlier this year that since Sept. 11, "All I want in a president is a person who is strong" -- despite the fact that she usually backs candidates who favor abortion rights and support expansive welfare programs.

The anecdotes and the data both suggest the same thing: If voters in November base their choice on the war in Iraq, as Kerry hopes they will, it will work to his benefit. If, however, they base their vote on their desire to keep the homeland secure, the benefit appears ready to adhere to Bush.

 

[Cryozombie]

Welcome to the world of mischaracterization.

Try reading this:

http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=155

Okkk... that article said the same thing that the NPR report said...

Analysis

[font=Arial, Helvetica]The Bush ad says Kerry "voted . . . for military action in Iraq" and then "voted against funding our soldiers." [/font]In fact, Kerry did vote October 11, 2002 to grant Bush authority to use military force against Iraq at his discretion, and a year later Kerry also voted against Bush's request for $87 billion to fund military operations and reconstruction in Iraq and Afghanistan.