Ten Reasons Why Women Should Unite Behind Obama If He's the Candidate
Should Sen. Barack Obama emerge as the Democratic candidate, women have compelling reasons to support his candidacy. Here are my top ten:
10. Nearly half of women voting in the Democratic primaries already support Sen. Obama's candidacy. CNN compiled exit polling data from all the states that held primaries before West Virginia. Averaging the percentage that each candidate received from women voters in these states, the two Democratic candidates were only three points apart (46.6% for Obama, 49.6% for Clinton). Sen. Obama won the women's vote in 13 states, compared to 16 for Clinton -- and that's not counting the caucuses where he won decisively, including among women.
9. Support for Sen. Obama among women is not surprising. His stands on issues important to women, from fair pay to reproductive justice to support for paid sick days and paid family leave, are strikingly similar to Sen. Clinton's. He'll be not just on the right side but a champion for gender justice. Above all, he has shown his commitment and ability to galvanize grassroots movements -- the key to moving our agenda.
8. He has attributed his understanding of gender to the strong women in his life, including his mother, grandmother and wife Michelle. Having been raised by a single mother, he has insights into the lives of those who need food stamps to feed their families or have to choose between seeking health care or paying the rent. As an engaged father he understands the reality of work-life conflicts, but he also sees how these fall disproportionately on women, and how much more difficult they are for women without resources.
7. Our anger at the sexism that emerged in this campaign, from low-life hecklers to high-profile pundits, should stoke our determination but not determine our vote. At the same time, we must all oppose the racism that emerged in both blatant and coded ways and recognize that breaking that glass ceiling is also a blow to the Big Boys, one that weakens them and strengthens us.
6. Women can set an example of unity to build a stronger party that draws on the unprecedented turnout in the primaries among African-Americans, women of all races, young people and others who have too long been left out of political decision-making. Such a coming together will not only power an election victory, but lay the groundwork for significant social change in the coming years.
5. John McCain on the war: Sen. Obama's early judgment opposing the war in Iraq puts him in an excellent position to take on John McCain, who has not only supported the war from its onset but professed to having no problem should troops remain in Iraq for 100 years. Women can't afford a president who thinks "Bomb, bomb, bomb Iran" is a stance to brag about.
4. John McCain on the right to abortion: not only does he oppose it, he's pledged to fill any Supreme Court vacancies with justices who will overturn Roe v. Wade.
3. John McCain on health care: McCain voted against reauthorizing the State Children's Health Insurance Program for five years. His health plan provides $2 billion in tax cuts to the top ten health insurance companies, while allowing those companies to exclude people with pre-existing conditions.
2. John McCain on valuing families: When Congress was considering the Family and Medical Leave Act in 1993, McCain voted to suspend it unless the federal government certified that compliance wouldn't increase business expenses or gave employers financial assistance to cover any costs. He supports a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage and campaigned for an Arizona constitutional amendment banning any legal recognition to gay couples.
1. John McCain on fair pay: He opposes the Fair Pay Restoration Act on the grounds that it will create too many lawsuits (this is like opposing OSHA inspections on the grounds that too many violations will be found). He also opposed raising the minimum wage and safeguarding overtime rights.
And did I mention John McCain?
Those of us who have been supporting Obama welcome the passionate, hard-working supporters of Sen. Clinton -- as we will support her should the campaign turn out differently than expected. Every woman angry at the way in which gender discrimination has robbed our pay, crimped our opportunities, devalued our work in the labor force and in the home, minimized our pain and trivialized the barriers we face, now has a great opportunity to determine the outcome of this election. We also have a great responsibility, to ourselves and the women who follow.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Corporate Media consistently says Sen. Obama has a problem with generating votes from White working class Americans. It's not Sen. Obama who has the problem, it's the White working class in certain sections of the country who have a problem with Sen. Obama. It's called racism.
It is a shame that these people put their racist ignorance ahead of their country's best interest.
For months I have been posting that we must use the Supreme Court as a criteria for determining who we should vote for. John McCain is steadfast on reverting our progress as far back as he can. His presidency would mean the continued shredding of our constitution, the loss of our freedoms, liberties and rights. Our children's future, if we allow them to have one, depends on who we have as our next president. As progressives, it is our duty to make sure McCain is not the next president.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOTE! Don't forget the Supreme Court when you do.
The Obama camp has taken pains to cover up the racism they witnessed on the trail. Why? Because the idea is to believe in a better America. As Obama himself said, some wont vote for him because of his color just as some wont back Clinton because of her gender and Edwards because of his accent.
Contrast that with Clinton using the gender issue to drive a wedge, threatening the entire party- not too subtly.
Do some women actually think that liberal men are not aware of sexism in America? In every aspect of society there is sex-bias, sometimes even favoring women, believe it or not. When Clinton supporters dismiss all the deception and lying of her campaign- from the NAFTA flipflops to the Sniper fib, the gas-tax pandering to the reversal of her stance on MI and Fl, after all these things, they claim sexism is the reason their candidate is losing, it is clear there is another kind of sexism here. The kind of sexism that it is not ok to talk about- the kind that accuses good people who vote by their conscience of being bigots- It can come only from a place of misplaced values. A value system that considers some perceived gain that can be achieved regardless of the means.
If McCain wins, he will appoint judges that will set back womens rights back decades. We have been in unchartered water throughout this primary and over all the twist and turns it has been exciting but we all knew going into this race, there would only be one person picked for President and who would image that Hillary and Obama would have been the last two standing for the Democratic Nomination all I can say America has won round one, only one left to go and that is to beat John McCain.
Hey, Army193...
Have you forgotten that Supreme Court Justices have to be APPROVED by the Senate Judiciary Committee. Since Dems comprise 1/2 of the Judiciary Committee, McCain CANNOT force his nominee onto the Supreme Court...Please review the information below for more details... :-)
Posted on MSNBC.com
Source URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6694744/
"A guide to the Supreme Court nomination"
The Senate must vote to confirm the nomination. Since 1925, that Senate vote has often been preceded by hearings before the Judiciary Committee during which senators question the nominee on his judicial record, if any, and his approach to constitutional issues.
And what happens if you get John McCain in office and in 2010 the Dems lose a bunch of seats and the Repubs regain the majority? I'm sure no one expected the Dems to lose control during Bill Clinton's years either. Do you really want to risk it?
Hey ywinfield,
Do you remember John Roberts? His appointment was no problem. He displayed no conservative bent, no right leaning tendency and is now Chief Justice. It shows us that candidates don't have to display their positions on matters. Once they are in they are in.
Um, have you noticed how completely spineless the Democrats in this Congress are?
Excellent article.
i could be wrong about this, but it seems as though this fight has become about who gets to sit at the big table first. Will it be women or African Americans? I get the sense that many women feel that they have fought alongside African Americans for equal rights for a long time as somewhat equally oppressed groups in America ( not that i agree that the struggles were equal), but now that these two groups are forced to face off against each other, class has become a more defining factor. Ferarro and to a lesser extent Hillary tout their history of fighting for black rights, while in the same breath belittling and demeaning the same people. Ferarro's obtuse interpretation of Obama's "dirt off yo shoulder" gesture, saying "that's not done. women don't like that." betrays her upper class outdated views, and in my opinion harkens back to some plantation matron scolding a slave for a gesture that she doesn't understand and therefore doesn't approve of because it might just be aimed at her. Hillary's statement that race has not played a factor and gender has is just downright ridiculous. The entire attack against Obama has been that he was associated with the "scary black man" Wright, or that he is not patriotic enough because of his diverse background. The attitude that some women will support African Americans only until there is a possibility that they might achieve something first is what pisses me off.
No thanks!
To get a historical context for the White Women vs Black Men struggle, please read "When and Where I Enter: The Impact of Black Women of Race and Sex in America" by Paula Giddings. The inherent racism in the womens suffrage movement is something that is still manifesting itself today in the Democratic Presidential primary and throughout the affirmative action years.
I think that it is important to note that Black Women, those who stand at the intersection of race and gender, have overwhelmingly chosen race over gender. The racism in the feminist movement and the fact that white women are the biggest beneficiaries of the affirmative action programs have helped to drive wedges between Black and White women.
Thanks for the book reference.
Also, read "Women, Race & Class" by Angela Davis and "Ain't I a Woman" by bell hooks. There are dozens of books about this tension.
Just want to point out that the "women" you are referring to don't believe the "big table" exists.
"Ferarro's obtuse interpretation of Obama's "dirt off yo shoulder" gesture, saying "that's not done. women don't like that." betrays her upper class outdated views"
To Vicendithas- Yes, this is so true! As a 55 year old liberal white woman, I am unfamiliar with Jay Z and the video that younger people say influenced Obama's gesture. However, I never took it in the same way as Ferraro has decided to interpret it. No, to me the gesture reflected Obama's attitude of remaining cool under fire; and indeed he was being attacked from all sides: the Republicans, the Clinton campaign, right wing talk radio, and the MSM running the Rev Wright snippets ad infinitum. I saw the gesture and smiled in (my) understanding; it was simply his way of invoking the old saying, "like water off a duck's back," and flicking those superficial attacks away!
Of course, Ferraro is choosing to misread the gesture and says it mocks and belittles Clinton. Of course, no mention of the speech Clinton gave where she mocked Obama for his airy rhetoric, and belittled his candidacy as based on a mere speech in 2004.
Clinton once said, "If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen." Now she is using the sexism charge to try to have it both ways. It's easy to see that. And it's easy to see also how this harms the quest of women for true equality.
I admit, I threatened to vote for Mccain if Clinton won. I didn't agree with Mccain on everything, but I knew where he stood, and I couldn't say that about HIllary, but I was thinking of the 2000 Mccain, not the McBush of 2008. I would definately vote for Hillary over Mccain 08. I hope the Hillary supporters will come aound and see there's too much at stake for a revenge vote.
I cannot forgive a man who voted present 7 times on legislation banning abortion without an exception for the life of a woman for political tactics. He put lives of women at risk for his political ambitions which tells me what else would he do citing "bipartisanship" in order to get re-elected in 2012. I rather give my vote to the devil I know than the one I don't!
Planned Parenthood has already stated that they were working with him on these votes, and that they asked that he vote "present" because it is a tactic used in the Ill. Senate.
Please, please stop believing this lie. This was put out there by (if memory serves) the Chicago chapter of NOW (but someone correct me iI am wrong about that), along with other lies to make Obama look weak on choice. Even the former president the the chapter switched her support from Clinton to Obama after she saw how his reputation was being smeared, because she had worked with him on women's issues and knew what a strong advocate he is.
You are just using this as a cover for your sexist attitudes. You know very well that those votes were in agreement with planned parenthood. This has been known for months. Also, NAARL Pro-Choice America has endorsed Obama citing his 100% record on women's rights issues. Your last line, about the devil you dont know, is fear-mongering and does not really follow from the rest of your post, leading me to conclude that you are making your decision based on some other preconceived reason, presumably your sexism.
Sounds to me like you're unable to forgive him because he beat the famous Clinton machine fair and square. I bet a finger you don't even know why he voted present. Moreover, I'm certain you don't want to know as the answer would invalidate your inability to forgive ( I hope for you you're not christian).
You're talking about a guy who was raised by a single mom, and is surrounded daily by a wife, and two girls. They don't look submissive nor abused, on the contrary.
So go ahead and give your vote to the devil (perhaps you're christian!). I'm sure you'll reap great rewards out of it.
PLEASE EDUCATE YOURSELF.
Obama wanted to vote "no" but the local women's rights groups TOLD HIM TO VOTE PRESENT because it was the tactically smarter thing to do in the Illinois legislature.
Suzie's talking points are repeated often enough to suspect that someone is manipulating the facts and uninformed voters to discredit Obama. It's totally nauseating.
The right-to-lifers thank you for your support and invite you to the big party they're having when Roe v. Wade is repealed.
Kburlz, you're absolutely correct, THERE IS TOO MUCH AT STAKE! The race now is for our very future. I sense that our country is poised on a teetery peak. One direction is disaster, the other, a challenge. We've had two great candidates. We'll end up with one. If we bitterly withhold support, we risk a horrible crash. For what??? Hurt feelings? Bent outta shape noses? When our ways of life are at stake, GET OVER IT! We have work to do to protect our (and our children's) futures.
Yes, we need to come together. The Democratic Party doesn't have a gender.
unfortunately, the party still has class lines
Very solid points -- and of course there are many other issues where Obama is aligned closely with Clinton.
The nightmare scenario of McCain is slowly unfolding before our eyes -- the pervasive lobbyists, the pro-war stance, the pro-rich stance, the absence of meaningful policies on the economy. It should make the move for Clinton supporters to go to Obama an easy call.
Obama is not aware that he was "running" for president. After having everything handed to him and his wife for so long, he and his wife naturally believe they are simply being "given" the role of president and first lady. They were not aware that the little people, those "nasty voters" would have any say in the matter. Normal campaign rules don't apply to the Obamas, any more than normal admission requirements applied when they were getting into their tony Ivy League schools.
wow...through the looking glass. Amazing
Are you kidding me? Hillary took too many states for granted - plain and simple. She ran a poor campaign. I will vote for the democratic nominee. We have 2 great candidates who will work hard for our country. (no need to call yourself nasty)
Except for the not running for president, you have that exactly backwards.
This opinion post is about women, specifically how they will be damaged if a McCain presidency were to come to pass.
Besides your sniping at Obama I don't see how this comment really says anything that applies to this post, other than you are mad and will happily see alot of the gains that women have made in the last 75 years ruined for the luxury of your "mad".
Grow up.
Obama '08
This is Bull Sh@t and you know it. Obama's mother was a 19yr women white w/ a biracial child. She dropped out of college and married. The dude left her when Obama was 2 yrs old. Obama's grandfather was a furniture salesman and his grandmother worked in a bank. When Obama lived in New York. They had furniture they dragged in off the streets and he walked every where he had to go,because he couldn't afford a car or bus fare. Get over yourself.
A response to #6. Women are often THE minority group that seeks to bring unity among many and seek to help fight all forms of oppression (look at the National Organization of Women for example - they help fight against racism, homophobia, economic injustice, etc. and compare it to, say, the NAACP's website - they don't seem to be fighting for women or gays, etc.). This suggestion for women to be the ones to unify is exactly why they've lackd the ability to rally behind the woman candidate and all that she (and all women!) symbolize. I fear women have been so busy empowering others they've forgotten how to empower themselves!
I've posted to you several times about this, and I will again.
The NAACP doesn't represent the depth and breath of black political/self-help organizations. And the fact that you seem to think so doesn't not speak well for you. Why don't you try some other web sites.
Also, and I'll be as clear as possible, WHITE woman enjoy privileges as whites that blacks, male, female, gay, straight, don't enjoy. And keeping in mind that many feminist-activist have historically been of color, race and other issues HAS to be brought up if they're going to seriously address gender discrimination. I mean, the woman who abuses her female housekeeper is no better than the men who discriminate against her at work.
And let me point out that it was Frederick Douglass, a former slave, who convinced Elizabeth Stanton Cady that women should demand the right to vote and to put voting rights into the Seneca Falls Declaration. And the NAACP does, in fact, tackle issues besides "black" issues.
But to answer your question as it applies specifically to THIS situation, it's women who are threatening to vote for McCain, so these same WOMEN, as well as supporters of Obama, have to be the ones to shepherd "unity."
And for the love of all that's good and holy, pastor, either respond to my post and quit putting up that NOW vs NAACP analogy!
FYI, It's Elizabeth Cady Stanton (not Stanton Cady)! Do your homework.
Brilliant!
Everyone needs to read this.
Well said and I couldn't agree more. Especially #6. We all can band together and win this election.
I can easily think of ten reasons to let the Obama fan club drag their guy over the finish line: We survived Bush. We'll survive McCain. Obama really is an empty suit. He won't get much accomplished even if he wins the election. Obama really likes Reagan and Bush pere. I don't. Obama's got plenty of money--that guarantees a win, right? Obama's married to a woman who shoots off her mouth, so he can't be a sexist, can he? "Change" doesn't happen through electoral politics. I'd rather devote time to causes than to electing Obama. Etc.
Tell that to all of the military families who are suffering, the millions without healthcare, the folks who are losing their homes because of foreclosure... .just because you are surviving, doesn't mean that everyone else is doing well.
Your attitude simply highlights the selfish, narrow minded behaviour displayed by many of the Clinton supporters I've seen posting on Taylor Marsh, Talkleft, etc.. You should be ashamed of yourselves.
"We'll survive McCain"
Wow... that's all I can say about that...
As for Obama being an empty suit... you need to open your eyes. You can't see anything if you clamp them shut. Ask questions, we'll answer them. Some of us actually TRY to be informed.
Yeah, Obama respected Reagan for his strong diplomacy and he liked Bush Sr's way of waging war: build a large coalition and strictly define objectives (something W failed to do). It's called understanding, something of which you don't have.
"Obama really is an empty suit. He won't get much accomplished even if he wins the election. "
I don't agree he is an empty suit, but you might be right about that last one. However, I believe he is our best chance.
Have you actually looked at what Hillary and Obama have done in the Senate, and compared their records? Here's a breakdown, written by someone who at first did not support Obama:
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/2/20/201332/807/36/458633%3Chr
But you won't look, because you would rather keep your mind closed.
Have a great day.
The racism that started in this campaign started with Billy and has been continued by Hillary. Then in typical neo con fashion they blamed the victim and called the victim the aggressor.
Considering fascism was begun and perpetrated by white males, who were carried, birthed and suckled by white females, one has to wonder who is raising these white males who today create a glass ceiling women cannot pass through.
Considering traditionally women have been the dominant parent in the raising children, how then do their children turn out to hate them so much? If their fathers are not in the home what percentage of responsibility are white women willing to take for these white males they now call sexist? After Hillary it is easier to understand.
The laws are such today that if white women don't like white men who are creating the glass ceiling that is holding these women back, ABORT THE MALE FETUSES, or figure out a way to give them values that are wholesome, empathetic, and spiritual.
YOU CHOOSE.
But if Hillary is any example of white womanhood, and considering her large following of support among women who relate to her and support her, no wonder these male neo-cons are so screwed up.
All HRC has done is project she is capable of being a neo con also. If that the perspective of feminism HRC is selling to white women then they need to be clear on what they are buying into.
These women writing articles saying why women should vote for Obama are simply amazing...that said, I respect a women's right to make her own choice. One question, however, why don't we never see articles that say things like: "Ten Reasons Why AFRICAN AMERICANS Should Unite Behind HILLARY If SHE'S the Candidate." It's always a formula where women should be proud to support the Black candidate but rarely (even not never) an equal formula saying Blacks should be proud to vote for the Woman candidate, why is that?
Because the woman candidate is losing, and because she played on racism to her advantage.
How did she specifically use racism? Questioning someone's experience is not racist last time I checked.
If women want anything to change for women, they should vote for a woman. Simple math. A woman president for the USA would turn some heads internationally, and could change women's lives all over the world. Hillary could refuse to do business with countries who discriminate against women. Half of the women in the world are still slaves, basically.
Would you vote for Margaret Thatcher, Eva Braun, or Ann Coulter if they were running?
Gosh, that's pretty naive - and you think Obama is nothing but hope? Do you think Bill's business dealings suffer any from dealing with nations that discriminate against women? How about the impact Obama will have in the third world? A world that sees US leaders as old white men? Obama is pro-women - his record is clearly that.
Are you really that naive?
Wow.
Because Obama is winning, Hillary is losing, and people want to unite the party. If Hillary was winning, we would be seeing articles about uniting the black community behind Hillary.
Bottom line, EVERYONE should vote for the BEST CANDIDATE. Simple. No color issues. No gender issues. Simple. Let's focus on the QUALITY of INDIVIDUAL. From two there will be one. That one will stand between continued republican manipulation and a chance at democracy once again. That's the decision. MAKE IT WISELY.
Why don't you see those articles? Because a strong majority of all of Obama's supporters have already said they'd vote for Hillary.
There's a huge difference between Obama supporters and Hillary supporters. It's called devotion. Hillary supporters are devoted to their candidate, Obama supporters are devoted to their country. There's a pure flow of rationale running through Obama supporters... we get it... we know the consequences of failure this year.
And "always" is a little misleading since this is the first election of its kind. One scenario that happens to be in the present can not be used to define all of time.
BRAVO!
Well said!
THANK YOU!
Women who vote for McCain just because Clinton didn't win aren't just voting against "the party" (I'm an Independent, so that doesn't hold much water to me), they're choosing to vote AGAINST WOMEN.
They are using misplaced blame on Obama and opting to get revenge on America for not chosing Clinton over Obama. I'm a woman, and a woman president would be great, but Clinton was not the right woman, and her loss had nothing to do with sexism. Yes, some media say inappropriate things, and some voters as well, but that didn't cause her to lose, and American should have to pay because her supporters feel "scorned".
Grow up already!
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
