Reply #107

In the discussion thread: Obama: ‘Congress Would Get More Done If There Were More Women’ [View all]

Mon Apr 9, 2012, 09:13 PM

hughee99 (10,104 posts)

107. The point is,

If you think people are better off with more female public officials, then to make that happen, either incumbent men are going to have to make way for more women, or you're going to have to win more repuke seats (and I'm all for ANY Democrat winning a repuke seat, regardless of gender). Should the DNC send more money to female candidates because they are female, or should they target their money towards those with the best chance to win, regardless of gender. I'm all for having more women in congress, but the logistics of actually making that happen can be tricky. As I said, this statement was just "playing to the audience".

Reply to this post

Back to OP Alert abuse Link to post in-thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum

Replies to this discussion thread

114 replies	Author	Time	Post
Obama: ‘Congress Would Get More Done If There Were More Women’ [View all]	ProSense	Apr 2012	OP
And this isn't a sexist argument?	badtoworse	Apr 2012	#1
So you	ProSense	Apr 2012	#2
Hmm	Dokkie	Apr 2012	#3
It's a	ProSense	Apr 2012	#4
Bull	Dokkie	Apr 2012	#7
What?	ProSense	Apr 2012	#9
But	Dokkie	Apr 2012	#11
We have more spending power? how's that?	robinlynne	Apr 2012	#15
That's what I'd like to know, too. eom	BlueCaliDem	Apr 2012	#27
This is what am talking about	Dokkie	Apr 2012	#38
You got a link for that? n/t	TriMera	Apr 2012	#76
60% of personal wealth, 51% of stocks. I seriously doubt that. Oprah may scew the statistics	robinlynne	Apr 2012	#80
I'm all about the data, so I'd like to see a link too nevertheless...	mathematic	Apr 2012	#90
Let's look at one statistic, new cars bought.	robinlynne	Apr 2012	#97
I'm not talking about cars and neither were you.	mathematic	Apr 2012	#110
the article talks cleafrly about cars. The so called statistics. Most stocks are not owned by women	robinlynne	Apr 2012	#113
Here is the "stat" quoted on new cars: 68% of new car purchase the US are made by women	robinlynne	Apr 2012	#114
I think I meant to say	Dokkie	Apr 2012	#28
Women 'out earn' men?	ProfessionalLeftist	Apr 2012	#36
This is a recent development in the US	Dokkie	Apr 2012	#39
10 women working @ minimum wage make more than 1 unemployed man who used to make $200,000/yr?	uppityperson	Apr 2012	#77
Do you want to rephrase this?	lumberjack_jeff	Apr 2012	#85
No, I don't. Do you want to look again and think again? If a woman makes 10% of what a man makes,	uppityperson	Apr 2012	#103
Women do not out earn men. Purchaisng at the mall is not wealth. buying real estate, stocks, and cor	robinlynne	Apr 2012	#81
Women make 91% of real estate decisions.	lumberjack_jeff	Apr 2012	#86
Women do not buy 91% of new homes. That is just plain inaccurate.	robinlynne	Apr 2012	#88
I think this conference had a clear agenda, and uses wrong/misleading statistics to prove a point.	robinlynne	Apr 2012	#89
It was considered a useful set of stats to push a Limbaugh boycott.	lumberjack_jeff	Apr 2012	#96
Dokkie said it wrong.	Zalatix	Apr 2012	#34
A more logical argument would be that	Zalatix	Apr 2012	#19
By the same token	Dokkie	Apr 2012	#30
Ayup. Agreed.	Zalatix	Apr 2012	#31
See that's	ProSense	Apr 2012	#35
Not really.	Zalatix	Apr 2012	#37
Actually,	ProSense	Apr 2012	#40
Indeed, Republicans aren't very diverse anyway.	Zalatix	Apr 2012	#42
You asked	Dokkie	Apr 2012	#41
That's taking things too far.	Zalatix	Apr 2012	#43
Well,	ProSense	Apr 2012	#44
This message was self-deleted by its author	Kath1	Apr 2012	#51
Agreed!	Kath1	Apr 2012	#52
There are countries that guarantee a certain number of women in office.	Zalatix	Apr 2012	#53
I wouldn't have any problem with that.	Kath1	Apr 2012	#55
The assumption that more women would translate to greater productivity strikes me as sexist.	badtoworse	Apr 2012	#5
Well,	ProSense	Apr 2012	#6
I will ask you a question I asked to another DUer	Dokkie	Apr 2012	#10
Well	ProSense	Apr 2012	#12
Um, just answer "no" to her post and be honest.	Zalatix	Apr 2012	#20
Please	ProSense	Apr 2012	#23
at the end of the excerpt, he specifies, "democratic women"	BlancheSplanchnik	Apr 2012	#84
You're speculating. Maybe you're right, maybe not	badtoworse	Apr 2012	#16
I think	ProSense	Apr 2012	#17
I think the "war on women" is not a good measure of Congress' productivity	badtoworse	Apr 2012	#18
Thanks for	ProSense	Apr 2012	#22
I'm not dismissing women's rights	badtoworse	Apr 2012	#58
Actually,	ProSense	Apr 2012	#62
and I can tell that women's rights are the only item on your list.	badtoworse	Apr 2012	#63
That's	ProSense	Apr 2012	#64
i actually agree with you. but to play devil's advocate I do want to note	robinlynne	Apr 2012	#98
are you	veganlush	Apr 2012	#8
No.	badtoworse	Apr 2012	#13
I BEG TO DIFFER	Skittles	Apr 2012	#14
Are you attacking the poster and not their arguments?	Zalatix	Apr 2012	#21
Did	ProSense	Apr 2012	#24
Actually I read it as sexist as well.	vaberella	Apr 2012	#32
What I find	ProSense	Apr 2012	#33
Prosense I understood the context of the President.	vaberella	Apr 2012	#100
No.	joshcryer	Apr 2012	#105
Women are underrepresented in Congress. That's a fact.	RZM	Apr 2012	#25
Well,	ProSense	Apr 2012	#26
It would only be different if those new women Congresspeople were mostly from one party	RZM	Apr 2012	#91
It would have to appreciably different, simply because Congress would represent the population more.	joshcryer	Apr 2012	#109
Congress would get more done if get money out of it, and quit electing religious fundamentalists.	Initech	Apr 2012	#29
After watching the behavior of the women in the feminist forum	zappaman	Apr 2012	#45
Well, that settles it. n/t	ProSense	Apr 2012	#48
Yes, but	DonCoquixote	Apr 2012	#46
Thanks for	ProSense	Apr 2012	#49
Women like Sarah Palin & Michelle Bachman?	Angleae	Apr 2012	#47
No	ProSense	Apr 2012	#50
Do we need more women in Congress, yes.	MadHound	Apr 2012	#54
You know	ProSense	Apr 2012	#56
So you have a sexist title headlining this piece,	MadHound	Apr 2012	#57
Nonsense	ProSense	Apr 2012	#59
Wait a minute here	Dokkie	Apr 2012	#60
Let the misogynists cry about it if they want...	redqueen	Apr 2012	#61
This is a valid argument for the same reason that "there should be more male teachers" is.	lumberjack_jeff	Apr 2012	#65
LOL	redqueen	Apr 2012	#66
No. You have a point.	lumberjack_jeff	Apr 2012	#67
Notice the difference in phrasing...	redqueen	Apr 2012	#70
a) The op doesn't question, it asserts	lumberjack_jeff	Apr 2012	#71
The OP is one person's opinion....	redqueen	Apr 2012	#74
LOL	redqueen	Apr 2012	#79
I really loved my first male teacher.	DevonRex	Apr 2012	#68
Although I do think more men should teach	lumberjack_jeff	Apr 2012	#69
I know it was.	DevonRex	Apr 2012	#72
Oh, the drama...	redqueen	Apr 2012	#73
The President is not saying women are better than men.	joshcryer	Apr 2012	#106
are we color/gender blind, or not?	bart95	Apr 2012	#75
We would like the female vote this election	Rosa Luxemburg	Apr 2012	#78
That's my President!	KamaAina	Apr 2012	#82
Says the guy who defeated the woman with the first realistic chance	hughee99	Apr 2012	#83
My same thoughts.........	Beacool	Apr 2012	#87
.	ProSense	Apr 2012	#93
Laugh all you want, but there are plenty of people fed up with the whole lot of them.	Beacool	Apr 2012	#101
Yes	ProSense	Apr 2012	#102
Yeah,	ProSense	Apr 2012	#92
If he's suggesting that the problem is there's not enough women,	hughee99	Apr 2012	#94
Where	ProSense	Apr 2012	#95
My mistake, he's not suggesting anything...	hughee99	Apr 2012	#99
There	ProSense	Apr 2012	#104
The point is,	hughee99	Apr 2012	#107
Relevance? He's talking about Congress not the Presidency.	joshcryer	Apr 2012	#108
Of course he is.	Beacool	Apr 2012	#111
That does not make the statement untrue.	joshcryer	Apr 2012	#112

Edit History

Please login to view edit histories.