Aestu wrote:
I know full well I'm wasting my breath but - you claim the media is left-wing biased, you are immune to influence and brainwashing, yet you seem pretty eager to believe this claim...by the media...that Romney is closing the gap...based on a selective citation of supposed polls. People are more likely to vote for a candidate if they think others are, especially in this day and age. You're being manipulated.
I agree that polls are as much about manipulation as gauging opinion...but if a polling firm/news organization is in the habit of throwing polls, their work loses the credibility necessary to influence people. A month or so ago, I would have been more skeptical, but the new numbers for women make more sense (and Governor Romney is still behind President Obama in those numbers), because they would appear to more accurately reflect married women (who tend to vote republican just as singles tend to vote democrat) and those like the one in the second video who aren't single-issue "womyn unite!!!" voters.
Aestu wrote:
The best justification that can be given is that power corrupts, and therefore, it is necessary for women to be able to vote to ensure the protection of their own rights. I don't see what that has to do with any issue that is on the table. And no, reproductive rights don't count - very few women actually have any legitimate interest in reproductive rights, because abortions are rare.
And yet you would not believe the number of women I interact with on FB and other places who jump right on the "Romney gonna make me have a baby" bandwagon. A lot of them have bought into some really silly ideas like republicans want to take away their birth control (never mind that there are probably more than a few republican women and that republican men are happy for it regardless of the party affiliation of their lovers).
Aestu wrote:
Jubber's incredible gullibility aside (particularly since without military welfare, he would be living in subsidized housing and on a less lucrative form of welfare and therefore statistically extremely unlikely to vote),
I can't tell you how little it stings to be called a leech by the guy who has been living off his parents for the entire tenure of our friendship.
Aestu wrote:
women are not as rational as men, they are more susceptible to social pressure and psychosexual emotional entreaties, and I think allowing them to have a say in the political system and driving of society is dangerous and destructive. I haven't seen anything that makes me believe that female suffrage has changed the world for the better.
Maybe, but since men and women are equally capable of human failings, I doubt it's changed the world for the worst, either.
Your Pal,
Jubber