BlogHer - Go register to vote, you sexy thing, you - Comments

Sorry I missed the soapbox!

PunditMom — Tue, 14 Nov 2006 13:30:08 -0600

Boy, I should have checked back sooner! That's a tough question. But I just feel like so many politicians talk at us instead of to us. So few of them really try to connect with the voters in a way that I think used to happen -- they say what they think we want to hear or allowe themselves just to be "packaged" instead of telling us what they genuinely believe or think would be new and inspiring messages. In the post-Reagan era, everyone is about the soundbite and not the substance.

How to inspire the disappointed junkie?

1. Talk about change that would really make a difference and be committed to that change, whether tou get elected or not. And then keep working for that change in the post-election season (tho' I'm afraid there is no such season anymore).

I think the greatest example of that right now is Al Gore and his movie, An Inconvenient Truth. He's not president, but he's still out there trying to convince us all of the gigantic environmental crisis we're facing. (If, as he says in the movie, it is our "moral imperative" to save our environment, he should run in 2008).

2. Related topic -- don't be afraid to lose. Politicians, say what you REALLY mean and think regardless of how you think the voters will respond -- just be authentic.

I'll keep thinking! Thanks for the soapbox, Lisa!

Yes! Great marketing

Katya Andresen — Thu, 26 Oct 2006 09:11:14 -0500

I could not agree more. This follows all the rules of effective marketing - asking for a clear call to action and providing an immediate reward for that action (in this case, good feelings and memories). It shows voting carries attractive emotional benefits. Thanks for highlighting; I linked to it on my blog.

Excelente. Felicidades!!!

juliaardon — Wed, 25 Oct 2006 22:36:58 -0500

Es importante hacer conciencia de los deberes ciudadanos entre las mujeres.

Julia ArdÃ³n
Costa Rica
http://juliaardon.blogspot.com/
http://www.elsalondebelleza.com/

Debra, the short-answer is yes

Lisa Stone — Tue, 17 Oct 2006 23:19:06 -0500

...but I need to do some research tomorrow to share the stats. Good assignment, thank you! ;)

Lisa Stone
BlogHer Co-founder
Surfette

Touche Marianne

Lisa Stone — Tue, 17 Oct 2006 23:14:55 -0500

!! Thank you for digging in and explaining to me, both of you. I look forward to hearing what happens...

Lisa Stone
BlogHer Co-founder
Surfette

AARP very organized

Roberta — Tue, 17 Oct 2006 20:32:24 -0500

I am impressed with how organized their info is and how you can research who votes which way on certain topics. But their table of contents on issues are limited
* AARP Policy on Social Security
* AARP Policy on Retirement Security (IRAs)
* AARP Policy on Medicare
* AARP Policy on Long-Term Care
* AARP Policy on Health Care Reform

I understand that these are supposed to be the most important issues to the AARP voting block, but what about the war in Iraq, Afghanistan or even the fed. budget?

Birdsword

Lisa, is it a generational thing??

debra roby — Tue, 17 Oct 2006 18:56:18 -0500

Every woman I know around my age votes. And tells everyone that they voted. I wonder if it's because of coming of age during Vietnam.. and being part of the 26 Amendment generation.

I read that women don't vote; I read that younger women don't vote. I cannot understand the choice at all. It's the responsibility of being a citizen.

A few years ago I started planning a fiberart piece that would have been based upon women voting. Maybe I need to resurrect it? Photos of women from 18 to 98 who voted this fall and photos of the suffragettes who made this possible.

Debra
A Stitch In Time
Deb's Daily Distractions

You are right...

Marianne Richmond — Tue, 17 Oct 2006 17:21:09 -0500

It COULD work....depends on if information to make an informed decision is available and accessed.

Marianne Richmond
resonancepartnership

Judging their popularity

Marianne Richmond — Tue, 17 Oct 2006 17:18:54 -0500

Its such a multifaceted issue really....on one hand you have judges who are running for re-election on TV campaigning on issues. This seems wrong. Or you hear pundits speak of the desire of the Republicans to retain control of the Senate because controlling judicial appointments is an intregal part of the Republican "agenda." This also seems wrong.

But let's face it, appointed or elected the judicial system is subject to your popularity contest question. The "retention" option could actually be a slight improvement IF people took the time to read the information provided and voted accordingly. Judge Judy's rating by trial lawyers...as I said, was quite accurate.

When I was told that she said she couldn't remember the case (it was a 2 day trial, you can guess the cost to me), and couldn't FIND the requested "findings of fact and law" from either attorney so therefore turned down ALL of the motions, I suggested it was similar to a surgeon going into the operating room and saying, I don't remember what the diagnosis was for the patient or if it is the left leg or the right leg we are supposed to amputate, so let's take them both off.

What's the difference? Well, a surgeon would be sued for malpractice but a judge has judicial immunity. But, in either case, the patients/clients are left to live with the consequences and try and correct the outcomes of incompetence.

So, back to the point of your original post... vote, baby vote!

Marianne

Marianne Richmond
resonancepartnership

Now that we've addressed voting...

debra roby — Tue, 17 Oct 2006 17:04:20 -0500

Lisa (or another CE),

Does anyone have a take on the AARP campaign: Don't Vote.

http://www.dontvote.com/map.html

Debra
A Stitch In Time
Deb's Daily Distractions

Two years ago when I bought

heivilinj — Tue, 17 Oct 2006 14:53:41 -0500

Two years ago when I bought my house I had to alter my registration and I found the Boone County (Missouri) site in one try and finished it up in under 20 minutes. I also found my new polling place.

Jim Heivilin

Who was it who said "if you

heivilinj — Tue, 17 Oct 2006 14:41:14 -0500

Who was it who said "if you don't have someone you want to vote for, surely there is someone you need to vote against"?

I know I wasn't terribly inspired by Senator Kerry but I definately voted against Mister Bush.

Jim Heivilin

It works

heivilinj — Tue, 17 Oct 2006 14:38:05 -0500

Thanks to Marianne for info on a topic I would have been one of the uninformed lever pullers. I don't know that I will have the opportunity to vote on Judge Draper but I know how I will if permitted.

As to the system here, a good friend of mine who is currently clerking for a federal judge in Jeff City explained the system to me and it seems to work well enough that a number of other states have adopted something similar. I wouldn't think that would happen if it didn't have safeguards or work fairly well.

Jim Heivilin

She's great, isn't she?

Lisa Stone — Tue, 17 Oct 2006 12:40:27 -0500

Glad you liked it Absurda. Many props to the director.

Lisa Stone
BlogHer Co-founder
Surfette

Debra, you deserve a tattoo

Lisa Stone — Tue, 17 Oct 2006 12:39:44 -0500

...for all that devoted voting. That's a commitment to the Constitution right there.

Lisa Stone
BlogHer Co-founder
Surfette

Go register to vote, you sexy thing, you

Lisa Stone — Mon, 16 Oct 2006 12:12:19 -0500

When I first read about "Remember Your First Time?" -- a new ad campaign aimed at getting more single American women to vote -- I rolled my eyes.

"Oh, ha-ha," I thought about the double-entendre, "Is the way to my head really through my ...?" I couldn't imagine how ads that invoke the memory of virgin sex (and all the baggage that may come with it - yeah, that first time) could help change the fact that 20 million single American women didn't show up at the polls in Election 2004. Boy was I wrong.

The Women's Voices, Women Vote campaigns are fantastic. The videos are slick, well-produced and smart. The sexy headliner features well-known actors, from the venerable Tyne Daly to hotter-than-snot Rosario Dawson "mmmming" their way through reminiscences of their "first time" - in the ballot box, that is. I didn't feel patronized by their tone or remotely like some creepy guy dreamed this up and was seriously loving watching Regina King through the camera. In fact, I cringed very little, although Angie Harmon does lay it on a bit thick.

But while the sexy little number will doubtless get these public service announcements on the air (half the battle, natch) and women talking, this video is not my favorite. The short called "Dreams" gets my vote -- and damned if the last line didn't get me blinking hard at my computer. Go on - play the link above if you haven't already. That's right, I nearly cried when they eyed the camera said, "We don't have to dream about the future: We can wake up and vote for it." I'm losing it, I thought - then Romi LaSally at The Huffington Post emailed me Cooper Munroe's post and I saw that I wasn't the only one. The same line cracked her like an egg, too.

Why? Because I don't know a single American woman -- or a single single American woman in charge of her own household -- who isn't dreaming of a better future, and deeply concerned the state of the direction of our country today, be they self-identified Republicans, Democrats. Progressives, Conservatives, Libertarians, or Green.

Why, then, if we're running our own lives, paying for our own healthcare and taxes and seriously worrying about our retirements, did 20 million single women stay away from the polls in 2004? The answers provided by the WVWV research team resonate. Lead by the formidable Anna Greenberg of Greenberg Quinlan Rosner, the team conducted targeted focus groups on women (including oversampling for Hispanics) in two states and learned that:

"Despite immense dissatisfaction with direction of the country, unmarried women still under-participate in elections, particularly in off-year issues. Many women on their own see politics as irrelevant to their lives as political leaders simply do not address their issues, while others lack the time to learn about the issues and candidates; both contribute to depressed turnout among unmarried women. ...[U]nmarried women are so cynical about politics and political candidates, in particularly, they are loathe to believe or rely on any political ad they see in passing on television. They tend to dismiss this information as biased or confusing. These feelings are only confirmed when they see that politicians do not follow through with their promises or leave them out of the conversation. When the women we spoke to do actively seek out information, many of them rely on the Internet â€“ particularly if they are younger or have a job where they are online. The notion is that they can collect information from many sources, weigh the competing views and come to their own decision about a particular issue or political choice. While it is not clear if this research process actually occurs, it is important to note that the primary issue is that these women do not believe they can trust the media â€“ the primary source of political information in our current political environment â€“ to tell the truth about much of anything." (I deleted liberally; read the entire PDF here.)

Ah. Disenfranchised by spin, working hard for our money, utterly ignored by candidates and lacking a balanced source of information, our single women voters tune out and go back to taking care of our immediate circle. That I can believe.

But that complaint is, I hope, will become increasingly outdated. Today the Web offers terrific, non-partisan sources of voter information that allow users to do an end-run around newscycles that spend their time calling Beltway horseraces and pitting op-ed versus op-ed. Here's where I turn for the best non-partisan facts about politics online:

League of Women Voters Online Voter Registration (all you need to know is your zipcode and your state) and non-partisan Voters' Guides and Candidate Information (unfortunately not every state is listed)
Factcheck.org for terrific, nonpartisan research into the latest headlines and campaign ads.
National Women's Law Center Election 2006: Candidates & Information database to research which initiatives, propositions and political offices up for a vote in your state. Note: This site has one of the most comprehensive databases I've seen, but their analyses of each reflect a progressive agenda.

I'll keep saying it: It's an underreported fact that American women are the voting majority and have been since 1964. But until single women commit the ultimate act of patriotism -- voting -- and add their voices to running our country, we will never change our world. I like how Lisa Witter of Feministing puts it:

"With recent elections that hinged on a little more than half a million votes nationally and a few hundred votes in Florida, single women have more power than they realize â€“ or exercise.

...America is changing and too many voices are not being heard in our democracy. Itâ€™s time for single women in America to use their voice â€“ and their vote â€“ to make a difference in their lives." Then Witter signs off, "Sleeping giants no more..."

So get out there and vote, you sexy thing, you.

And while you're at it, I'd love to know:

- Did anyone here not vote in 2004 who plans to vote this time?

- Who among us is staying away from the polls?

- Do you find the Women's Voices Women Vote campaigns compelling? (Full list here)

- WVWV takes responsibility for turning out more single women voters in 2004. Do you plan to help or take any of their site's advice to help get the word out? More here: http://wvwv.org/

- What additional non-partisan are missing from the list above? Bring 'em on!