Results of BlogHer Election 2008 Poll: "How Should Presidential Candidates Earn Women’s Votes?"

Lisa Stone — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 16:21:25 -0600

Survey responses recorded on: December 12 - 21, 2007
Respondents during this time period: 275
Survey launched with this post: Please tell us: Should BlogHer interview presidential candidates or stick to their spouses?
Survey is still open here: http://www.micropoll.com/akira/TakeSurvey?id=850450

Survey question overview:
* Do you want BlogHer to talk with the candidates themselves -- Obama, Hillary, Mitt, etc.-- or will their families and supporters -- Oprah, Chelsea, Ann, etc. -- do?
* Do you want presidential candidates to answer policy questions in the Voter Manifesto?
* Are you turned on or turned off by the candidate’s tactics to reach women and moms specifically (described here)?
* Where do you get most of your news?
* Do you have a message for the candidates about reaching women online that you’d like to share?

Survey response detail by question:
(Including typed answers to open-ended questions)

Do you want BlogHer to talk with the candidates themselves -- Obama, Hillary, Mitt, etc.-- or will their families and supporters -- Oprah, Chelsea, Ann, etc. -- do?

Candidates 64.73%

Spouses and supporters 2.55%

Both 29.45%

Other 3.27%

Do you want presidential candidates to answer policy questions in the Voter Manifesto?

Yes on video 43.91%

Yes in print 43.17%

No, the candidates don't have to but the campaign should 10.70%

No, I have a different question I want to ask the candidate 2.21%

Are you turned on or turned off by the candidate’s tactics to reach women and moms specifically (described here)?

I like efforts like “Women for Obama” and “Moms for Hillary” 18.38%

I’m turned off by these efforts 55.88%

Other response: 25.74% (listed below)
Date Record # Comment (empty if no typed answer)
12/12/2007 7174281 I like the MOMocrats blog for John Edwards
12/12/2007 7174300 meh
12/12/2007 7174344 I have no opinion one way or the other
12/12/2007 7174362 I guess it's "just politics" - good to see women acknowledged, by why just "Moms"?
12/12/2007 7174427 I would prefer that such efforts be voter-driven than campaign driven (like MOMocrats)
12/12/2007 7174500 These are marketing gimmics and I see them for what they are.
12/12/2007 7174521 I don't mind the efforts provided they see me as a voter first and a mom/woman second. In other words, those sites aren't the ONLY place I'm going to get information on the candidates.
12/12/2007 7174524 I'd say both: I like feeling like I'm valued as a mom and a woman, but on the other hand, a lot of these specifically targeted tactics tend to make assumptions about what women and moms want in a candidate that sometimes don't fit me. The targeting itself assumes that women and moms are interested in all the same things, and I find that thinking reductive.
12/12/2007 7174560 I'm not personally attracted by them, but not really offended either
12/12/2007 7174561 They're fine, but not enough.
12/12/2007 7174771 Dr. Ron Paul has delivered over 400 babies he doesnt need tactics!
12/12/2007 7174846 It depends from campaign to campaign. It's hard to tell if they're sincere.
12/12/2007 7174857 A little of both. I like the idea, but I am turned off when they don't seem genuine
12/12/2007 7174887 I think these actions are great, but the candidate need to speak to us directly, too.
12/12/2007 7174922 I don't think they are doing enough, especially online.
12/12/2007 7174983 if it smacks of being patronizing or phony, it's a huge turn off to me.
12/12/2007 7174995 turned off by moms for hillary effort
12/12/2007 7175000 I'm cynical about them, but I understand that they have to campaign w/ an eye toward every demographic. (Sigh.)
12/12/2007 7175026 I appreciate the effort in general, but personally I find it mildly offensive, not to mention unnecessary.
12/12/2007 7175377 It remains to be seen if this ends up being a campaign gimmick to be tossed aside once in office...
12/12/2007 7175386 they're trying to do it on their terms and ignoring BlogHer's efforts to get their opinion. BAD MOVE!
12/12/2007 7175482 I like the Obama social media site, where people can label themselves but I find the Hillary Moms site patronizing. What if you wrote a site like this about members of a race or a religion?!
12/12/2007 7175512 Unsure
12/12/2007 7175607 It's OK as long as they talk concrete policy that is nearly-exclusive to women; however, it seems more like an approach to ensure turnout and NOT to focus on hard policy specifics
12/12/2007 7175837 Fine idea, poor execution. Do moms require exclamation points? Because I sort of thought we were interested in family-friendly social policy more than by exciting! nights! out! with our friends! Maybe that's just me.
12/12/2007 7175838 not sure
12/12/2007 7175924 These efforts are insipid, but if they do get more women voting, then they are fine. I would like to know if these tactics are effective.
12/13/2007 7176380 Well, they have to do something. But those are kind of corny. Talking here would be better.
12/13/2007 7177105 Given the fact they won't speak to BlogHer, I'd say they are being ignorant to their audiences.
12/13/2007 7177429 I'm a bit suspicious of these efforts, but if they're being put forward honestly, than I can see the benefit.
12/13/2007 7177603 no opinion
12/13/2007 7178036 Don't know
12/13/2007 7178205 It's hard for me to say. I'm turned off, but I'm not at all mainstream. I do think it's good they're trying to reach women; I have little clue about how homogenous these categories are.
12/13/2007 7178378 If these, plus BlogHer, can reach lots of women, then I'm all for it.
12/13/2007 7178900 Turned off if they dodge women's questions!
12/13/2007 7179046 I'm very turned off specifically by the Clinton campaign in this regard. I found the campaign's approach to mothers demeaning. Their "put your feet up" holiday party giveaway is irrelevant to campaign issues and is a disturbingly blatant way of buying votes.
12/13/2007 7179837 mistargeting our demographic
12/13/2007 7181215 I'm offended by Hillary's offering a prize. I like Obama's offer of content and bloggers.
12/13/2007 7181959 Meh. I'm neutral. What's the information/position?
12/13/2007 7182027 I cna appreciate the approach, as long as their coverage is not watered down and "Election Lite"
12/13/2007 7183487 Any outreach that treats women as a single entity is offensive to me.
12/13/2007 7184589 don't care
12/14/2007 7186349 I liked it until I found out they were turning their backs on 7 million of them.
12/14/2007 7192933 If is wasn't for Hillary running nobody would care too much about women and mothers.
12/14/2007 7194183 it completely depends on my mood. Typical woman... ;-)
12/14/2007 7194306 not sure yet
12/14/2007 7194405 While I appreciate the efforts of the campaigns to reach out to women and moms (I can't really comment on the content of the efforts since I haven't spent enough time looking at them) it doesn't make sense that the candidates/campaigns wouldn't ALSO want to reach out to the BlogHer community by answering the questions in the Voter Manifesto. Why reinvent the wheel?? We are all right here, in a community, waiting to hear from them.
12/14/2007 7194641 I am turned off by the "marketing" of Mamas. I think we should be spoken to and conversed with. I am not a commodity. Rather, I am a breathing, living, heartfelt, human, citizen and VOTER.
12/14/2007 7194801 i feel that it is important for the campaigns to reach out to women, but not by stereotyping them or by making it a big deal; women should be reached out to as equals to men, not as a minority.
12/15/2007 7195901 eh its ok I guess
12/15/2007 7196475 I feel mixed.
12/15/2007 7197081 Special interest groups are fine, but not when it is used to marginalize. They seem to only want to talk to women on their terms and with their framing.
12/16/2007 7199287 i'd like straight answers. what better way to get their info out than to tell all us chatty women!
12/17/2007 7202694 It should not "either / or". I like efforts like “Women for Obama” and “Moms for Hillary” AND I want the candidates to participate with BlogHer
12/17/2007 7204034 i am unaffected either way
12/17/2007 7205646 I'm turned off because they don't address real issues facing women; many talk about families, not about women
12/18/2007 7208091 They should do that AND speak here
12/18/2007 7208123 If they were sincere I would like it, but their unwillingness to meet with Blogher leads me to believe its a BS effort
12/18/2007 7208831 I think these efforts might help them reach out to a specific subset of women voters (democratic women between 30 and 50)
12/18/2007 7209356 neither
12/18/2007 7209552 I want to start a movement: Another Wellesley Woman for Hillary!
12/18/2007 7210129 don't care
12/19/2007 7216082 I am irked and appreciate them at the same time. I think the campaigns don't value women's role in politics, but at least they do something for us.
12/19/2007 7216850 "Moms for Hillary"? That HAS to be Madison Avenue hype! I'm always suspicious of slick blog names...
12/19/2007 7217132 I'm only turned off if they don't discuss issues facing women
12/19/2007 7217175 i dont know
12/20/2007 7219915 It falls short of what they should be doing which is reaching us through all possible channels

Where do you get most of your news?

Newspapers 10.55%

TV 10.18%

Radio 12.36%

Blogs 11.27%

Internet other than blogs 49.45%

Other: 6.18% (listed below)
Date Record # Comment (empty if no typed answer)
12/12/2007 7174816 All but radio
12/12/2007 7174857 Internet, blogs, and Cable News
12/12/2007 7174949 Public Radio and TV
12/12/2007 7175607 All of the above fairly evenly
12/12/2007 7175924 all of the above
12/13/2007 7176380 Blogs & Internet. I'm an expat so I don't get any newspapers now.
12/13/2007 7178378 A combination of newspapers, blogs, and the Internet
12/13/2007 7178473 papers, Tv, net
12/13/2007 7180568 combination
12/13/2007 7183116 all of the above
12/14/2007 7187006 Internet & blogs
12/14/2007 7194472 Newspaper websites, HuffingtonPost, Slate, NPR.org
12/15/2007 7196252 newspapers AND TV
12/17/2007 7205646 it's a mix, but I feel much more ignorant now than I did even ten years ago
12/19/2007 7218833 Internet and NPR

Do you have a message for the candidates about reaching women online that you’d like to share?

All answers listed below:
Date Record # Comment (empty if no typed answer)
12/12/2007 7174281
12/12/2007 7174293
12/12/2007 7174299 Yes. Stop expecting that we will be happy with hearing from your spouses and surrogates. If you have the time to talk directly with mostly male outlets, then you should have the time for us -- especially since we are 52% of the population and you need our votes to win this election.
12/12/2007 7174300 I want specifics. No more of this brag rap.
12/12/2007 7174316
12/12/2007 7174324
12/12/2007 7174333 I don't need to be set apart as a woman or mom- I just want to be addressed as a VOTER. That should be all the candidates are concerned with.
12/12/2007 7174337
12/12/2007 7174343
12/12/2007 7174344 Discuss the issues that are important to us and clarify EXACTLY WHERE YOU STAND on those issues. Talking in circles and spouting useless, rehearsed rhetoric wastes our valuable time.
12/12/2007 7174349 Don't condescend; don't separate us off from the population.
12/12/2007 7174351 Do not ignore the power of women in this election. Speak out, speak up and address this critical voting block.
12/12/2007 7174352 We are as important voters as any other group with which they would choose to address in person. The spouse thing is nonsense. There may be value of some other type in hearing from the spouses but hearing from them is no substitute for hearing from the candidates themselves. The candidates are the ones who will be making decisions if they become president. End of story.
12/12/2007 7174362
12/12/2007 7174371 Please greet female voters with a handshake instead of a pat on the head. It's unsulting and frankly, kind of shocking that because something has "Her" in the title, it's instantly treated as "quaint" infotainment. I saw Lynne Cheney on the Daily Show speaking for her husband and it was a ridiculous and uncomfortable attempt at pandering to a grossly underestimated audience. I am truly interested to see how having a female candidate in the running will affect these "milk and cookies" meetings. Traditionally a female role, the spouse of a candidate was treated as fluff. I wonder if they'll treat Mr. Clinton the same way. Will he be trotted out to smile pretty at the cameras? Or will Mrs. Clinton be expected to fulfill that duty as well? hmph.
12/12/2007 7174377 Don't assume that we're secondary decision-makers in the household--about detergent or the next President.
12/12/2007 7174382
12/12/2007 7174394 In Chicago, I was personally offended by the "woman-to-woman" chattiness along with Elizabeth Edwards' unrepentant partisanship in a room NOT filled with Democrats. We're not electing the wives/husband, we're electing a president. 'Weak sisters' we are, if we talk to anyone except the candidates themselves. Go get 'em ...
12/12/2007 7174403 I'm seeing lots of campaigning while Congress sits deadlocked - this is contrary to what I feel I was promised at the midterms which was CHANGE CHANGE CHANGE. I don't see an effective plan to end the war, I don't see action on health insurance, I don't see, well, anything more than campaigning. What are the candidates doing RIGHT NOW while they're still on the taxpayer's nickel to sit in Congress that should make me believe they are the right person to promote to President?
12/12/2007 7174407 I think the best way to reach female voters would be current venues. Creating new sites to reach women cannot possibly be as effective as agreeing to be interviewed by a site that already has a strong female following. It also will allow candidates to reach more female voters and not just the ones who are most likely already inclined to vote for them. Reach out to female voters where they can already be found.
12/12/2007 7174415 Women vote for the candidate. Just because a voter is female, doesn't limit the scope a voter will have regarding campaign issues and policy. By pigeonholing women as "this way" or "that way" is sexist. Yes, there are trends, but many a powerful person has bucked a trend regardless of gender.
12/12/2007 7174423
12/12/2007 7174427 Don't pander. Be real. Speak to the issues that concern everyone (Iraq, Healthcare, Global Warming) and BE SPECIFIC. Don't assume that women will vote for or against you solely based on your gender or race.
12/12/2007 7174435 I am a well-educated (post-graduate) 50+ year-old woman who does not blog but who reads a variety of blogs by both men and women for pleasure and for information. I consider many of my favorite women bloggers to be among the most well-informed and intellectually curious writers around today. Many of them have risen, in my estimation to the level of "new journalists". Any campaign which overlooks this vast and influential resource is, in my opinion, ill-informed, ill-advised and sure to reap negative consequences as a result.
12/12/2007 7174453
12/12/2007 7174454 Could they ALL tell the truth for a change -- we CAN take the truth.
12/12/2007 7174456
12/12/2007 7174495
12/12/2007 7174497
12/12/2007 7174500
12/12/2007 7174505
12/12/2007 7174521 Frankly I'm offended that the candidates think that we'd be more interested in their wives than them directly, considering that women could indeed tip the election this year and will be more involved than ever with a female as a strong Democratic candidate. I'm going to chalk it up to ignorance - we're not just women, we're women bloggers with the potential to reach tens of thousands more voters. Not just female voters either. Shockingly, I have male readers too.
12/12/2007 7174524 I got rid of my television, and I hardly ever have the radio on; if you want to reach me, you'd better do it online.
12/12/2007 7174532
12/12/2007 7174560 I'm shocked (and insulted) at their response to BlogHer, honestly. It really says that a group of women aren't their primary focus, which is odd. Oh, and I could care less about spouses. I don't really get why we're talking to spouses.
12/12/2007 7174561
12/12/2007 7174586
12/12/2007 7174588 Women are voters, too. Stop sending your spouses to answer our questions about YOU!
12/12/2007 7174599
12/12/2007 7174619
12/12/2007 7174629 Just because we're women doesn't mean we only want to hear from the women in your campaign. We can't vote for anyone but you, the candidate. By suggesting that we hear from your women family members and supporters instead of you, you marginalize and insult us. That's not good campaigning, good politics, or good leadership.
12/12/2007 7174693
12/12/2007 7174736 Don't play us cheap. That said, I think BlogHer should interview the candidates' spouses because the Elizabeth Edwards conversation was, I think, very valuable.
12/12/2007 7174771 www.ronpaul2008.com
Please include Ron Paul in your manifesto. The best part about a Ron Paul Presidency would be the chance to make politics local again. He wants the states to decide many of the polarizing issues! This would restore the Republic, and reinstate the Constitution!
12/12/2007 7174774 Be upfront and honest.
12/12/2007 7174783
12/12/2007 7174816 Try mutual respect.
12/12/2007 7174830
12/12/2007 7174846 I extended an invitation to each of the campaigns to meet with mom bloggers through a post on DC Metro Moms. My question to them is: Your "plans" for America aside, how will our world be a safer and more prosperous place for our children if you are elected President. Elizabeth Edwards met with us and answered the question. Her answer was fantastic. I'd love to hear how all the other candidates answer the same question. I won'der if I'd be equally impressed. To the candidates: Don't ignore women online, but don't expect us to come to you. You must come to us. You would if we were male bloggers.
12/12/2007 7174857 Ignoring BlogHer is ignoring women...Ignoring women will lose you the election.
12/12/2007 7174862 Wake up to the blogosphere!
12/12/2007 7174882 Women don't want ploys and silly websites that say they're "for moms." What we want to know if what you're going to do for us, for our children and our country, so that we know that our kids are going to HAVE a good future.
12/12/2007 7174887 When will you, as candidates, start taking women seriously? We are the "big deal" when it comes to voters. We are the ones who control the family dollar. I'm not saying we can be bought, but you do need to start caring about what we think and how we feel.
12/12/2007 7174903
12/12/2007 7174914 How about addressing family issues, for example health care, paid medial leave, etc., that concern both men and women instead of dismissing them as "women's issues."
12/12/2007 7174922 Yes, should learn from the John Edwards campaign. Especially Barack Obama --he has NO strategy whatsoever compared to what Edwards has in place.
12/12/2007 7174949 BlogHer members have taken the time to develop, discuss, distill and focus on the policies that concern us during this very important election year. Ignoring our request for direct answers to our questions indicates a lack of interest in women and bloggers as a viable and important part of the election process. Blogher is a tightknit and supportive group committed to helping and educating--the candidates are missing a significant opportunity to gain that support!
12/12/2007 7174962
12/12/2007 7174983
12/12/2007 7174985 To ignore organizations like BlogHer is to ignore the power of women who blog. Candidates, you're underestimating this important group if you think we have short memories and no influence!
12/12/2007 7174995
12/12/2007 7175000 The candidates can "reach" women by supporting legislation that honors our needs and reflects the realities of our lives: daycare, health care, reproductive rights, clean food, environmental responsibility, peace.
12/12/2007 7175014 Women who are already online aren't looking for cutesy websites pandering to us. We're looking for you to come to us - where we already are online - and talk about real issues.

Online women already have blogs and communities, and we want candidates to come into our virtual homes to show what they stand for. By avoiding our communities, they are sending the message that we don't matter, and I think that's an unwise move. We're educated, we're often the primary decision makers in our families, we're web savvy with far-reaching networks, and we vote.
12/12/2007 7175026
12/12/2007 7175036 no
12/12/2007 7175041 Although I participated in the '08 Voter Manifeseto, I now think that the ONLY policy question that is important is removing corporate interests from political decision makers. Until we do that, our elected officials (including President, but also Congress) can be too easily bought by corporate interests.
12/12/2007 7175052 I hope you interview Dennis Kucinich AND His wife - they both have outstanding things to say , stuff that can save America. There has been enough efforts to keep them out of the media "eye". That is why exactly BlogHer is so popular, we can sidestep the MSM which tries to deny truth to everyone. I also like Mike Gravel and would really like to hear what he could say, btw. Hillary runs the WORST campaign of the lot when it comes to so-called women's issues. Who the freak wants to hear from Billy Clinton? HE is the Biggest Sexist of ALL time! I mean really. And I am not saying this becuz it's PC, but becuz it is true.
12/12/2007 7175079 Yes, wake up and smell the 21st Century. You can't run you campaign and expect non-participation support. You have to make contact with different groups.
12/12/2007 7175081
12/12/2007 7175094
12/12/2007 7175108
12/12/2007 7175161 Please don't underestimate the numbers nor the power of women bloggers. This is a community well worth your investment of time and effort to reach. It would be a mistake to continue to ignore this vast network of women.
12/12/2007 7175186
12/12/2007 7175187 We are not a special needs group!
12/12/2007 7175284 Just because I'm a woman doesn't mean I want to talk to your WIFE! That logic is offensive in itself. If I have questions about serious issues, I expect to get serious answers from the candidate not their significant other.
12/12/2007 7175303
12/12/2007 7175335
12/12/2007 7175339
12/12/2007 7175377
12/12/2007 7175382
12/12/2007 7175386 Just because we're moms at home doesn't mean we don't have a BIG sphere of influence. Don't mess with us by snubbing us because you'll feel the other end of that stick.
12/12/2007 7175432
12/12/2007 7175454
12/12/2007 7175482 Why offer the wives when women ask policy questions? It's like sending Mr. Thatcher for tea if an English women's group wanted to ask the Prime Minister policy questions.
12/12/2007 7175489 Be real.
12/12/2007 7175497
12/12/2007 7175499
12/12/2007 7175512 We (you and us) need this important opportunity to hear one another. We are women that wear many hats and part of a unique generation - mothers, businesswomen, wives and mothers (sometimes all!) who carry our weight in this country. We need to understand who you are because we're going to talk about you one way or another, and we are LOUD.
12/12/2007 7175588 go for the already established networks, don't create new ones!
12/12/2007 7175607
12/12/2007 7175613
12/12/2007 7175636
12/12/2007 7175638
12/12/2007 7175672
12/12/2007 7175748 Talk to us about issues. We are unisexual about issues. Creative transit plans for the Country, Iraq, economic development, better energy resources; if we don't speak to those issues and how to get communities off their duffs to handle education and role modeling on their own, we are doomed.
12/12/2007 7175837
12/12/2007 7175838
12/12/2007 7175900 I'm especially turned off by candidates setting up mom groups and offering parties as incentive to participate. This is serious stuff and we (& our votes) should be treated with respect.
12/12/2007 7175924
12/12/2007 7175935 What is this, a 1950's society rewritten for blogs? Do the candidates want to pat us on the head and send us back to the kitchen?
12/12/2007 7176009 Ignore us at your own peril.
12/13/2007 7176380 Be real. Be funny. Don't patronize.
12/13/2007 7176438 Get on the band wagon! In my personal circle, I'm the only one who understands the power of the internet. Most of the people I know, don't use it as freely as I do and don't understand how much you can gain from turning off the TV and getting the information you really want.
If I wanted bad bias interviews, I'd watch fox news! I want to read a little of everything and draw the Bigger picture myself!
Candidates: If you don't reach out to the massive amounts of female voters at BlogHer, you're leaving votes behind. I've only been here a few weeks, the majority of BlogHer bloggers are American women who vote (as apposed to people who just don't vote). The candidate who answers the call will have tremendous effect, as these women are active on the web sphere and they will leverage your one interview into a viral gust all across the web. Get with it!
12/13/2007 7176616
12/13/2007 7176740
12/13/2007 7176805 Not every female blogger is a mommyblogger and we like to be taken seriously as voters who have a variety of issues that concern us...not just the issues that BlogHer likes to market via its overwhelming support of mommybloggers.
12/13/2007 7176947
12/13/2007 7177087
12/13/2007 7177105 Speaking to BlogHer would solidify your campaign -- you really need to listen to BlogHers, ignore them at your own peril!
12/13/2007 7177211 Yes, as a woman, I have felt extremely disenfranchised by every candidate except John Edwards. I've tried to contact campaigns and his is the only one that replied, and have noticed, despite their words, a distinct disassociation and low priority the candidates have for women's issues and groups. Their independent efforts to "reach" women appear to be just words, too.
12/13/2007 7177241 Women are not a niche. They have 51% of the voting power
12/13/2007 7177429 I'm a working woman who votes in every election and follows politics closely. Even after all of the coverage I've read this year, I'm still undecided about who I'm going to vote for next year. It's vital that the candidates find out what's important to me and explain their positions on those issues. I consider BlogHer to be a very mainstream community for women who participate in online communication and it would be foolish indeed for candidates to give it short shrift.
12/13/2007 7177542 I create the voter guide for my family. We all discuss the issues, but I'm the one who knows the most about the candidates and where they stand. Where my vote goes, so goes the family.
12/13/2007 7177594
12/13/2007 7177603
12/13/2007 7177611
12/13/2007 7177642
12/13/2007 7177681 We aren't a monolithic group!
12/13/2007 7177739 I just think that it is imporatant for people to start realizing that as women bloggers people pay attention to what we say.
12/13/2007 7178034 It is very shortsighted of the candidates to pigeonhole BlogHer as the kind of "women's media" spoonfed our grandmothers. Have their advisors even looked at the political coverage on the BlogHer site -- or some of the many political and policy blogs that our women contribute to? Right now, I can't decide among the Democratic candidates, but I've been leaning towards Edwards, thanks to the coverage on Momocrats. Do any of the other candidates want to convince me otherwise? Anyone who is featured on BlogHer is going to get my attention.
12/13/2007 7178036
12/13/2007 7178039
12/13/2007 7178158
12/13/2007 7178205
12/13/2007 7178246
12/13/2007 7178317
12/13/2007 7178356
12/13/2007 7178378
12/13/2007 7178473 We pack a vote just like anyone else. It really is not complicated. When we become only the friends or spouses of real voters, then you can pawn us off on the friends and spouses of real candidates.
12/13/2007 7178545
12/13/2007 7178598 Just because we're women doesn't mean we just want to see interviews from the candidates' wives -- that's ridiculous and insulting. It's not the 1950s.
12/13/2007 7178878
12/13/2007 7178900 We're here, we read each other, and we vote. Come on and meet with us!
12/13/2007 7179046
12/13/2007 7179376
12/13/2007 7179837 put your money where your mouth is
12/13/2007 7180132
12/13/2007 7180249 Don't pander to us. Just because you're male doesn't mean we aren't interested in your positions. Sending your spouse as your representative sends a message that you don't think women are important enough a voting bloc to give your own personal attention. You are sorely mistaken.
12/13/2007 7180371
12/13/2007 7180474
12/13/2007 7180546 Don't reinvent the wheel - good, strong organizations that were created by women, for women already exist - use those mechanisms to reach us, and be prepared to demonstrate how important we are - show up yourself.
12/13/2007 7180568 If Oprah can come out in support of Obama, Hillary Clinton needs to mobilize and use every media support network she can.
12/13/2007 7181215 Take a standpoint of sharing information rather than "marketing to women." Marketing makes assumptions about what we want - and we all have different needs...
12/13/2007 7181363 If the candidates will not talk directly to Blogher, can the campaigns go on record and tell us why? Let's have a press release about that.
12/13/2007 7181959 Definitely advertise through the BlogHer Ad network!!! Even if I wind up picking a different candidate, I'll still be impressed, and it will probably increase my enthusiasm for you if you win your party's nomination over whoever I did vote for in the primary.
12/13/2007 7182027
12/13/2007 7182488
12/13/2007 7182772 Talk to me the way I want to be talked to -- here, on blogs.
12/13/2007 7183116 Lets have real position papers on real issues
12/13/2007 7183169
12/13/2007 7183268
12/13/2007 7183487
12/13/2007 7183763
12/13/2007 7183819 I want to know where you as a candidate for president stand. Not, where you think I want to you stand, but exactly what your opinions are on Iraq, the economy, education, and health care. Contrary to popular belief, you are running for president, not God. You don't get to do it alone. You have to work with Congress. I want to know where you will lead us.
12/13/2007 7183842
12/13/2007 7184134
12/13/2007 7184589 we are here ignoring us via blogher is not helping you at all
12/14/2007 7185784
12/14/2007 7186349
12/14/2007 7186355 We will NOT be ignored.
12/14/2007 7186469
12/14/2007 7186824
12/14/2007 7186932
12/14/2007 7186978
12/14/2007 7187006
12/14/2007 7187028
12/14/2007 7187053
12/14/2007 7187141
12/14/2007 7188543
12/14/2007 7188972 Please don't insult women voters by ignoring the voices of women online.
12/14/2007 7189003
12/14/2007 7189037 There is a very diverse but educated and interested population of women online, and ignoring them in favor of male bloggers and media outlets isn't a smart move. The more you come in contact with women online, the more educated they become about your issues and your commitments.
12/14/2007 7189501 Keep trying. :-)
12/14/2007 7192933 I would like the candidates to consider family planning, abortion policy. I want to hear about resuming funding to title X health centers that focus on womens health care for women without insurance or limited health insurance. I would also like them to consider more thoroughly the plight of the all th working/middle class families who are struggling to survive in todays economy.
12/14/2007 7193144
12/14/2007 7193475
12/14/2007 7193602
12/14/2007 7193614 Wake up and read the demographics, people! DUH!
12/14/2007 7194183
12/14/2007 7194295 As a note: adoption is NOT the answer for the pro-life movement against abortion. In fact, some major reforms are needed within the adoption system to better protect women and children which is supposedly the interest of pro-life supporters.
12/14/2007 7194306
12/14/2007 7194312 I think they should reach us where we are & we are increasingly online more now!
12/14/2007 7194341 I think offering the spouses rather than the candidates themselves is a slap in the face to women and our influence in the voting block. We deserve the candidate's time & attention. Those candidates that are declining invitations to speak with women and then start their own women focused websites is hypocritical. This makes me question their leadership abilities and how 'tuned in' they really are with the American populace.
12/14/2007 7194386
12/14/2007 7194397
12/14/2007 7194405
12/14/2007 7194412 You don't have to talk down to women to get our vote. We aren't one dimensional. We juggle jobs, we hold together families, we pay taxes, we read, we think. Don't take for granted that a one-cliche tactic will get our vote.
12/14/2007 7194438
12/14/2007 7194472 What is the matter with you? We're here and we want to talk. You will spend months in Iowa and New Hampshire, but not 15 minutes answering our questions? Barack Obama, I am especially annoyed with you.
12/14/2007 7194496
12/14/2007 7194533
12/14/2007 7194641 Sure! As an online-mama, a blogher I would liked to be reached honestly, ethically, professionally, and traditionally. I am looking for something deeply personal, privy, special and honest vs. a marketing scheme.
12/14/2007 7194726
12/14/2007 7194801
12/15/2007 7194888
12/15/2007 7195133
12/15/2007 7195144
12/15/2007 7195213
12/15/2007 7195216
12/15/2007 7195775 I'd have to say they are missing an incredible opportunity here. Most of us don't have the time to sit down and watch a televised debate but catching a clip on the internet is doable.
12/15/2007 7195901
12/15/2007 7196071 If the candidates want to reach me as a voter they should treat me with the same respect they treat other voters and answer our questions. I'm not a number in a pool of people to be "marketed" to.
12/15/2007 7196184 we need acandidate who is serious and not bought by big name entities.
12/15/2007 7196252 I want to know their views. I am not interested in their pandering to interest groups and carefully adjusting their views for these groups. Don't insult us or waste our time with spin!
12/15/2007 7196344 Give us a chance to hear you!
12/15/2007 7196403
12/15/2007 7196475 Women who blog online have more influence than I think some campaigns understand. We are often quite independent thinkers and will take the time to seriously evaluate candidates.
12/15/2007 7196599
12/15/2007 7196699
12/15/2007 7196958
12/15/2007 7197081 Talk to us directly. We do not want to hear from your surrogates, especially not when you are sending your wives out to talk about "women's issues" which somehow include cookie recipes. (And I am a food writer!)
12/16/2007 7197576
12/16/2007 7197782 We have a lot of women who are unhappy with current affairs, we will get involved and we hope you will join us.
My best...
women for honorable politicians..
12/16/2007 7197965 Women are not a novelty. We represent more than 50% of the population of this country. Please speak to us directly, as people, rather than sharing the favorite cookie recipes of your spouses or daughters.
12/16/2007 7197995
12/16/2007 7198048
12/16/2007 7198209
12/16/2007 7198838
12/16/2007 7199045
12/16/2007 7199194 Not all women are mothers and/or married. Reach out to single women and women without children as well.
12/16/2007 7199198 engage on serious issues across the spectrum
12/16/2007 7199287 just give us a bullet list of items each candidate wants to promote/change. when I say bullet list, I mean short and sweet. we moms don't have time to filter out the point in all their long winded deliveries. however, we are too smart to not figure it out if we have to. the difference is that were a little less irritated if you just spill it to begin w/. it could be a standard form each can fill out to be consistent and easier for voters to discern what counts to us. this is something i wish for each election year: a standard bullet list that represents each candidate's points that allows me to decide what is good/bad about each potential president. I'd like it for local political elections, too. Let's come up with the standard form and get everyone to ask for it!
12/16/2007 7199459
12/17/2007 7200364 every mother is a working mother.
12/17/2007 7200888
12/17/2007 7202494 Whom do these candidates think they need to impress MORE than the women/mothers who deal with economic, health care, education, workforce issues every day? Their positions/decisions on these issues affect me on a daily basis. I vote. And, I tell all my friends about my political opinions, too. Having tea and a cozy chat with Mrs. Romney is very, fucking annoying pat on the head and pinch on the ass.
12/17/2007 7202694 Women are frequently relegated to so-called “women’s issues”. But, isn’t the choice between war and peace a women’s issue? Isn’t the societal divide between wealth and poverty a women’s issue? I’d like to see the end of categorizing issues as “women’s issues” and instead bring women’s perspectives to the solutions of the many problems that face us.
12/17/2007 7203761
12/17/2007 7204034
12/17/2007 7205348
12/17/2007 7205496
12/17/2007 7205646 Many women tell me they want to see pictures, but I want quick downloads and little clutter. Don't get caught up in technological competitions; just recognize that women have busy lives and want solid information that can be read between all the demands on their time.
12/17/2007 7205782
12/18/2007 7206106
12/18/2007 7207116
12/18/2007 7207376
12/18/2007 7207788
12/18/2007 7208091 Women who blog, and get their news on the internet, are just the sort of educated, thoughtful people you want behind your campaign. Don't make the mistake of ignoring us.
12/18/2007 7208123 If you sincerely care about reaching out to women, then take the time to meet with them. I don't meet my doctors spouse when I need information, I don't care to meet my candidates spouse either.
12/18/2007 7208384 I think it's a shame that the candidates don't want to speak directly to Blogher's extremely passionate and vocal, not to mention large, group of women bloggers. They're passing up an opportunity that I think will alter the potential outcome of their candidacy's. I, for one, will remember this when voting in Nov. '08.
12/18/2007 7208700
12/18/2007 7208754
12/18/2007 7208831 Putting their female relatives and supporters out front is good because women like to see the larger picture of a person's life (it helps them "get to know" the candidate better). But the candidates themselves need to speak about how they would deal with issues important to women (healthcare, war in Iraq, education) personally as well.
12/18/2007 7209228
12/18/2007 7209356 i don't feel the need to separate women from the general populace and hope that women bloggers would be treated comparably to men bloggers with similar reach.
12/18/2007 7209552
12/18/2007 7209625
12/18/2007 7210129 We have to understand that people - women and men do not count in politics.
The powers that run this country from behind the scenes will get the person in office that they want regardless of your opinion or mine.
We have to change the way we run this country or it will continue to go down as the Roman Empire failed many years ago. I recommend that we vote for neither Rep or Dem as a protest. Your vote will be wasted otherwise.
Dr Bob
12/18/2007 7210249
12/18/2007 7210651
12/18/2007 7211325
12/18/2007 7211348 We're no different than men. As Ron Paul says we're all individuals. I find the People tab on Obama's site particularly offensive. My biggest concern is our foreign policy. Is that a female concern?!
12/18/2007 7211534
12/18/2007 7211652
12/18/2007 7212485
12/19/2007 7213742 Don't sell to us. We are smarter than that. Talk to us. Use the resources (such as BlogHer) that are already out there and established. I'm not interested in the spin I'll find on your website.
12/19/2007 7216037
12/19/2007 7216082 Get a clue.
12/19/2007 7216171
12/19/2007 7216326
12/19/2007 7216371
12/19/2007 7216396 Look to the future. It's here staring you in the face. Women are no longer strickly manning bakesales and carpools. It is in a polititians best interest to find out what is important to us.
12/19/2007 7216546
12/19/2007 7216625
12/19/2007 7216850 Don't patronise. Don't talk down. No favorite recipes, please.
12/19/2007 7216865 overall, we just Want respect & stop trying to treat us like we're all either soccer moms or samantha from sex and the city.
12/19/2007 7217132 I blog, I read news blogs, I read political blogs, I listen to NPR, I read the ever-thinning local newspaper and I VOTE. If they want me to vote for them, I would like to hear from them, and I don't just mean to ask for money.
12/19/2007 7217175
12/19/2007 7217273
12/19/2007 7218084
12/19/2007 7218713
12/19/2007 7218833 Women-- smart women-- aren't concerned with different policy issues than men are, but I know I'm more receptive to a different style of campaigning. I appreciate candidates reaching out specifically to women.
12/20/2007 7219915 If you truly want to reach women, moms particularly, you have to come to them,especially online. By only doing it "your way," i.e., on your own Web sites, you are doing your campaign a disservice. You show that you are out of touch with where women are and what they care about.
12/20/2007 7220350

Posted by Lisa Stone, Decembr 21, 2007

BlogHer - Results of BlogHer Election 2008 Poll: "How Should Presidential Candidates Earn Women’s Votes?" - Comments

Results of BlogHer Election 2008 Poll: "How Should Presidential Candidates Earn Women’s Votes?"