BREAKING: RFK Jr. Has Landed a Nomination in the Trump Administration
Why Bucks County Dems Should Be Indicted for Trying to Steal the PA...
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Thought Deleting This Off Her Twitter Bio Would Go Unnoticed
Blinken: Before Trump Takes Office, 'Every Dollar We Have at Our Disposal Will...
Pocahontas Way Off Reservation on Hegseth Attack
UR Investigating After 'Wanted' Posters Featuring Jewish Faculty, Staff Plastered Around C...
Connecticut Teacher Resigns After Video of Her Threatening to Kill Trump Voters Goes...
Feds Raid Home of Polymarket CEO After Betting Site Predicted Trump Win
One Hollywood Celeb Said That Her Family Moved Out of the ‘Scary’ and...
Egregious: A Wisconsin School District Received Over $1 Million to Promote Woke Initiative...
Revealed: How Bob Casey and His Lawyers Are Trying to Steal an Election...
Hundreds of Explicit Books Have Been Expunged From Schools in This State
George Clooney Whines About Being Used As a 'Scapegoat' Following Harris' Loss
'God-tier Kind of Trolling': John Fetterman Shares His Thoughts on Trump’s Cabinet Picks
This NYT Post-Election Focus Group of Young Voters Is Brutal for the Media...and...
Tipsheet

Another Silly "Women" Problem at the NYT

The NYT continues to obsess over women, running a piece discussing how "single women" are up for grabs in the 2012 election.

The problem?  As an analytical matter, the piece is worthless.  Like "women" as a whole, "single women" are a disparate group, who vote for very different reasons. 
Advertisement

First, there are the young, single (presumably childless) women.  Contrary to the Times' assertion, they do NOT "already earn less than married people and single men."  In fact, by 2008, single childless women between 22 and 30 were earning more than their male peers.    These, presumably, are the "smart" women who are going to believe the Obama scare hype that Mitt Romney is going to take away contraception (please!), despite the fact that he has indicated he would maintain the status quo (aside from the hideous new ObamaCare mandate forcing religious employers to violate their convictions by providing no-cost sterilization, abortifacients and contraception in their insurance).

Then there are the single women with children.  They may depend on public assistance, and we all know the Obama administration is working hard to court them.  But let's not forget that, as the TImes piece acknowledges, they are some of the people who have suffered most from the Obama economy.
Advertisement

Single women are not a Democrat monolith, as much as the Times wishes they were.
And the ultimate problem for the Times and other Obama supporters is that it's hard for anyone -- male or female, single or married -- to overlook the President's dismal economic record, and his overt hostility to those like the small business owners who work hard, are productive, and create jobs AMericans need, male and female alike.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement