Why Hillary Needs Men

Matt Lewis
|
Posted: Jan 28, 2007 1:18 PM

Today's Washington Post features a very interesting opinion column (written by a female) on the subject of whether or not women can propel Hillary Clinton into the White House.  The column has bad news for Hillary and her strategists:

"Any campaign that needs women to win would have to break the 88-year record of women failing to produce election results that men oppose."

But while the column was specifically about Hillary, it also shed some very interesting light on the differences between women and men, regarding politics:

"... women just aren't as interested in politics as men are. The Center for Civic Education recently reported that American women are less likely than men to discuss politics, contribute to campaigns, contact public officials or join a political organization. About 42 percent of men told University of Michigan researchers last year that "they are 'very interested' in government and public affairs, compared with 34 percent of women."

Worse, women consistently score 10 to 20 percentage points lower than men on studies of political knowledge, regardless of their education or income level. Studies dating to 1997 have shown that fewer women than men can name their senator, or know one First Amendment right. They even know less about the Supreme Court's decision in Roe v. Wade than men do.

As a 2006 study by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press put it, American adults live in "A World of His and Hers." Two million more men than women read either Time or Newsweek; more men listen to radio news and talk radio, read the paper and get news online. Only broadcast television news plays to more women than men, and a lot of that is TV news magazines and morning shows. Not only do fewer women read the newspaper, but almost half the women surveyed said they "sometimes do not follow international news because of excessive coverage of wars and violence."

In fact, men are more likely to be reading this very blog.

One thing the column does not address is the theory that women voters are actually harder on women candidates than they are on male candidates. 

I'm not sure what all this means, but I am sure of one thing: If Hillary wants to win, she can't afford to concede the male vote.