Vote by Gender

[fschmidt]

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/epolls/index.html#NHREP
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/epolls/index.html#val=NHDEM

Among male voters in New Hampshire, Ron Paul came in third and Obama beat Clinton.  This proves, once again, that universal suffrage is a very bad idea.

[Will L]

I think average men and women are about the same in intelligence. America has successfully womanized men and manized women. Most candidates get about the same distribution of support from men and women.

The anomaly is with Ron Paul and Hilary Clinton.

Ron Paul has the biggest variance of male vs female (11% vs 4%), vs Hilary's (29% vs 46%). Ron Paul is #1 in dividing men and women, and Hilary Clinton is #2 (excluding Richardson and Kucinich which are too small).  Ron Paul is a man's movement which is new and weak, and Clinton is a woman's movement which is old and strong.

[fschmidt]

When I was a kid and took the IQ test, there was no verbal component.  It was purely analytical.  The verbal component was added specifically to raise women's IQ scores.  In other words, intelligence was redefined so that women could be equal.

This isn't to say that I think no women should vote.  I would prefer that voters be selected based on analytical intelligence.  This would remove most women voters, but not all.

Will L wrote:

Ron Paul is a man's movement which is new and weak, and Clinton is a woman's movement which is old and strong.

Why is Ron Paul is a man's movement?  Because he represents intelligence and freedom, that's why.

Ron Paul's ideas aren't new at all.  In fact, they are very old and represented American values before the women's movement ruined America.  Ronald Reagan was the last president to represent these old ideas.  It is no accident that Ron Paul is 72.  He represents the last gasp of what was good about America.