Democratic congresswomen 'less feminine in appearance' than Republicans
Time-rich psychologists in the USA say they have discovered that female Democratic politicians are significantly less feminine in appearance than Republican ones - so much so that it's often possible to tell which party a woman politico belongs to just by looking at her. Official pic of US Rep Michele Bachmann Michele Bachmann …
Both of those you mentioned, overshadowed by the Pelosi effect.
imagine
A threesome with Margaret Thatcher and Janet Reno.
Suddenly, Hilary sems quite attractive now, no?
Re: imagine
Maggie was an amazing politician... take her over Janet or Hillary any day!
Psychologists present a subjective assessment as objective fact.
further undermines their tenuous claim to scientific credibilty. A friend routinely refers to psychologists as psychiatry's hand-maidens.
More about ethnicity?
The Republicans feature more WASPy (White Anglo Saxon Protestant) people of both genders. I suspect they are considered prettier and more feminine by everyone (possibly unconsciously) than the more varied ethnic groups represented in the Democratic party.
Re: More about ethnicity? (no, more about money)
That is one way to look at it - but it is not entirely accurate. The color of the Republican Party if Green (i.e. the color of money.)
Women (not an ethnic group) are basically independant of either party, with a nearly even split, heavy influence in either political party (which is GOOD for them, equal representation!)
White (not an ethnic group) - are slightly more dependent upon Republican Party for representation.
http://blogs.ajc.com/jay-bookman-blog/files/2010/11/housechart1a.jpg
Latino Ethnic Groups - are slightly more dependent upon Democratic Party for representation.
http://latinosreadytovote.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Hispanic-Vote-2010-41-e1326161791632.p
Black Ethnic Groups - for the most part are enslaved to the Democratic Party for their representation... with a slight uptick in movement towards the Republican Party during the 2010 mid-term elections (odd, with their ethnicity in the Presidency and their ethnicity's dominant favoured party in control of both the Legislative and Executive branch!)
http://www.factcheck.org/2008/04/blacks-and-the-democratic-party/
One ABC (American Black Conservative) [in his own words] "won't stay on t he Democratic Plantation because of the color of his skin".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ollRkX0o5cM
It is not good for ANY demographic to become heavily dependent upon a single political party. It is dangerous when you are counted against those who may offer a better opportunity for you. This person actually BELIEVES that President Obama supplied her and others telephones, thus wins their vote.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tpAOwJvTOio
It is in the best interest of the Democratic Party to keep demographic groups voting for them and the main message from them is to emphasize: poverty, dependency, have them else take money from others to give to perspective voters. During the past 4 years, poverty has risen - and those in poverty are most likely to vote for Democrats (to use the power of the government gun to transfer money to them when they are in the time of need.)
http://colorlines.com/archival_images/youth_unemployment_2007_2010.gif
It is in the best interest of the Republican Party to keep demographic groups voting for them and the main message for them to increase their base through lifting poor into middle class and middle class into upper class through wealth. Unfortunately for the Republicans, they lost this battle in 2008, with the election of a Democratic House of Representatives, Democratic Senate, and Democratic President. No representation of this demographic means the nation becomes poorer, the economy is depressed, and Republicans voting base loses more wealth (and more voters to replace those who die off.)
Neither party want the poor or elderly to be in need - they both understand that instability comes with idle hands joined to hungry stomachs and instability threatens their political power. At the same time, Demcrats have figured out they can manipulate demographics by making them dependent upon government (health care reform took over student loans from the banking sector to give Democrats another demographic to control) and the Republicans have been inept in keeping their opposing party from manipulating ethnic and other demographic groups to vote for them wholesale.
(Ironically, regarding the Obama Phone, that program was a private program which came into existence under the Republican G.W. Bush Administration, made possible through cooperative efforts dating back decades through Presidents of BOTH PARTIES... yet Democrats have capitalized on this political capital.)
http://www.factcheck.org/2009/10/the-obama-phone/
The Democratic Party is more about government coersion (government taxation & income redistribution) while the Republican Party is more about personal freedom (growing wealth for everyone.) As long as the Democratic Party can keep more people poor and THINKING they are voting for their lives to be sustained, the Republicans don't have a chance. Candidate Romney alluded to this with his 47% remark, but has been ineffective in countering the rhetoric.
Re: More about ethnicity? (no, more about money)
What a load of BS! Watch that Kool-aid, it'll get you in the end.
Re: More about ethnicity? (no, more about money)
> What a load of BS!
A truther. Care to suggest which facts do you reject?
"Attention all women...
"... if you want to be elected, it doesn't matter what your education or background or political views are: If you aren't good looking, you have less chance of being elected!"
WTF???
Re: "Attention all women...
Graham you sound surprised - this shows a touch of naievity which I wouldn't have expected from you. Women have always been judged on appearance as well as ability; you rarely get comments in political discussions on what a male politician wore, whether they'd recently had their hair "done" etc.
Lots of studies have shown that whether male or female you still have a better chance when you're attractive for things like landing a job as well as getting laid - personal experiences of being a not very attractive woman who has been overlooked in a job environment in favour of prettier & less able women bear this out
Re: "Attention all women...
Oh please, call it "telegenic" for example and it applies to both sexes. Tony Bliar being a classic example, people voted for him "because he has a nice smile" and completely ignored any of his policies (if they were voting for his policies, they'd have voted Tory).
Dimwits
My oh my, there are some dimwits on this thread. Gays / lesbians / trans-sexuals are more likely to be left-wingers because conservatives have different values. Therefore, you get people like Rosa DeLauro in the democrats and with who I wouldn't pick a fight.
Yeh, I know, you sensitive girls and lady-boys in IT land will be all upset now, but you are so far in virtual reality that you have lost sense of reality.
Dog Whistle Politics
Please be aware that the accepted usage is "Democratic Congresswomen," not "Democrat Congresswomen." The usage of Democrat Party and similar constructions is a Republican idiocy, they refuse to refer to the Democratic Party by its properly accepted name. They would howl with anger if anyone used a similar construction like the "Republic Party."
You have succumbed to "Dog Whistle Politics." While you may not have understood anything was wrong with that particular usage, Conservative Republicans hear "Democrat Congresswomen" and hear the inaudible dog whistle, indicating the author is also a Conservative who is intent on disparaging Democrats.
Of course there is always the possibility that Mr. Page deliberately intended to disparage Democratic Congresswomen.
Re: Dog Whistle Politics
Bloody hell, isn't headline long enough already?
No offence intended, already changed.
Re: Dog Whistle Politics
Thanks, but I notice the article still retains the usage. Oh well, the story is water under the bridge by now.
But seriously, El Reg's headline writers can do better than that. It might have been preferable to use a headline like "Dem Chicks Lack Fizz" or something like that, rather than the GOP disparagement.
@Charles E
Surely that should be "Dem Chicks buck fizz"
Mines the one with the rip off skirt.
Maybe they Democrats need more Botox
The best example is "pass it to see what is in it" Ms. Nancy Pelosi. The bummer is that I have to put up with my wonderful congress critter Atherton Anna Eshoo.
One will note that Ms. Pelosi is pretty well off, even to having a country estate in the Napa County Wine Country of California.
This might be filed under the "Why Bother" folder.
Re: Maybe they Democrats need more Botox
Not just a "wine country estate"... Ms. Pelosi and her husband own an operating winery as well... Don't think it's open for public tours though.
Paris, for something nicer to look at until El Reg lets me have a glass of wine... Cabernet Sauvignon preferred...
age a factor here too
the pictures look more like hip grandma vs. scary bitch, rather than more or less feminine, but what do I know?
GOP femininity
Why am I not surprised that GOP men are more feminine. Look at Mitt, he wears mom jeans. Then there's Lindsey Graham, if he were to marry the representative from PA-14, and take his surname, he'd be Lindsey Doyle. Say it three times quickly
Mia Love is hot !
fact is that better looking / taller people tend to do better in life and are more likely to be self-sufficient because ... well .. they are more likely to have better income .. they tend to have a more positive attitude towards life
anyway .. if Mia Love gets elected in Utah .. she'll be the most attractive lady in Congress by far
and how can one not mention the the great looking Sarah Palin in an article like this?
Republican women have to be pretty
So republican men can recognise them as sex objects.
Re: Republican women have to be pretty
sure .. there's the infamous Kennedy family exploits with their sex objects
then there's Bill Clinton and Monica .. Paula Jones .. oh ... wait ..
are you saying Democrat men don't need a woman to be pretty to recognize them as sex objects ?
Re: Republican women have to be pretty
Not only so republiCLOWN men can recognize them as sex objects... so they can treat them as sex objects, but only until they get them preggers, then they drop them like a hot potato.
Re: Republican women have to be pretty
Cinton apparently didn't...
Re: Republican women have to be pretty
"republiCLOWN" wow ha ha I see what you did there, its a play on words.....moron!
Go USA milf
Bachmann for president, and Palin for vice. I'd even listen to their theocratic preachings.
I Like!
Re: Go USA milf
Surely Sarah Palin for President and Christine O'Donnell for running mate?
Maybe O'Donnell isn't quite in the same milf age bracket as Bachmann, but (theoracy wise) she more than makes up for it with her evolution comments.
Wouldn't that just be the dream team?
Feminine American women ....
would seem to be something of an oxymoron
Bah!
I don't care whether the female representatives of a given political philosophy are Helen of Troy beautiful or hobnail boot ugly so long as what is going on between their (possibly cauliflower) ears has some sort of reasoned sense and isn't simply "our side is American Democracy Made Manifest, theirs is Gay Marriage Socialism run by Muslims". The country, indeed the world as a whole has serious problems and we have to sit through the diatribes of these clowns when we need real leadership and workable ideas.
On a related subject: What a shame the moderators of Presidential debates cannot order a Boot To The Head* for evasive prevarication. Imagine how many people would tune in and pay attention just to see the candidates get a size ten in the left ear every so often. That'd get the electorate informed and active, I'll bet.
Ooh! You could offer the candidates the option of a wet fish instead of the boot as a test of character too!
*Tei Kwon Leap style.
Where the women look masculine, and the men look even more masculine.
Sounds kinda like Prairie Home Companion to me.
