Politics by the Numbers

A recent poll illustrated that George W. Bush’s approval rating is at 33% a year before the November elections. Moreover, that same poll noted that 75% of Americans wanted him out of office. This is an interesting number when you compare it to those of Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton. At the mark a year before elections, 55% of the population wanted Reagan out of office while just 47% of Americans wanted Bill out; strategists have been paying close attention to single women as the ‘08 campaign emerges. For the first time in our nation’s political history, single women have a slight advantage over married women. This number is important because recent statistics that measure political socialization tells us that single women are more liberal, and tend to favor the Democratic Party, unlike their sex counterpart. You may recall that during the ‘04 campaign Republicans made a big push to recruit soccer moms, who traditionally speaking favored traditional values, conservative social policies, and placed a greater emphasis on the family.

I suspect in the next few weeks, if you have yet to see it, a series of commercials will be airing to recruit single women. I imagine the commercials will target the beauty of being a bright independent woman who has made great gains socially and professionally. Because lower class women turn out at the polls in far fewer numbers in comparison to their middle class counterpart, those adds will probably place some normative value on these characteristics: professional class lesbian women, CEOs, academics, etc.

16 Responses to “Politics by the Numbers”


  1. 1 Kristi November 6, 2007 at 3:28 am

    Goody. I love it when they attempt to manipulate me.

  2. 2 Edward Carson November 6, 2007 at 3:39 am

    They (Democrats) have been manipulating me and the rest of the bretheran for years. I have little choice but to vote sociaist on the smaller scale (if possible) and Democrat at the national level. I hate the throw away concept.

  3. 3 teacherwoman November 6, 2007 at 9:24 am

    …and NASCAR moms?

  4. 4 Walker Parkhill November 6, 2007 at 9:30 am

    Numbers (Statistics) have become meaningless to me.

    Death counts, Abortion rates, accident rates, and all the things I hear that try to tell me I am stupid because I am American.

    Sure it’s sad when someone dies, and sure it’s important to know that most teens die in drunk driving accident, but the second you start to shove your , albeit compassionate, political agenda down my throat with your so called accurate numbers, you’ve lost me.

    I’m not trying to pull the “I’m not just another statistic” argument, I just disagree with the use of statistics as a way of persuasion, in most cases.

    Oh and most political statistics differ according to who you hear them from.

    Hmm I don’t think any of that related to your post Carson…

  5. 5 Edward Carson November 6, 2007 at 9:47 am

    No…not really, but I like the rant. Those are pretty important numbers, though. Very difficult to ignore that we might be seeing history made as this president joins Andrew Johnson and Ulysses S Grant as the worst presidents ever.

    See here.

  6. 6 Walker Parkhill November 6, 2007 at 10:09 am

    Johnson just got caught up going against the radical republican senate…
    Grant was a bad president?
    My American history didn’t teach me much.

    Maybe this is just due to my elitist views, but I feel a significant amount of the American people don’t like Bush because we are at war…and the media tells me of all these people dieing… it’s ALL the president’s fault

    Am I wrong with that statement?

  7. 7 Edward Carson November 6, 2007 at 10:23 am

    You are right. People hate his ego and inability to listen. Sounds like you learned a lot in that US history course.

  8. 8 Jon Magiera November 6, 2007 at 10:33 am

    Walker, your American history taught you the French and Indian War was the 30 Years War…

  9. 9 Walker Parkhill November 6, 2007 at 12:01 pm

    At least I was smart enough to catch that one Jon

  10. 10 Edward Carson November 6, 2007 at 5:35 pm

    What!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Are you serious? Did your professor say that? What a sersious mistake. This is a Joke.

  11. 11 Sam Driver November 7, 2007 at 1:12 am

    Wow, that’s terrible. By the way, I agree with Walker’s rant. For some odd reason, the statistical numbers (those supposed to be facts and set in stone), seem to vary from source to source.. Especially when it comes to their political views.. Coincidence?

  12. 12 Edward Carson November 7, 2007 at 3:44 am

    You would agree with Walker.

  13. 13 Sam Driver November 7, 2007 at 10:37 am

    What a Jon-esque thing to say.

  14. 14 Sam Driver November 7, 2007 at 10:38 am

    By the way Carson, are you being skeptical of the recruiting of women in such a way? Both parties do this to pull in the loose ends and attract some of the minorities not previously associated with their particular party.

  15. 15 Edward Carson November 9, 2007 at 12:51 am

    No…I am serious. Women are no longer the second sex of politics.

  16. 16 Kristi November 9, 2007 at 1:04 am

    Women will be the second sex of politics until a woman is elected commander in chief. It’s not enough to for it to be ok to run, it needs to be ok to win, and until that happens, we are not equal.


Leave a Reply




Blogging Since June '06

  • 256,749 Visitors

Feel Free to E-mail Carson at

ecarson@houstonchristianhs.org or leave a comment