Obama's Mommy Strategy

The New Republic: Democratic Candidate Is Attempting To Mount A Femisist Challenge To Hillary

(The New Republic)  This column was written by Dana Goldstein.

---

For Barack Obama, it has all come down to the mommies.

Hillary Clinton's commanding lead among Democratic women--as high as 20 points in some nationwide polls--has long been cited as a strength Obama can't overcome. A November Zogby poll found that nationwide, Clinton's 11 percent advantage over Obama was due entirely to her 18 percent lead among women.

But in recent weeks, Obama brought female voters into his column as he pulled even with Clinton in the early primary states. The Des Moines Register's December 1 Iowa poll showed Obama not only winning the overall race by a narrow margin, but for the first time beating Clinton among women, 31 to 26 percent. As the air of inevitability around Clinton vanishes, so does her lock on female voters. And the Obama campaign is trying to lock down his new supporters with a very special appeal to the peacenik earth mother it apparently believes is lurking within every woman (or at least every Democratic primary voter).

A few weeks before Oprah Tour '07, the Obama campaign rolled out a 19-minute web documentary on "why women across the nation are supporting Barack Obama for president." It features a bevy of babies gurgling happily to the strains of folk rock. And with babies, of course, come mommies. Mommies supervising in the park, cutting their children's food up into tiny squares, and generally worrying about stuff. "Ever since I gave birth to my son, which was two and a half years ago, I have felt this, like, my heart ripped open to the world," says a choked-up Gabrielle Grossman, a stay-at-home mom and Obama supporter from Exeter, New Hampshire. "I want to create a world that's safe for my son and has harmony rather than sadness and poverty and grief and fear."

Lord help us if the right wing decides to use this video--it's almost a parody of Democrats as the Mommy Party. We meet Obama campaign COO Betsy Myers as she prepares dinner for her little girl. After all, there's lots of time for those home-cooked meals on the trail! "Women have a guilt gene that men don't have," Myers says. "We're the ones who handle the school, and the days off, and the doctor's appointments."

Though Obama is so ready to talk about "responsible fatherhood" on the stump, the video doesn't contain a single word about breeding this "guilt gene" into the male of the species. Instead, the video serves up a primer on "difference feminism," which holds that women deserve to be involved in politics less because they are inherently equal to men than because they're different--more nurturing, less warlike, and more intuitive, in the ways mothers are supposed to be.

"Women will often prioritize issues differently," says Illinois Representative Jan Schakowsky in the video. Schakowsky, who has endorsed Obama, represents Chicago's affluent suburbs--neighborhoods filled with the type of women the campaign needs to reach. Call it the Whole Foods vote: the half of all college-educated Democratic women, most of them liberal and upper-middle-class, who are skeptical of Hillary Clinton, in large part due to her late arrival on the antiwar bandwagon.

"Women are interested in not sending their children of to war," Schakowsky continues in the video. "Not that men aren't. But I think [women] are more likely to look at personal consequences of what war is all about."

But the truth is that retailing in stereotypes of femininity has never been a very successful way for women to get their voices heard in politics. In the run-up to World War I, a delegation of roving (self-appointed) lady ambassadors traveled the Western nations to implore world leaders, for the sake of mothers, not to send the boys to war. We know how that turned out. The most modern of the American suffragists, such as Alice Paul, understood this--that's why they built their demands on human and civil rights, not women's role as mothers, a position men in politics neither wanted nor respected.

As the Hillary Clinton campaign gathered steam over the past year, feminists, often in spite of past misgivings about the candidate, were excited by what seemed to be a unequivocal message that women's political leadership--not motherhood, or peace rallies, or high-profile female surrogates like Oprah--could change women's lives. Feminist messaging of a particular, second-wave vintage became a defining characteristic of the Clinton primary campaign. "Make history with Hillary!" was one early slogan. At her alma mater, Wellesley College, Clinton told students her election would help American women "shatter that highest glass ceiling" of what she called the "boys club of presidential politics." The theme was not feminine difference, but gender equality, as represented by the symbol of one woman reaching the highest heights of power.

But the Clinton campaign, too, can stereotype women's concerns in its attempts to win their votes. For weeks, they've been hammering the story of Obama's noncommittal "present" votes on seven Illinois State Senate bills that attempted to limit women's access to abortion. Illinois Planned Parenthood says it urged Obama to vote "present" to preserve a pro-choice seat in the legislature, but the Clinton camp isn't backing down--on December 20 they hosted a conference call with reporters to attack the votes further.

Even if feminists come to be less than over-the-moon about Obama's record on choice, the fact is that they are not likely to base their votes on shades of grey in candidates' reproductive rights records. The war in Iraq, the economy, and health care consistently poll as the top issues on the minds of American women, Republican or Democrat, with terrorism, the environment, and education occupying a second tier. The priorities of male voters are almost indistinguishable.

In such a climate, does Barack Obama's message of feminine difference make sense? The campaign, of course, is desperate to connect the strong antiwar views of grassroots Democrats to their candidate's long history of opposition to the war. Clinton has been able to neutralize that threat in part by promising to withdraw the troops, but also, when it comes to women, by becoming a vessel for lifetimes of frustration with male-dominated politics. The Obama campaign is responding by subtly suggesting that Clinton's original support for the Iraq war was anti-feminist, like all wars, and a failure to, as Schakowsky puts it, "consider the personal consequences of what war is all about." Was it more anti-feminist than voting against--or running against--the first viable female presidential candidate? The answer to that question depends on what kind of feminism one subscribes to.

Perhaps Clinton fears Obama's mommy shtick, because lately, she's adopted it. One recent Iowa TV advertisement steps away from the "make history" rhetoric to focus on--yep--motherhood. "Hey, I'm a girl!" it seems to scream, as Clinton appears alongside her mother, Dorothy Rodham, and her daughter, Chelsea, at campaign events and in an antiseptic kitchen. "My mom taught me to stand up for myself, and stand up for those who can't do it on their own," Clinton narrates as the words "Hillary lives with her mom," flash across the screen. She continues, "I'm proud to live by those values, but what I'm most proud of is knowing who I've passed them on to." The camera settles on a smiling Chelsea, currently standing up for others by working for a hedge fund.

Like Obama's web documentary, the commercial is cheesy, off-putting, and chock full of stereotypes, even as it manages to convey sentiments that feel, at least to me, somehow emotionally true. But no matter how viscerally distasteful, this campaign for the hearts and minds of Democratic women will only kick into higher gear over the coming weeks and months. Women are more likely to be Democrats (they represent 60 percent of Iowa Democratic caucus-goers), more likely to make it to the polls (in 2004, 54 percent of the electorate was female), and more likely to choose their candidates late in the game. Let the pandering begin.

Dana Goldstein is a writing fellow at The American Prospect.

[PulSamsara]

Barack Obama for President of the United States of America.
It''s time to Rise and Shine again.

[Blondshag]

........all people smile in the same language.

VOTE-HILLARY CLINTON-CHANGE MACHINE FOR AMERICA 2008.

Hillary is experienced and ready to do the Presidential duties on day one.

Hillary is well educated and can get the job done.

Hillary is a very hard worker, she is truly committed.

Hillary will do great things for America.

Hillary is THE CHANGE MACHINE FOR AMERICA AND READY TO GET THE WHEELS OF CHANGE ROLLING FOR ALL AS PRESIDENT.

YOU GO GIRL!!!!!!!
YOU GO GIRL!!!!!!!
YOU GO GIRL!!!!!!!

WHO LET THE DOGS OUT
WHO LET THE DOGS OUT

YOU GO GIRL!!!!!!!
YOU GO GIRL!!!!!!!
YOU GO GIRL!!!!!!!

[samthetvcat]

This author is very fringe and self-absorbed, talking about ''stereotypes'' and ''feminist messaging'' . . . who thinks and talks like that in this day and age?

[dinslc]

I''m a 36 year old woman, and i consider myself feminist. Saying someone like me is "more anti-feminist" for "voting against...the first viable female presidential candidate", is RIDICULOUS AND INSULTING.

Any feminist who is intellectually able to grasp complex issues, would conclude that Hillary herself is the "anti feminist" candidate.

This is a woman whose career plan was to ride the back of her man to success, never intending to fight for anything on her own. Hillary Clinton is the opposite of a feminist, and to support her just because she is a woman, when she is the least qualified candidate is an INSULT to women everywhere who have fought for success, pulling their own weight, and have succeeded-- NOT by riding a man to the top.

It is sending this message to young girls: ''Yeah, honey, you can be president- as long as you marry right!''

Hillary''s nomination would reinforce the sexist stereotypes that women have been fighting in the workplace for years. How would nominating a woman who LITERALLY "slept her way to the top" help fight myths regarding women''s success?

I look forward to the day when we elect a woman as president.


Hillary does not deserve to be president. If it weren''t for her man, she may very well have been a successful lawyer- but certainly not a candidate for president. I hate Hillary''s message, that women can''t succeed on their own.

To say women should vote for her because she is a woman, is sexist and insulting.

[docjulia]

I do not consider Hillary Clinton advancing the professional women''s role well, she did not get to her position on her own merit but by marrying well. She was not at the top of her class (she didn''t even graduate Yale with Honors, let along Magna *** Laude).

Hillary does not send a good message to young girls. We need to tell them they can advance on their own, and can marry whoever they want, not just someone to help them get ahead.

[patintexas]

As a feminist, I am offended by Hillary''s use of the word ''girl'' to describe herself. I fought too long to be not called girl when I was an adult woman to listen to a female candidate for president describe herself that way. And, since I really don''t think Hillary thinks of herself as a girl, she must be pandering for the vote of females who can''t get their gender description straight.

[patintexas]

As a feminist, I am offended by Hillary''s use of the word ''girl'' to describe herself. I fought too long to be not called girl when I was an adult woman to listen to a female candidate for president describe herself that way. And, since I really don''t think Hillary thinks of herself as a girl, she must be pandering for the vote of females who can''t get their gender description straight.

P.S. I agree with you, dinsic.

[patintexas]

Sorry for the multiple postings!

[lvdragonlady-2009]

I was a ''feminist''(I hate that word) before it became popular. Women who are offended by being called ''girl'' need to get over it. You know who you are, so why let someone else rain on your parade? Hilary is NOT going to help make things better for women, she is in this strickly for herself, not the country. She needs to be stopped!
No I am not a ''red'' or a ''blue'' I am me and voted for what or who I consider to be the right person/thing to do, not the popular thing to do.

[wooha3]

I am a feminist, Mother, and Grandmother and will vote for a leader who will protect our Constitution, protect our rights by respecting separation of church and state, and will go to war only as a last resort. Hillary Clinton supported Bush''s war 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006 and 2007 up to her presidential bid. And even after running, voted yes on the Kyle-Lieberman amendment in support of Bush. Senator Obama spoke out against the war consistently!

I believe that feminists in America would never put a woman in office simply because she is a woman. I will vote for Senator Obama because his record shows a deep concern for women. He is a peace maker, and will bring strong diplomatic leadership. Obama 08!

[afsc30574]

"I believe that feminists in America would never put a woman in office simply because she is a woman."

Wrong, again. Some women will vote for Hillary, just because she''s woman, and tell themselves that men do the same thing. The fact that they''ve probably never met a man whose done that doesn''t matter. Some men did it, so all men are guilty: that''s the historical cry of Feminism. To quote the line from "Shirley Valentine": "All men are potential rapists."

Here in Michigan, our Governor presides over the worst economy in the 50 states, yet she was reelected. How? Women voting for a women. Exit polls show women voted for her overwhemingly, even across party lines. Sexism is alive and well, but it''s okay, as long as only men get discriminated against "cause now they know how it feels".

[kansas1946]

will vote for Senator Obama because his record shows a deep concern for women. He is a peace maker, and will bring strong diplomatic leadership. Obama 08!


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by Wooha3 at 04:08 PM : Dec 26, 2007
************************************

Wooha3, you go girl! I agree 100pct. I am also a feminist, a mother, a wife, and a grandmother. The Republicans can''t stand the Democrats edging in on their "family values" turf, as if the Republicans ever owned that turf. I want a leader that I don''t have to live in fear of them getting us into global skirmishes that we have no business in, creating hatred and disgust for our country around the world, and spending my grandchildren into insolvency from birth.

[nativewoman]

Posted by afsc30574 at 04:48 PM : Dec 26, 2007

Apparently it didn''t hurt your governor''s election that 52% of the male voters also voted for her although males comprised only 48% of the electorate.

Additionally, she won across all age groups as well as across all education groups, income groups and racial groups.

She took 53% of the Protestant vote, 56% of the Catholic vote, 71% of the other religion vote, and 72% of the vote of those who claimed no religion. She even took 47% of the born-again or evangelical Christian vote which comprised only 33% of the electorate. She even took 51% of the vote of those who attended church weekly.

She also took 63% of the vote of those who felt the state economy was good or excellent and 58% of the vote who felt the state economy was not good or poor.

50% of fathers voted for her as well as 53% of men with no children.

Yep, it must have been those evil women who put her in office not the fact that she took most of the vote across the demographic groups of age, education, race, religion and income.

[royeyk]

I''m Canadian so my interest is more about who we can get along with. I think you have an embarrassment of riches in the Democrat candidates. Either of these candidates is going to advance women''s issues. I like the idea of a black American president but Bill beat us up so badly on economic issues, while making us think we liked it, that I''m probably just afraid of his wife.

[cbs_oliver]

CBS needs to stop it''s preference for right wing opinions.

[afsc30574]

You missed the point, but succeeded in proving mine. I didn''t say men weren''t fair minded, so quoting all those stats on men means what when were talking about women voting for a woman candidate? I realize that to Democrats 52% is a lot, since Bill Clinton never got more than 49% of the popular vote. But that 52% was insignificant compared to the percentage of women who voted for Granholm. And I never said women were evil, but because I said that some women might have the same failings as some men, it must be evil. Remember, no woman leader ever started a war! Well, except for a couple of Queens and Margret Thatcher. But other than them, none!

[afsc30574]

NativeWoman,

CNN''s exit polls are not exactly the same as "facts", but even your source shows Gov. Grnholm did not receive the majority of the Protestant vote:

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2006/pages/results/states/MI/G/00/epolls.0.html

Also, I seriously quetion the intelligence of anyone who thought the Michigan economy was good in 2006, and history shows that Gov. Granholm has proven to be completely inept in handling it since then.

[nativewoman]

Posted by afsc30574 at 09:12 AM : Dec 27, 2007

You are the one who originally referred to "exit polls".

So how do you explain the 52% of the overall male vote as well as the 50% of fathers and the 53% of men with no children?

So the men voting for your governor were "fair minded" while the women voting for your governor were indulging in "sexism"? Interesting assessment.

[logicanada]

Seems to me that polls in the early caucus states have Hillary well behind Obama in popularity among liberal women but ahead nationally based solely on name recognition. Perhaps this article is attempting misdirection by confusing the two.