"...as I move from being a rabid Democrat for 40 years towards being a nonpartisan The New Agenda member, I am one of those who have decided that for the time being, I will vote for all women on the ballot. They don’t have to be the smartest, they don’t have to hold any particular view, they don’t have to be the most experienced. They just need to be women. Period.
I don’t believe that any other criteria matters to reach that critical mass of women in power. In 50 years, we have tried other methods for women to reach parity, and though we have made progress, we have stalled out. To do the exact same things and expect a different result is ridiculous."
So says Cynthia Rucci in an excellent piece called Musings on Hyperpartisanship and Gender Voting, posted at The New Agenda.
I concur with her points on the need for all of us to really look at our political beliefs and root out the bipartisan poisoning that causes the knee-jerk reaction we have to those who express different views. This came into focus for me during the last election, in blog posts here that document the journey I have taken from staunch Democratic voter to owning my vote.
I vote for the ticket that meets my criteria, and the most important criteria for me, as a woman, is more women in government. So I also share Rucci's "gender voting" stand, and have written about that numerous times here in the past.
One of my friends put that down as "voting vaginas", which said more about her contempt for women than about my decision to support women.
So I vote vaginas. I voted for McCain/Palin - first vote I ever cast for a Republican. If, in 4 years, there is a woman on the Republican ticket and not on the Democratic one, I'll vote for them again. Had Obama had Hillary as a running mate, that ticket would have gotten my vote.
Thanks to Stray Yellow Dog for pointing in the direction of Rucci's article.