A Man, Duh Marcotte:
A new poll from Public Policy Polling is making headlines this week because it reveals that 57 percent of Republican primary voters want to make Christianity the national religion, even though doing so would require removing the First Amendment from the Constitution. Even more interestingly, the data shows a stark gender divide among Republicans polled on this question: 66 percent of Republican women versus 49 percent of Republican men would like to see America become more theocratic.
Overall, the data suggests that there may be an intriguing gender divide when it comes to the motivations of Republican voters, with results showing men to be more motivated by economic reasons and women drawn to conservative politics for more religious and social reasons. Other interesting gender gaps: Men are nearly twice as likely as women to identify themselves as “Tea Party”; 73 percent of Republican men refuse to accept that climate change is real, compared with 57 percent of Republican women; and Republican men are actually more likely than Republican women to accept evolutionary theory, with 43 percent of men versus 30 percent of women expressing a belief in evolution. Since climate change denialism is more tied up in anti-environmentalist sentiment and evolution denialism is primarily about religion, this divide makes perfect sense.
The gender divide persists when the poll looks at which potential primary candidates male and female Republicans support. Politicians who are seen as more libertarian or more supportive of corporate interests (Rand Paul, Scott Walker) get more love from men, whereas candidates that are more on the Bible-thumping side of the equation (Mike Huckabee) are more popular with women. Of all potential candidates, Huckabee had the highest favorability rating among women.
There’s been an increased interest in recent years in what motivates Republican women, particularly as the party has amped up its assault on reproductive rights. This data, which jibes with countless studies have shown that women are more likely to be religious than men, helps answer that question: It’s religion.
Shorter: Them Republican bitches be whack, yo!
To really understand her post you need to know that in addition to being a radical feminist and a misandrist, A Man, Duh Marcotte is also a radical atheist and a far-left progressive Democrat. She hates men more than any hetero woman I ever heard of, and her radical views on men and religion got her kicked off the John Edwards campaign staff.
On January 30, 2007, the John Edwards 2008 presidential campaign hired Marcotte to act as the campaign’s blogmaster. She was soon criticized for her previous work.  The campaign responded that, while Edwards was “personally offended” by some of Marcotte’s remarks, her job as their blogmaster was secure.
In January 2007, Marcotte wrote controversial statements about the Duke lacrosse case, including that people who defended the accused were “rape-loving scum”. A few months before all charges were dropped in the case, on a blog post titled “Stuck at the airport again…..” Marcotte wrote in part, “Can’t a few white boys sexually assault a black woman anymore without people getting all wound up about it? So unfair.” The post attracted criticism, including from The New York Times. Cathy Young described Marcotte as a leader of a “cyber-lynch mob,” writing that, “in Marcotte’s eyes, the real crime of the independent feminists is helping preserve the idea that the presumption of innocence applies even in cases of rape and sexual assault.” Marcotte later deleted the post.
On February 12, 2007, the Catholic League called Marcotte’s review of the film Children of Men “anti-Christian”. Later the same day, Marcotte announced that she had resigned from the Edwards campaign, accusing Bill Donohue of a sexist perspective in the calls for her resignation. She returned to her work on other blogs. In an article for Salon a few days later, she said the reaction to her comments on the Duke lacrosse case was the first in a series of “shitstorms” that had prompted her to resign from the campaign.
A Man, Duh lacks the objectivity to evaluate the motives and life choices of conservative Christian women. Is it possible that these women she is talking about are Christians and Republicans because they are by nature conservative? A Man, Duh doesn’t have any kids. Perhaps motherhood has an effect on some women that makes them more conservative and/or spiritual.
There simply isn’t enough data to do anything more than superficial analysis. Mix that with a strong preexisting bias and the conclusions will be suspect, to say the least.