Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: SilentZ who wrote (280100)	3/14/2006 12:10:39 PM
From: Road Walker	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1586630

Z, re: Think about it this way: If 0% of men won't vote for a man because he's a man, but 15% of women won't vote for a woman because she's a woman, and most elections are decided by 10% of the vote or less, doesn't that put women at a disadvantage? Don't you have to add in the men that won't for a woman because she's a woman? You might get, say, 25% on that. John

To: SilentZ who wrote (280100)	3/15/2006 12:30:52 AM
From: Elroy	Respond to of 1586630

If 0% of men won't vote for a man because he's a man, but 15% of women won't vote for a woman because she's a woman, and most elections are decided by 10% of the vote or less, doesn't that put women at a disadvantage? Not if 15% of women will definitely vote for a woman candidate because she's a woman. The "no women" and the "yes women" teams offset each other. But anyway, Americans are "brainwashed" (as you say) to vote for whoever they think will do the best job in running the government. Find me the women that will not vote for other women- I don't know them. You can't just create them by fiat.