In a recent edition of Brain, Child (Fall, 2007) Tracy Mayor informed that it's no longer a soccer-moms world http://www.brainchildmag.com/toc/indexfall07.asp. Apparently, Soccer moms are no longer the desired demographic. The new demographic is labeled the "Single, Anxious Woman". The "SAW" is fearful and under-educated. She wants the laws to be tougher on criminals, is on the fence about choice and is willing to swing. Nonetheless, now that the soccer-moms have been passed over for a new, younger model the debates have moved far away from education. Even the Health care debates are more about which democratic candidate is less afraid to sound like a socialist then they are about the realities of un-and under-insured kids and families.
I attempted to watch the Republican debates last night, but failed as I drifted in and out of sleep (winter colds have left me seriously sleep deprived as my two year old has now decided that "mama's bed" is the new hot sleeping destination). Still, I watched a lot of the pre-game show, Tucker (whom I usually refer to by a name that mistakes the "T" for an "F") and Chris Mathews seemed to think that Giuliani is out unless he makes a run with Huckabee and that Hillary is just plain unelectable. I think that Huckabee is making a real run and I have to say, Huckabee scares me. He seems like he could just emerge at the top getting the "good-guy" vote from folks who are watching TV, but not listening to what he's saying. He's got a "compassionate conservative" jive going on and I'm worried.
What's hopeful about the soccer-moms loosing their desired demographic status is that perhaps that means that we've stopped swinging. That eight years of GWB has forced us to realize that republican's just aren't for us. Let's hope that we SMs out number the SAWs because I think that this election is starting to feel like 2000 all over again.
Thursday, November 29, 2007
Friday, September 7, 2007
Oh Bama!
Did you see Barack Obama on the Jon Stewart show recently?
I saw the rerun last night. Amazing. The question came up about narratives -- the stories that the media tell over and over. For this campaign, the narrative is that Hillary has more experience and Barack has more appeal.
Barack's response was right on. Basically he said, what people mean by someone having experience is that you trust them to make good decisions. He went on to say that Cheney and Rumsfeld had long resumes, which means lots of experience, right? But that didn't turn out to be such a good thing.
His key message of the night was that he is to be trusted to make good decisions. I commented to my husband that Barack seems genuine, real, while Hillary is a politician. "Manufactured" was his word.
Leah may have something to say about all this though. Any other reactions to experience vs. appeal?
I saw the rerun last night. Amazing. The question came up about narratives -- the stories that the media tell over and over. For this campaign, the narrative is that Hillary has more experience and Barack has more appeal.
Barack's response was right on. Basically he said, what people mean by someone having experience is that you trust them to make good decisions. He went on to say that Cheney and Rumsfeld had long resumes, which means lots of experience, right? But that didn't turn out to be such a good thing.
His key message of the night was that he is to be trusted to make good decisions. I commented to my husband that Barack seems genuine, real, while Hillary is a politician. "Manufactured" was his word.
Leah may have something to say about all this though. Any other reactions to experience vs. appeal?
Thursday, August 23, 2007
V-Day campaign in Congo
I've known about Eve Ensler and her creation, The Vagina Monolgoues, for years since I saw the play in Baltimore. But I wasn't aware of the depth of her work overseas until I read about it in the Asheville Citizen-Times today (of all places to find interesting international news!). Here's the link to the V-Day site: http://www.vday.org/contents/drcongo. I could try and summarize it, but her words are more powerful than mine. This made the pit of my stomach hurt more than anything I've come across in a long, long time. It's worth reading.
Monday, August 13, 2007
Brand sandwich
Our blog covers all things related to motherhood and families, which includes the politics of food. The results of a recent study revealed that children prefer food if it's in a McDonald's wrapper, even if it's carrots. Here's a summary of the findings:
"By the early age of 3 to 5 years, low-income preschool children preferred the tastes of foods and drinks if they thought they were from McDonald’s, demonstrating that brand identity can influence young children's taste perceptions. This was true even for carrots, a food that was not marketed by or available from McDonald’s. These taste preferences emerged despite the fact that 3 of the foods were from McDonald's and only the branding was changed, indicating that the effects were not due to familiarity with the taste or smell of McDonald's food. Even the children with the lowest frequency of eating food from McDonald's had average positive total preference scores, indicating they preferred more of the branded foods ."
You can read the full report from the Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine at:
http://archpedi.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/161/8/792?tr=y&auid=2909446.
The sad thing is that I'm not even surprised. Over three years of coordinating a childhood obesity prevention program showed me how far and deep the work needs to go to completely change the youth food culture of this country.
What do you think?
"By the early age of 3 to 5 years, low-income preschool children preferred the tastes of foods and drinks if they thought they were from McDonald’s, demonstrating that brand identity can influence young children's taste perceptions. This was true even for carrots, a food that was not marketed by or available from McDonald’s. These taste preferences emerged despite the fact that 3 of the foods were from McDonald's and only the branding was changed, indicating that the effects were not due to familiarity with the taste or smell of McDonald's food. Even the children with the lowest frequency of eating food from McDonald's had average positive total preference scores, indicating they preferred more of the branded foods ."
You can read the full report from the Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine at:
http://archpedi.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/161/8/792?tr=y&auid=2909446.
The sad thing is that I'm not even surprised. Over three years of coordinating a childhood obesity prevention program showed me how far and deep the work needs to go to completely change the youth food culture of this country.
What do you think?
Thursday, August 9, 2007
On Message
As a public relations professional, I spend a lot of time thinking and talking about messages. Key messages, staying on message, getting our message out there. This morning in a meeting, a colleague brought up an example of how Hillary Clinton is a pro at staying on message.
During the debate monday night, John Edwards critized Hillary Clinton for appearing on the cover of Fortune magazine. (The headline was: Business Loves Hillary!). Edwards said we'd never see him on the cover of Fortune stating "I am the candidate that big corporate America is betting on.") Edwards turned to Clinton for a response. What was Hillary's reply?
That's she's here to unite the party. As my colleague observed, Hillary came off looking like the peacemaker. Edwards attacked and Clinton didn't bite. She stayed on message. And came out looking the best.
For more commentary, also check out: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2007/08/07/edwards-slams-hillary-for_n_59571.html.
During the debate monday night, John Edwards critized Hillary Clinton for appearing on the cover of Fortune magazine. (The headline was: Business Loves Hillary!). Edwards said we'd never see him on the cover of Fortune stating "I am the candidate that big corporate America is betting on.") Edwards turned to Clinton for a response. What was Hillary's reply?
That's she's here to unite the party. As my colleague observed, Hillary came off looking like the peacemaker. Edwards attacked and Clinton didn't bite. She stayed on message. And came out looking the best.
For more commentary, also check out: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2007/08/07/edwards-slams-hillary-for_n_59571.html.
Sunday, July 29, 2007
Got questions for Councilwoman Cape?
For the Asheville locals --
This week on Listen2Women, we'll be interviewing City Councilwoman Robin Cape. The show airs on WPVM 103.5 FM on Thursday, Aug. 2 from 5-6 p.m.
If you have a burning question for her, you can post it on this blog and I'll make sure to add it to my list. Partisan elections? Local immigration concerns? Asheville going green? Or maybe you want to hear about life as a political mom? Or her band The Buckerettes?
She helped start the Listen2Women show several years ago, so it will be great to have her in the studio. We'll also be taking calls live during the show if yould like to chat with her on-air (828-258-0085).
Tune in to WPVM 103.5 FM or listen live at http://www.wpvm.org/ this Thursday, Aug. 2 from 5-6 p.m. If you miss the show live, you can listen anytime on the WPVM archives.
This week on Listen2Women, we'll be interviewing City Councilwoman Robin Cape. The show airs on WPVM 103.5 FM on Thursday, Aug. 2 from 5-6 p.m.
If you have a burning question for her, you can post it on this blog and I'll make sure to add it to my list. Partisan elections? Local immigration concerns? Asheville going green? Or maybe you want to hear about life as a political mom? Or her band The Buckerettes?
She helped start the Listen2Women show several years ago, so it will be great to have her in the studio. We'll also be taking calls live during the show if yould like to chat with her on-air (828-258-0085).
Tune in to WPVM 103.5 FM or listen live at http://www.wpvm.org/ this Thursday, Aug. 2 from 5-6 p.m. If you miss the show live, you can listen anytime on the WPVM archives.
Monday, July 16, 2007
ranting at the Times
It's hard to say away from the national elections. At some point when my schedule clears (enough so I can see over my desk) I'd like to spend more time exploring local activists and politics. Nonetheless, I read something every week that sparks an idea, a thought or an outrage.
In this Sunday's New York Times magazine (7-14-07) Matt Bai made a grievous error in his rush to make a point. His article, "What Does It Take?" seeks to explore the lack of "Washington experience" that the current candidates have. His thesis, however, delves more deeply into why a lack of experience is palatable for the American people. His point is a good one, but he lost me with this statement, " Today most of the leading presidential candidates have other kinds of experience that are arguably just as relevant to the presidency as years logged in statehouses or the Capitol--living at the White House..."
LIVING AT THE WHITE HOUSE????? Thank you Mr. Bai for acknowledging that there might be "other kinds of experiences" that make a candidate viable for the highest office, but to reduce Hillary Clinton's contribution to the Clinton Administration (or any First Lady's contribution to the presidency for that matter) to a mere "living at the White House" is outrageous. The role of the First Lady is tremendous and Hillary carried a full calendar both as an international ambassador and policy wonk. Actually, the chief complaint of her time living in the White House was that she was too involved. Hillary was so involved, and dare I say, effective that she was subject to a full scale GOP attack that she weathered with quite a bit of grace.
This involved role of the First Lady is not new, Lady Bird Johnson took the beautification committee to the next level ensuring the protection and expansion of wild areas and flowers. I won't even go into the role of sweet Mrs. Roosevelt.
I for one am not going to let the media get away with reducing our contributions to politics. Within the walls that have been set around us women have done great things. So many, in fact that we have our first female candidate for president who might actually get the nomination and quite frankly, she's the most qualified candidate for the job.
In this Sunday's New York Times magazine (7-14-07) Matt Bai made a grievous error in his rush to make a point. His article, "What Does It Take?" seeks to explore the lack of "Washington experience" that the current candidates have. His thesis, however, delves more deeply into why a lack of experience is palatable for the American people. His point is a good one, but he lost me with this statement, " Today most of the leading presidential candidates have other kinds of experience that are arguably just as relevant to the presidency as years logged in statehouses or the Capitol--living at the White House..."
LIVING AT THE WHITE HOUSE????? Thank you Mr. Bai for acknowledging that there might be "other kinds of experiences" that make a candidate viable for the highest office, but to reduce Hillary Clinton's contribution to the Clinton Administration (or any First Lady's contribution to the presidency for that matter) to a mere "living at the White House" is outrageous. The role of the First Lady is tremendous and Hillary carried a full calendar both as an international ambassador and policy wonk. Actually, the chief complaint of her time living in the White House was that she was too involved. Hillary was so involved, and dare I say, effective that she was subject to a full scale GOP attack that she weathered with quite a bit of grace.
This involved role of the First Lady is not new, Lady Bird Johnson took the beautification committee to the next level ensuring the protection and expansion of wild areas and flowers. I won't even go into the role of sweet Mrs. Roosevelt.
I for one am not going to let the media get away with reducing our contributions to politics. Within the walls that have been set around us women have done great things. So many, in fact that we have our first female candidate for president who might actually get the nomination and quite frankly, she's the most qualified candidate for the job.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)