At the same time, Romney has spent much time on persuading women. According to that article in LA Times, “Even as Romney focused his remarks Wednesday on the economy, his campaign launched a new TV spot that sought to reassure women — especially more moderate women — about his positions on contraception and abortion.” There was a common misunderstanding about Romney’s stance. Indeed, Romney does act inconsistently regarding to contraception, which confuses the public and infuriates the democrats. A lot of women thought Romney was opposed to all abortions as well as contraception because Romney once supported a measure that would allow any employer to refuse to include contraception coverage in their insurance plans. Now that Romney decides to court the female vote, he has made himself more appealing to women. As a result, the poll found out that Women gave Romney a second look. And one of the reasons is probably that women have learned that Romney does not oppose contraception at all and allows for abortion in the cases of rape, incest or to spare the life of the mother.
Moreover, in order to defend himself, Romney questioned "Why is it that there are 3.6 million more women in poverty today than when the president took office?" during a stop at Tidewater Community College in Chesapeake. "This president has failed America's women. They've suffered." Romney’s question would be a stifling one to the supporters of Obama. Since the public tend to vote based on how the current president is doing, which political scientists define as retrospective voting, Romney’s words remind women that Obama is not doing well and women would be more likely to vote for Romney. However, Robert Durant, a professor of public policy points out a potential problem of the female vote. He worries that "Women with families are especially busy. They arrive at the theater midway through the third act,look around, and decide who the heroes and villains are.” This way of dealing with election also troubles Menand, a professor at Harvard. “The unpolitical animal”, he described those people who use shortcuts to reach judgments about political candidates. Although these shortcuts are as good as the long and winding road of reading party platforms and listening to candidate debates, to value more aspects and to think again before they vote would always be cautious for people, who are emotional and careless in general.
{[['']]}