It’s not rocket science. It’s not complicated. The explanation for the results of the 2012 presidential campaign are clear, decisive, and tell a story that is unmistakable in its message. Republicans seem to differ in their analysis of the reason for Romney’s catastrophic loss. Debate moderators, Obama “gifts”, and Chris Christie have all been blamed by Romney or his camp for the loss. Karl Rove explained that the reason for the loss was the failure of the Republican Party to get their message out about the economy. Ann Coulter predicted in February of 2011 that if the GOP didn’t nominate Chris Christie, Romney would be the candidate, and he would lose.  After Romney’s loss, on November 7th, Coulter explained that Romney was a “magnificent” candidate and he lost only because the President was the incumbent.

As a recap of the outcome of the election, remember than Obama won 332 electoral votes to Romney’s 206. Obama won the popular vote by roughly 3,500,000 votes.

Given the overwhelming victory of Obama, it is hard to understand why the GOP continues to deny the obvious. It is just math, and it’s not complicated. The gender gap in the election of 2012 was the largest since Gallup has been measuring those number since 1952. The gender gap in the 2012 election was 20 POINTS. Obama prevailed among female voters by a 12 point margin, and Romney won with male voters by an 8 point margin. Many Republicans are making excuses for the loss of Romney because he wasn’t conservative enough. It’s like saying that the reason the amputee lost the race is that he still had one leg, and if he’d just cut off the other, he could have won. In addition to the many failings of Romney in the 2012 election campaign, there were some glaring deficiencies in his popularity that were specific to women:

1. Had he been in a position to vote for it initially, he would have opposed it. Later it was unclear what his position on it was. Finally the best that he could say was that he CURRENTLY has no plans to repeal it.

2. Romney said he was in touch with the economic challenges facing women because he talked with his wife about it. The first problem with that approach was that Ann Romney was never employed to earn any money.

3. Romney said he supported the Personhood laws, but demonstrated his ignorance regarding the way birth control worked.


4. Romney selected Paul Ryan as his Vice Presidential candidate, who co-authored the forcible rape bill. 


5. When asked during the debate about equal pay for women, Romney claimed that he was proactive in finding women to work in his cabinet.


Yet even his “binders” comment was not truthful. The truth is that women, on their own initiative, brought binders of resumes of women to Romney in an attempt to encourage his hiring of women. Over the last two years of his term, women made up only 25 percent of the 64 new appointments Romney made. By the end of his term, the number of women in high-ranking positions was actually lower than it was before Romney took office.


Thus, the vote of women in 2012 was outcome determinable  Millions of dollars has been spent on political campaigns to try to court potential supporters. However until the GOP changes its approach to women, they will continue to lose every election. Even the men who are donating millions of dollars to Republican campaigns, are smart enough to realize that they are wasting their money if it is used to better publicize their misogynistic attitudes. Who could forget Todd Akin’s explanation about a woman who was “legitimately” raped could shut that whole thing down so that she wouldn’t get pregnant?”

Initially the Republican National Committee and other top GOP officials vowed to withhold money. However before the 2012 election the Missouri Republican Party spent at least $386,000 to help Akin get elected.


Thus the clear message is that the the Republican Party has had a long and colorful history of having candidates who alienate both men and women, who respect women. By supporting Akin, the GOP has demonstrated that they are more committed to winning a majority in the Senate than to having the majority of their Senators respectful and sensitive to issues that directly affect women, and the men who love them. Perhaps the next time somebody like Todd Akin or Richard Mourdock makes an outrageously offensive statement toward women, the GOP will realize that as painful as it may be to give up one or two seats in the Senate, they might gain more in the future by refusing to support men who view women with so much disrespect. Perhaps the GOP needs to realize that the notion that government should “get out of the way” with regard to jobs, employment, and taxes, applies equally to the notion the government should stay out of our bedrooms. It is hypocritical to suggest that the same government that should NOT enact regulations to promote safety and protect the environment, SHOULD enact regulations to determine who people can have sex with in the privacy of their homes, and what should be done with the products of conception. If the government should not be allowed to regulate the production of goods and services in commerce, they sure as hell shouldn’t be allowed to regulate the production of a fertilized egg within a woman’s abdomen.