GOP does a job on attempting to smear Democratic female candidates but Democrats are successfully fighting back

...................................................................................................................................................................
Outrage Over Sexist Remarks Turns Into a Political Fund-Raising Tool
By Amy Chozick, February 27, 2014

In the past few months, Republicans have called Wendy Davis, a Democratic candidate for Texas governor, “Abortion Barbie,” likened Alison Lundergan Grimes, a Senate candidate from Kentucky, to an “empty dress,” criticized Hillary Rodham Clinton’s thighs, and referred to a pregnant woman as a “host.”

Democrats do not just get mad when they hear those words. They cash in.

In fact, they are trying to find even more examples by tracking Republican opponents, their surrogates and conservative news media personalities, then blasting their comments out to supporters to build voter lists and drum up donations, casting aside the well-worn advice to shrug off sexist comments lest they draw attention to gender over issues.

It is proving effective. Emily’s List, the political action committee that backs female candidates who support abortion rights, has raised a record $25 million this election cycle. On Tuesday, the group put out an online petition, “Tell the G.O.P.: Pregnant Women Are Not ‘Hosts,’ ” after Steve Martin, a state senator in Virginia, referred to a pregnant woman as the child’s “host” in a Facebook message.

“Instead of fearing sexist attacks, we wait gleefully for the next one,” said Jen Bluestein, a political strategist who formerly ran communications at Emily’s List.

Republicans are trying to counter with their own war over the so-called war on women, saying that sexist attacks cut across parties and pointing to Democrats’ criticism of Sarah Palin and other conservative women. “They’re exploiting women for their political gain and political playbook,” said Brook Hougesen, a spokeswoman for the National Republican Senatorial Committee.

Republicans say that promoting these types of comments is part of a broader Democratic strategy to portray them as out of touch with women in an effort to shift the focus from unpopular issues associated with the Obama administration.

“I’m more than just a set of reproductive organs and I’d like someone to talk to me about how they’ll help my pocketbook and keep my health care plan that I like, and Democrats don’t have a good response to that,” said Katie Packer Gage, deputy campaign manager for Mitt Romney in 2012 who recently started a consultancy to advise Republican candidates about outreach to women. “If I were them, I’d want to turn it into ‘Abortion Barbie,’ too.”

With a record number of women in Congress and dozens more on the ballot, gender-charged attacks — stoked by the growth of social media and small-dollar Internet donations — can generate signatures and contributions in an instant. Battleground Texas, a group working to elect Democrats in Texas, for example, quadrupled its Facebook following after posting past comments by the rock musician Ted Nugent in which he had used terms like “fat pig” and “worthless” to describe women. Mr. Nugent has campaigned for Ms. Davis’s Republican rival, Greg Abbott.

Ms. Gage said Mr. Nugent and Erick Erickson, editor of the conservative news website Red State, who referred to Ms. Davis as “Abortion Barbie,” do not represent the Republican Party.

But surrogates’ comments can be effective tools in portraying a candidate as anti-woman, Democrats said. In an email to The Hill newspaper, Brad Dayspring, communications director at the National Republican Senatorial Committee, referred to Ms. Grimes as an “empty dress,” because he said she lacked specifics on policies.

The Grimes campaign promptly sent supporters an email titled “Empty Dress” associating Mr. Dayspring’s comment with Ms. Grimes’s opponent, Senator Mitch McConnell. “Senator McConnell should also know that sexist, offensive remarks will only fire up our campaign that much more,” Ms. Grimes wrote in the email, which included a link to make a donation. Mr. Dayspring declined to comment. Allison Ball, a McConnell surrogate, said Ms. Grimes “only cares about sexism when it’s politically beneficial.”

The turnout among female voters could sway the most significant races this year because, although they outnumber men, women do not vote in midterm elections in the same proportion as in presidential contests. In 2010, 51 percent of female voters chose Republicans, helping the party regain a majority in the House of Representatives. In 2012, women favored Democrats, with 55 percent voting to re-elect President Obama, compared with 44 percent for Mr. Romney.

How female candidates deal with attacks also has implications beyond 2014, particularly if Mrs. Clinton were to run for president in 2016.

In August, Ready for Hillary, a “super PAC” that supports a Clinton candidacy, sent out an email after the Hillary Project, an anti-Clinton PAC, released an online game “that allows viewers to virtually slap the former secretary of state across the face.” Adam Parkhomenko, executive director of Ready for Hillary, promptly pleaded for donations. “Instead of getting mad, we should get organized,” he wrote in the email to supporters. “That’s why I hope you’ll make a contribution today.” The attack led to a 40 percent uptick in web traffic and online contributions to Ready for Hillary compared with its normal daily average.

Traditional wisdom held that a candidate responding directly could seem abrasive, said Celinda Lake, a Democratic pollster. In 2010, Ms. Lake published a study called “Name It. Change It.” that found sexist attacks on a hypothetical female candidate decreased the likelihood of men and women voting for that candidate. But a direct response, rather than making matters worse, made up for that lost ground, and in some cases damaged her male opponent.

The findings were melded into campaign strategy, and by 2012 the approach grew into a fund-raising tool. In 2012, donations to the Obama re-election campaign increased after it spread a comment that Mr. Romney made during a debate about having “binders full of women.” And Senator Claire McCaskill, Democrat of Missouri, raised about $1.4 million in a week after her opponent, Todd Akin, used the term “legitimate rape.” Additional donations came in after Mr. Akin compared Ms. McCaskill to a dog playing “fetch” in Washington.

“It comes down to your ability to not just ride the wave, but create the wave,” said Marie Danzig, deputy digital director for Mr. Obama’s 2012 campaign and head of creative and delivery at Blue State Digital, which works with Emily’s List.

An American Bridge tracker in Missouri was monitoring a local TV station when Mr. Akin made the “legitimate rape” comment. The group promptly sent it out to political reporters and on social media.

Such comments, and the policies they’re associated with, helped Emily’s List raise a record $37 million and grow its membership to two million from 400,000 in 2012. Last year, Emily’s List signed up an additional one million members, a record in an off-election year.

Both sides agree there is a tension between capitalizing on a comment because it might raise money and spreading a stereotype, and in many ways 2014 will be a testing ground as to where that line should be drawn. “I think you need to be careful about being too shrill on these matters and understanding what will resonate with your audience,” Ms. Danzig said. “For every ‘legitimate rape’ hit, there are others that don’t go anywhere.”
...................................................................................................................................................................