We have already seen how Barack Obama's nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to succeed Justice David Souter on the Supreme Court has begun to split Republican leaders, both between electeds (who must be at least somewhat accountable to voters) and unelecteds (like Newt Gingrich and Rush Limbaugh, who face little threat of retribution for their rhetoric), as well as between those advocating for a big tent (including not only white voters) and those content with demagoguing against minorities). But apparently that's not the only division within the party today. According to Pollster.com's Margie Omero, even within the GOP base we're beginning to see some real cracks with regards to the Sotomayor nomination.

In the Gallup poll, both Democratic and Republican women are more supportive of Sotomayor than their Democratic counterparts.  The difference is more modest among Democrats (men: +46 "excellent/good pick" minus "only fair/poor" pick; women: +54).  Among Republicans the difference is sizable (men: -44; women: -11).

The Quinnipiac poll is consistent.  There is no difference in the ratings of Democratic men (+74 "approve" minus "disapprove") and Democratic women (+76).  But Republican women are almost evenly divided on Sotomayor's nomination (-9), while Republican men are more decidedly disapproving (-39).

Supreme Court nominations are not only about politics, of course, and the qualifications, temperament, intelligence and beliefs of nominees are extremely important. But that does not mean that politics does not matter. And at this very early (though very important) stage in the confirmation process, Republican leaders are finding themselves with a base that overwhelmingly itching for a fight. Yes, segments of the GOP, particularly conservatives, likely want to see their leaders do anything they can to stop Sotomayor from reaching the Supreme Court -- even if such an effort is futile. Yet a significant portion of Republicans, particularly women but others as well, view Sotomayor favorably. While Republicans might not be able to win without an energized conservative base, they certainly can't win with more women and moderates leaving the party, either. So you can see why Senate Republicans are in such a difficult spot at this juncture.

There's more...

In one of my posts yesterday, I noted the whopping 30-point gender gap that the Los Angeles Times and Bloomberg found on the generic congressional ballot question, with women overwhelmingly preferring to see a Democratic Congress by a 58 percent to 30 margin while men narrowly prefer a GOP Congress by a 41 percent to 39 percent margin.

That LA Times/Bloomberg poll was not the only poll to come out this past week showing a sizeable gender gap. The Cook Political Report (.pdf) commissioned a poll this week from RT Strategies that showed the Democrats holding a 10-point generic congressional ballot lead, 46 percent to 36 percent. The gender breakdown of the Cook poll shows an 11-point gender gap, with women favoring the Democrats by 15 points while men favor the Dems by only 4.

Whether women support the Democrats by a 28 percent margin or a 15 percent margin, it seems fairly clear that women's strong preference for the Democratic Party -- which had shrunk from 12 points during the 2000 presidential election to just 3 points during the 2004 presidential contest -- has returned.

One question that might emerge from these numbers is why? Why would women, who voted significantly less Democratic in 2004 than they had in previous years, return to the Democratic fold? Perhaps the two Supreme Court nomination battles, the "nuclear option" fracas and, most importantly, the South Dakota abortion ban have awakened women to the fact that the Republican Party actually wants government control over their reproductive systems. Sure, they knew that President Bush was anti-choice and that John Kerry was pro-choice going into the 2004 election, but how much focus had been given to abortion during Bush's first term? Yes, there were battles over judicial nominees, but there wasn't a Supreme Court nomination, which would garner more attention from the casual voter than a nomination to an appellate court.

One cannot be certain about the cause of this returned gender gap without conducting some specific polling on the subject, but I don't see the conclusion that the issue of choice was a major cause as being off-the-wall. And if it is indeed the case that the Republican Party's aggressive anti-choice agenda, which has been in full force over the past year and a half, is at least partially at the root of this shift, is it so wise for the Democrats to back off of the issue of choice? Certainly, attempting to reframe the debate to incorporate terms more amenable to voters -- I wouldn't say softening the message, but perhaps tweaking a few key words here and there -- can't hurt the Democrats, but should the party really give up on the issue of choice, particularly at a time when women appear to be coming back to the party in droves? I personally think not. And if the Democrats fail to tap into these sentiments, they run the very real risk of passing up their greatest opportunity for fundamentally altering the balance of power in Congress in more than a decade.

There's more...

First of all, thanks to Chris Bowers for inviting me to post here on MyDD. I read blogs regularly, but this is the first time I've ever posted anything.

This post is part of an ongoing series of discussions Chris kick started to discuss "Get This Party Started : How Progressives Can Fight Back and Win" - a collection of essays, edited by Matt Kerbel, which focuses on the strategies Democrats need to start winning again.

There's more...