Does Newt Gingrich have a women voter problem?

Newt Gingrich may have a women voter problem in Florida. Despite public endorsements from Sarah Palin and other conservative women, recent polling shows he's less popular among women.

Shannon Stapleton/REUTERS
Republican presidential candidate and former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich stands during a rally in Jacksonville, Fla., Friday.

Newt Gingrich won the South Carolina primary despite widespread publicity about his messy divorces and multiple marriages. Sarah Palin and some other conservative women have publicly supported the former House speaker, saying that in their view he’s the true grassroots tea party champion in the race.

On Sunday New York Times columnist Gail Collins went so far as to say that the former Speaker could go down in history as the politician who proved that voters don’t care about the dalliances of their elected officials.

But Mr. Gingrich may still have a problem with female voters. In Florida in particular, he’s less popular among women than he is among men. That gender gap is contributing to the sudden reemergence of Mitt Romney as the favorite for Tuesday’s Florida primary.

In a new NBC/Marist poll, for instance, Gingrich loses to Mr. Romney among women by a wide 47 to 26 percent. He’s behind among men as well, but by a smaller 38 to 29 percent margin.

A new Mason/Dixon survey for a number of Florida news outlets showed Gingrich and Romney virtually tied among men. But among women Gingrich again trailed, by 46 to 27 percent.

Similarly, Public Policy Polling’s overnight tracking results showed the two Florida front-runners tied among males, but Romney leading among women by a whopping 13 points, 43 to 30 percent.

“Mitt Romney is holding steady in our Florida polling,” said Dean Debnam, PPP president, in a Monday press release. “It looks like the main suspense in the state is whether he’ll win by single digits or double digits.”

[ Video is no longer available. ]

It’s unclear whether women are reacting against Gingrich’s marital history, his combative nature, or his attempt to position himself as the conservative alternative to, in Gingrich’s words, a “Massachusetts moderate.” But notably, the PPP survey breakdown shows that almost equal percentages of male and female respondents rated themselves as either very or somewhat conservative. So it is not the case that women are disproportionately moderate, and thus more likely to support Romney.

Ms. Palin’s support of Gingrich is an interesting test case. In a statement on her Facebook page, she notes that Gingrich is “an imperfect vessel” for tea party support, but argues that the GOP establishment is simply carpet-bombing him in its attempt to keep control of the party and keep tea partyers down.

“The challenge of this election is not simply to replace President Obama. The real challenge is who and what we will replace him with. It’s not enough to just change up the uniform,” wrote Palin in her Facebook note.

But as of Monday morning the wall section of the chief Mama Grizzly’s Facebook entry was full of comments from her followers (of both genders) discussing whether Gingrich was in fact the right choice for the tea party, with many expressing discontent with Palin’s choice.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.