Menzies relied on the women's vote. Any student of politics or people who can recall the time would be very aware of that and of the support of women for his colleagues that followed.

Here, from a split second Google, but honestly, why not cruise through the women's mags and papers of the time?

"Parliament and Public Service

Although Menzies’ dominance of Australian politics in the 1950s and early 1960s benefited from the misfortunes that befell the Labor Party and his good luck in coming to power as the economy began to pick up, Menzies also had considerable skill as a politician. He was one of the first federal party leaders who actively targeted women’s votes. Identifying women as usually more conservative in their voting habits than men, Menzies was always careful to emphasise how issues like industrial relations and defence were of concern to women."

http://primeministers.naa.gov.au/primeministers/menzies/in-office.aspx

It is wasted time trying to put facts before the ideologically driven who consistently reject facts and op9inion that might challenge their world view.

Now that the diversion has worked for some posts, what about a return to the subject of the thread, in politeness to its originator?

Could the preponderance of women in voting for Menzies have anything to do with the gross discrimination against young men in the conscription birthday ballots?

When discussing any issue we need to look at
not only one side or the other - but around
the edges as well. Ive stated in the past that
a historian can establish that an act took place
on a certain day, but this, by historical standards
constitutes only chronology. The moment the historian
begins to look critically at motivation, circumstances,
context, or any other such considerations, the product
becomes unacceptable for one or another camp or
readers. Some people are more interested in condemnation
than in explanation.

As far as Sir Robert Menzies is concerned - there were
many and varied reasons for his re-elections. To quote
from the link given by OTB:

"Menzies' deployment of the "Communist bogey" was masterful.
He genuinely believed that Communism posed a real threat
to Australian society, both at home and abroad. He raised
the threat of Communism before each election, provoked
opposition disaray and scared the more impressionable
voters back to supporting the Coalition. Menzies was helped
in the tactic by the fact that many recent immigrants were
refugees from Eastern Europe who harboured deep fears of
Communism."

This was a time in Australian political life where passion and
prejudices ran strong but with wit, reason, purpose and
clarity of expression were at least acknowledged for their
value in tempering the language and posturing of political
contest.

Unlike the divisive hardenning of political rhetoric
the retreat of civility and the ideological polarities of
our time, Australian post war politics at its best was
memorably human.

Menzies off-quoted quips - for instance, one of my favourites
is - to the woman who at Williamstown in 1954 heckled him with,

"I wouldn't vote for you if you were the Archangel Gabriel!"

Menzies supposed reposte was:

"Madam, if I was the Archangel Gabriel I'm afraid you
wouldn't be in my constituency!"

Communism wasn't a bogey though, it killed 100 million people in the 20th century and everything the conservatives said about "Red under the beds" was true.

Dear Jay,

This isn't a question of what is true or not
about Communism. This is how Menzies used the
threat of Communism before each election.
Hence the reference to the "Communist bogey"
in commas.

Foxy,

What I challenged was your belief, because it is NOT a fact, in the feminist mantra that men are responsible for war (and for every other bad thing in the world it would appear). In this and numerous other threads over years and long before I started posting, you have stated word for word that:

"War occurs as a result of a political decision - usually a decision by older men that younger men should fight for what the older men believe to be worth fighting for."

I was easily able to demonstrate that while men are the unfortunates sent to war, women may also be complicit in the decision for war and conduct of war at least be voting the responsible politicians in and by keeping them in power. It is a fact that women voters strongly supported Menzies and the later leaders who proposed and supported 19yr old youths being conscripted and sent to Vietnam.

Now that someone has provided you with the facts would you mind not repeating that offensive feminist mantra again? While some here have themselves volunteered for or been conscripted to put their lives on the line for yours and other women's safety and way of life, it is galling for them or their gender including little boys, to be continually labelled as violent threats and responsible for the terrible wars that have taken millions of lives.

If truth is to prevail, Australian men died in their thousands to liberate Europe from a tyrant in WW2 for instance. It is foolish to believe the lunatic, men-hating, self indulgent feminists (and I have given Germaine Greer as an example earlier) who disrespect men for for their sacrifice, saying that men bring it upon themselves and are predisposed to war.

Honestly, you continually bomb threads with outrageous bias against men (only white men - those from the UK?) and against Australia, despite the certainty that others including me have been patient and corrected you before.

Any wonder though that young women flee from the feminists?