Sexism

Frankly, I'm sick and f-ing tired of being called sexist because I chose Obama over Clinton.

I'm a white male who voted for Obama.  I've voted for countless female candidates (some won, others lost), and will be campaigning and voting for a Native female in our Congressional primary.

MY vote, at least, is NOT sexist.

Are folks from West Virginia sexist?  Ohio?  Pennsylvania?  New York?  Or is it only the states she lost, like Illinois?  Louisiana?  Minnesota?  Wisconsin?

Give me a break.  

I acknowledge sexism exists; I reject that any candidate deserves a vote merely because of their genitilia (or skin color).  Is it true that some voters chose one over the other based on these criteria?  Sure it is.  I have no problem with blacks voting for Obama in overwhelming numbers, any more than I have a problem with Hillary pulling significant chunks of the female vote, in a race where the two candidates are in agreement on 95% of the issues.  On the flip side, certain voters will cast their lot against Obama because of race and against Hillary because of gender--but I don't think either of those factors swung the outcome of the Democratic nomination.  If anything, you could very clearly make that case that Hillary, because of her big margins with white, female voters, made the race much closer than it otherwise would have been.  I don't hear anybody calling all those white women racist!  Nor should they be!  But it would be foolish to look at the numbers and try to project some kind of sexism as the reason Hillary Clinton failed to secure the nomination.  Logic--and the numbers--fail to bear that out.

As a practical matter, I think Hillary lost an election she should have won.  She had the name recognition, the money, and the support of the establishment.  Perhaps she should have chosen a strategist who understood that the states weren't winner take all, and maybe she should have contemplated a scenario where she failed to secure the nomination on Super Tuesday.  One or two simple tactical errors have cost her the office of the Presidency (because I think she or Obama will wipe the floor with McCain in the fall).

I think it's important to give Obama credit for threading the needle and running a nearly flawless campaign.  To win, he had to.

This campaign was Hillary's to lose, and she did.

Her vagina had very little to do with it.

(PS I'd vote for Hillary in a heartbeat.  I'm a Democrat.)



Display:


Re: Sexism (2.00 / 7)

I am just as tired of people being called racist because they don't vote for Obama.

The sexism I have seen has not been so much in the voters but rather in the pundits and politicians who support Obama.  I give any voter a wide berth to decide who they vote for whatever the reason they have for doing so.  But people who are in a position to influence people's opinions should be held to a higher standard and should refrain from sexism and/or allegations of racism.


by JustJennifer on Sat May 17, 2008 at 02:35:58 PM EST

Re: Sexism (2.00 / 1)

I agree--that's why some of the parsing of voters really does nothing more than drive a wedge between the electorate.  When we see the Blathering Heads waxing poetic about why women love Hillary, or why whites in Appalachia are rejecting Obama, or why blacks are going for Obama 9 to 1, it does nothing more than fuel division and lead to more of these sexist/racist charges and counter-charges.


"The only way I can lose this election is if I'm caught in bed with either a dead girl or a live boy."
by AK Democrat on Sat May 17, 2008 at 02:41:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

One question (none / 0)

Who in the world told you your vote for Obama was sexist? I haven't ever heard that particular charge lobed. There's been a lot of discussion about the treatment of Clinton by the media and many Obama supporters and the treatment of Clinton supporters, also by the media and many Obama supporters, but I have never heard anyone say that a person was sexist because they voted for Obama.

I won't accuse you of a red herring, or of latent sexism, but I do have to wonder. Unless you've got a link to when someone said that to you.


Rules are not necessarily sacred, principles are. - Franklin Delano Roosevelt
by anna belle on Sat May 17, 2008 at 03:52:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sexism (2.00 / 2)

Generally people have only talked about racism as an issue for Obama in Appalachia, and with very good reason.  Exit polls have clearly identified significant numbers of voters there for whom race was an issue who voted for Clinton.


by interestedbystander on Sat May 17, 2008 at 02:41:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sexism (2.00 / 0)

Who called you racist?


John McCain on social security.
by heresjohnny on Sat May 17, 2008 at 02:59:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sexism (2.00 / 1)

Are you asking me that?  No one has called me racist.  I am lucky enough to live in a enclave of libealism (Seattle area) so we haven't been stereotyped by the media as racist.  I know racism exists but I know there are plenty of people who live in one of the "racist" states who are not racist.  Just because the media delights in showing sound bytes of Betty Sue saying she won't vote for a black man doesn't mean everyone feels that way.  And yes I know exit polls show that some people stated race was part of their decision making process but exit polls also show XX number of voters won't vote for either candidate if their candidate doesn't get the nomination.  Exit polls are just a sampling of voters and should not be used to make absolute statements about everyone.


by JustJennifer on Sat May 17, 2008 at 03:18:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sexism (2.00 / 0)

Certainly a non-insignificant number of voters have admitted racism but I've never seen anyone say that everyone who doesn't vote for Obama is a racist.


John McCain on social security.
by heresjohnny on Sat May 17, 2008 at 04:00:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sexism (2.00 / 0)

I don't think there is anything you can do. Sexism is in the eye of the beholder. If Hillary's supporters feel that they've been told to take a back seat because they are women, well, that's the way they feel. There's no way to dissipate that force. And clearly Hillary has fueled that feeling.

There is a study in contrasts. At no point has Barack Obama suggested in the least that his race should either be a cause for solidarity or that any negative attacks were do to his race.


by drmark on Sat May 17, 2008 at 02:36:33 PM EST

Re: Sexism (2.00 / 1)

If you can handle spending an hour reading each of these different examples, you would see that your comment that sexism is in the eye of the beholder is BS.

http://shakespearessister.blogspot.com/2 008/04/hillary-sexism-watch-part-eighty. html


by colebiancardi on Sat May 17, 2008 at 02:40:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

As opposed to normal politics . . . (2.00 / 0)

which is a walk in the park.

Give me a f****ing break! You know as well as I do that politics is a contact sport and all kinds of outrageous things are said in a political season. Not only does Hillary Clinton know that, she encourages this kind of behavior. Should she have a special pass from ridicule and insults because she is a woman? Because that's what your argument boils down to. Isn't she the one who says she has balls, that she's tough. And now you're crying because she gets insulted. Talk about a double standard.


by drmark on Sat May 17, 2008 at 02:45:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: As opposed to normal politics . . . (2.00 / 3)

you didn't read it.

Hillary Clinton "encouraged" that behavior?  How?  Did the MSM talk about Obama's tight ass?  No, but they talked about her cleavage and what that meant as a serious candidate.

thank you for your support of sexism.


by colebiancardi on Sat May 17, 2008 at 02:50:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Actually, there recently was a little cable news (2.00 / 0)

buzz about the way Barack appears in blue jeans (which of course has a tinge of racist stereotype to it.).

And that really is the point. You can't on the one hand say that you're going to be an equal participant in politics, which is a dirty game, and then be so sensitive. You're imposing a sort of moral correctness which is totally unrealistic.

Also, if you care about progressive movements in this country you should feel responsible to decry racist remarks about Obama just if not more strongly than you decry sexist remarks about Clinton.


by drmark on Sat May 17, 2008 at 02:56:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Actually, there recently was a little cable ne (none / 0)

Your arguments in this thread have been weak, but in particular I am amazed to read this:

"if you care about progressive movements in this country you should feel responsible to decry racist remarks about Obama just if not more strongly than you decry sexist remarks about Clinton."

Are you seriously trying to say that it's MORE important to decry racism than sexism?  Hey, I see some sexism and racism going on in this primary, but I sure as shit don't try to claim one is worse than the other, or that one deserves more opprobrium than the other.  Geez.


by Montague on Sat May 17, 2008 at 10:17:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: As opposed to normal politics . . . (2.00 / 0)

Honestly the whole emotional, sexist, racist, prejudice, who's more hard-done-by back and forth bullshit is totally a waste of other people's times.  Most people (not all) do not care about this shit anymore, and suggesting that this election is going to be decided by people who are stuck somewhere and cant see past their prejudiced opinions is insulting to those that have more important things to worry about.

Give America and each other a little more credit and quit pointing fingers at each other.  Seriously, be part of the future that can see past this bullshit diversive politics that has held us in check and controled our consciousness.

Get over it.  We dont have time for this shit anymore.  If you can't see that or understand that or are mad at this or that or some other justification or example that fits into your view and makes it true then you can have it and keep it... but don't expect everyone else to agree with it.

And when we get tired of discussing this and everyone is right and everyone else is wrong, we will either move on to something that actually gets something done or spend the rest of our lives blaming each other for what was not.


by herenow on Sat May 17, 2008 at 03:36:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sexism (2.00 / 4)

You missed the whole point of Angry Mouse's diary.

She didn't call you a sexist for voting for Obama over Hillary.  Nor did she state that sexism was the reason why Hillary lost.

Try reading it again.

What is ironic is your denial of the MSM and netroots embrace of sexist and misogynist comments towards Hillary.  It isn't moral or right to have those comments towards someone just because you dislike or even hate them.   To excuse those statements because of that is just being in denial


by colebiancardi on Sat May 17, 2008 at 02:39:10 PM EST

Re: Sexism (none / 0)

I don't think I spoke for anyone but myself and other voters.

Perhaps you should read MY post again.


"The only way I can lose this election is if I'm caught in bed with either a dead girl or a live boy."
by AK Democrat on Sat May 17, 2008 at 02:44:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sexism (2.00 / 1)

yes, I did read your diary.  And it seems that your diary is in response to Angry Mouse's diary and your own comment there.  You went on a rant there and then decided to create your own diary based on that misinformed rant

I quote you here


I'm a white male who voted for Obama.  I voted for a white female in my state house primary, a white female in my assembly race, and will be campaigning and voting for a native female in our Congressional primary.

MY vote, at least, is NOT sexist.

Frankly, I'm sick and f-ing tired of being called sexist because I chose Obama over Clinton.

Are folks from West Virginia sexist?  Ohio?  Pennsylvania?  New York?  Or is it only the states she lost, like Illinois?  Louisiana?  Minnesota?  Wisconsin?

which you were corrected on, btw.


by colebiancardi on Sat May 17, 2008 at 02:47:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sexism (none / 0)

I found her diary to be wholly concerned with using sexism as the cause of Hillary's campaign's demise.

I'm not sure how you can make the case that sexism is the cause of your demise without inferring, in at least a very small way, that those who voted against your candidate are sexist.

If I misunderstood, I'll defer.


"The only way I can lose this election is if I'm caught in bed with either a dead girl or a live boy."
by AK Democrat on Sat May 17, 2008 at 03:01:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

the Angry Mouse diary is excellent (none / 0)

The Angry Mouse diary (which I also misinterpreted at first) is about sexism and politics in a much larger sense and it's full of passion and logic.

Read the last 3 paragraphs of that post especially:

But the problem will not be fixed.  The next time a woman runs for president, we will face it again.  Is she tough enough?  Too tough?  Are her clothes too boring or too revealing?  Is she too young?  Too old?  Are her ankles too fat?  Is her hair just right?  How often does she sleep with her husband?  Are her successes in life really her own?  Diamonds or pearls?

Don't tell me sexism isn't real.  Don't tell me it is irrelevant.  Don't tell me it isn't a problem -- a serious problem -- that the Democratic party must address.  If we have the courage to face up to our dark and disdainful history of racism, and even the courage to face the racism that exists today, even within our own party, certainly, somewhere deep within our souls, we have the courage to face up to sexism.

At least, I hope we do.  

This current diary also rings true -- not as a rebuttal to Angry Mouse -- but rather to the avalanche of attacks calling Obama and his supporters sexist, and claiming that Hillary is losing because of sexism.

As in most passionate feuds, both sides are right.  Hillary may have transcended sexism but the United States most certainly has not and as AM says, the next female candidates will be forced to run the same gauntlet that the population as a whole has to run every day.


McCain housing policy shaped by lobbyist.
by obsessed on Sat May 17, 2008 at 04:33:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

the straw woman argument (none / 0)

Both sides here are guilty of unwittingly conspiring to set up a straw man argument that marginalizes the problem of sexism.

The mistake is making Hillary's campaign a proxy for the problem of gender discrimination. People like myself have spent long hours trying to drive home three points:

  • Obama is not sexist
  • I am not sexist
  • Hillary's victory or defeat is not sexism-related

Limiting the discussion to these points allows me to win the argument in my own mind without having to deal with the larger argument, for which there is no rebuttal. Everything Angry Mouse says is true, and will continue to be true even if Hillary Clinton becomes President.

What are we going to do about THAT?


McCain housing policy shaped by lobbyist.
by obsessed on Sat May 17, 2008 at 04:54:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Diaries like this just leave speechless (none / 0)


by dbrown04 on Sat May 17, 2008 at 03:38:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sexism (2.00 / 2)

The most hardcore Clinton supporters tear down Pelosi, Michelle, Brazile, McCaskill, Sebelius, Maria Shriver...they don't care about abusing female politicians, they are concerned solely with getting a woman into the White House. Everything else is secondary, including women's rights. I actually saw people on Hillaryis44 excoriating Michelle for a dress she was wearing.


John McCain hates terrorists, except the ones that hate women. Those are just swell.
by terra on Sat May 17, 2008 at 02:44:07 PM EST

Re: Sexism (2.00 / 2)

please - do not equate Hillaryis44 folks with the rest of us passionate and hardcore Hillary folks.

many of us do not "tear" down other women for the benefit of another.  


by colebiancardi on Sat May 17, 2008 at 02:45:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sexism (2.00 / 0)

why not, it seems most os the hill44 crowd is posting right here.


"In the primary you should vote with your heart, but in the general, you should vote with your head" Bill Clinton
by venician on Sat May 17, 2008 at 03:04:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sexism (2.00 / 1)

terra, you are so right on. I'd give you MAJOR mojo if I could.


"In the primary you should vote with your heart, but in the general, you should vote with your head" Bill Clinton
by venician on Sat May 17, 2008 at 02:46:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sexism (none / 0)

sorry, she is NOT right on.  A few women on hillaryis44 do not speak for this hardcore Hillary supporter.


by colebiancardi on Sat May 17, 2008 at 02:48:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sexism (none / 0)

Don't miss the first two words of my comment.


John McCain hates terrorists, except the ones that hate women. Those are just swell.
by terra on Sat May 17, 2008 at 02:51:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sexism (none / 0)

don't miss the first few words of my comment

Exactly - we've got to stop assuming that the other side is full of crap - we've been fighting for so long that we've stopped listening to each other.


McCain housing policy shaped by lobbyist.
by obsessed on Sat May 17, 2008 at 04:59:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sexism (none / 0)

And a few people over at Dkos or even here do not represent Obama supporters as a whole...


I'm Ready For A Good Old GOP & John McCain Ass Kickin'!!!
by hootie4170 on Sat May 17, 2008 at 03:46:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sexism (none / 0)

Yep, they've gone so far as to suggest that McCaskill and Klobuchar's standing in EMILY'S List may be in jeopardy--but somehow voters against Hillary are sexist?


"The only way I can lose this election is if I'm caught in bed with either a dead girl or a live boy."
by AK Democrat on Sat May 17, 2008 at 02:49:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sexism (none / 0)

Not all feminists believe you can never be critical of another woman.  That is total BS.  While I consider myself to be a feminist I believe feminism means we should be treated equally - which means we should be critized just like a man would if someone disagrees with us.  


by JustJennifer on Sat May 17, 2008 at 03:20:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sexism (none / 0)

Understood and agreed.  It speaks to the passion of those involved that EMILY'S List and NARAL, for instance, have such heated reactions to this campaign.

I totally get it, zealously supporting and representing your candidate; at the end, let's not forget what this is all about, and let's be very careful indeed about laying sexism charges where none are warranted.

I remember talking to my wife, early on in this campaign, and she (mildy) suggested that I "must hate women" if I wasn't for Hillary.  I laughed and answered, "Either I'm racist or sexist, is that it?"

I believe that the candidates won or lost substantially on their positions and on their vision, not on whether they were black or female (outlying voters notwithstanding).

I have much less patience for a sexism argument that implies, however obliquely, that a vote for Obama is a vote against Hillary because she's a woman.


"The only way I can lose this election is if I'm caught in bed with either a dead girl or a live boy."
by AK Democrat on Sat May 17, 2008 at 03:28:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sexism (none / 0)

Honest question...

Is victimizing this campaign progress for Feminism??

or is taking the FACT that a women in 2008 has made further than ANY other woman ever has in their quest for President of the United States more progress for Feminism?


I'm Ready For A Good Old GOP & John McCain Ass Kickin'!!!
by hootie4170 on Sat May 17, 2008 at 03:48:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sexism (none / 0)

I think you have it exactly right--"the FACT that a women in 2008 has made further than ANY other woman ever has in their quest for President of the United States more progress for Feminism?"

That should be the story.  The problem is, some feminists are going to construe even that benign statement to mean acceptance of failure, when it means anything but.

I think part of the problem with all of this is we are Democrats, so we care what people think and we try to do the right thing.  I don't want anybody to think a woman or man of color has no chance in OUR party; so, some of us get a little defensive when a baseless sexism/racism charge is made.

The media coverage is a totally different animal--but we can tit for tat on when they've been race- or gender-charged in their coverage.  I think it's a wash, to be honest.

I don't think most Democratic voters are swayed terribly much by gender or race (Appalachia notwithstanding); Republicans are much more likely to vote against a woman or against a black man.  They are unlikely to vote for a Democratic white male either, by the way.


"The only way I can lose this election is if I'm caught in bed with either a dead girl or a live boy."
by AK Democrat on Sat May 17, 2008 at 04:01:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sexism (none / 0)

I'm still being tut,tutted by some of my Hillary supporter friends for being a 61 year old female veteran of the culture wars, who's not supporting their 'entitled' Hill-gal.


Let the children lose it Let the children use it Let all the children boogie
by toyomama on Sat May 17, 2008 at 02:51:51 PM EST

Re: Sexism (none / 0)

Toyomama, I see you're a fellow Alaskan on the Begich-Stevens thread.

Represent!


"The only way I can lose this election is if I'm caught in bed with either a dead girl or a live boy."
by AK Democrat on Sat May 17, 2008 at 03:04:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sexism (none / 0)

Yep, we were probably smashed together at the caucus last February.


Let the children lose it Let the children use it Let all the children boogie
by toyomama on Sat May 17, 2008 at 03:11:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sexism (2.00 / 1)

Ok, I see this is a troll diary.

the diarist posted his/her inaccurate comment on Angry Mouse's diary and then decided to reprint that comment in his/her own diary.

And misrepresent what was stated in Angry Mouse's diary.

echo chamber here of Hillary haters who cannot see that this type of language is unacceptable, no matter who you are.


by colebiancardi on Sat May 17, 2008 at 02:51:57 PM EST

Re: Sexism (none / 0)

I don't think the word "troll" means what you think it means...


I like baked beans.
by SpideyDem on Sat May 17, 2008 at 03:04:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sexism (none / 0)

I don't understand what is sexist about being opposed to someone who voted for the War, voted for possibly doing the same in Iran, and thinks it is acceptable for a candidate for President to talk about hypothetically "obliterating" another country.


by Piuma on Sat May 17, 2008 at 03:16:45 PM EST

Re: Sexism (none / 0)

please give an example of you posting something positive about Barack and being called a sexist. Generally those called sexists base all or part of their support for Barack by 'citing' or agreeing with Hillary's so-called negatives. I'd be surprised that anyone on Hillary's side would call you a sexist unless you'd said something sexist and hadn't seemed to realize what you were spouting.  Some of us try to educate others on what's offensive and/or what of her 'negatives' were originally based on sexist notions of a woman's proper role, or something connected to some unattractive stereotype often used to demean woman.   For example those that say she shouldn't emasculate Barack, or any words to that effect, are saying something sexist but may not know it.  So, please give an example.  Your last statement, that her vagina has little to do with the tone of the media about her, is offensive.  Using female body parts in any way is usually unpleasant.   Perhaps you could take out that last line, or substitute sex or gender for the word vagina?  


by anna shane on Sat May 17, 2008 at 03:25:25 PM EST

Re: Sexism (none / 0)

The use that word in high school education..


I'm Ready For A Good Old GOP & John McCain Ass Kickin'!!!
by hootie4170 on Sat May 17, 2008 at 03:50:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sexism (none / 0)

I can give you good examples of sexism against Hillary:

Male commentators saying they cross their legs when they hear her voice

The "bros before ho's t-shirts

The comment from Obama about "tea with ambassadors" certainly sounded sexist

Comments that she is only a Senator because her husband was unfaithful

Remarks about her appearance - ie her hair styles, what she wears, etc

Those are just a few I came up with from memory in like 2 minutes.  I am sure if I dug deeper I could find plenty more.


by JustJennifer on Sat May 17, 2008 at 03:37:54 PM EST

Re: Sexism (none / 0)

The "tea with ambassadors" is not sexist, it's part of the job as First Lady, a non-elected position which primarily has nothing to do with policy and substance.  She was wrong to try to overplay her experience as First Lady and opened herself to attack, not a gender grounds, but on substance.


by Piuma on Sat May 17, 2008 at 03:47:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sexism (none / 0)

Yeah.. and what about when the ladies from "The View" were discussing how sexy Obama is. I didn't see Obama complaining that he was being treated like beefcake! Someone posted that the media was discussing Hillary's cleavage. Like anyone is actually lusting to see her cleavage, get real.
These posts are becoming more bizarre and paranoid.

"Beauty, more than bitterness, makes the heart break." Sara Teasdale
by april34fff on Sat May 17, 2008 at 03:50:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sexism (none / 0)

There is nothing bizarre or paranoid about what I am saying.  And "The View"?  ugh that show is barely more than a tabloid show.  I know it prides itself on being television for women but it's not for this woman.


by JustJennifer on Sat May 17, 2008 at 09:33:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sexism (2.00 / 0)

..and If I wanted to I could come up with just as long of a list for racism and Obama...I could show you some really effed up shirts, bumper stickers, racist websites, racial slurs painted on his campaign offices, Mike Huckabee, Cuomo,..he knows it's out there, but he continues on just like HRC does...They are not playing victims to it which does nothing to promote equality, they keep fighting the RIGHT fight and won't let morons stop them or their vision.


I'm Ready For A Good Old GOP & John McCain Ass Kickin'!!!
by hootie4170 on Sat May 17, 2008 at 03:54:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sexism (none / 0)

your point is that she deserves it?  It's ti for tat. Well, that's an explanation that does not deny the overtones of misogyny.  


by anna shane on Sat May 17, 2008 at 04:40:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sexism (none / 0)

No, my point is that by pointing out you are a victim does nothing to empower Feminism...She is empowering Feminism right before your eyes but you refuse to see it...She has fought her way to the brink of being POTUS, further than any women as ever gone, and she NEVER once used her gender as an excuse during rough times or good times...She's doing exactly what you need to do to empower women, she is running on her merits not her gender...Do you get it??


I'm Ready For A Good Old GOP & John McCain Ass Kickin'!!!
by hootie4170 on Sat May 17, 2008 at 05:25:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sexism (none / 0)

I'm sure you could.  If this is what is the deciding factor in this election for you then that is your choice.  I'm sure that there are people of color that support Obama only because of the racist words/actions of others.

But seriously... is this how you are going to decide who can make the best choices for you and us to lead this country into the future?  The remarks and actions of some assholes?  

Honestly who cares what these people think.  And not only that, just because someone says something stupid at a moment in time does not make them stupid.  Or an asshole.  Just like just because some idiot "Obamatron" makes some rediculous sexist remark does not mean all 16million of his supporters agree or hold the same view.

Really, this is not a race of who has been more hard-done-by... by the system, critics, supporters, bloggers, etc.  This is a race for who can lead us best into the future.

If you believe it is Clinton, then that is great, support her with what makes her great.  Trying to play her as some victim of a system that we all know often judges people by race/gender does not support her in any way.  

Is it not possible to focus on what she is?  And not what she is not?  Especially based on the examples of comments made by people that obviously cant see past that.  Does that mean thats all you cant see past too?


by herenow on Sat May 17, 2008 at 04:03:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You Still Drank the Kool-Aid (none / 0)

You give yourself away when you accuse Senator Clinton of running a poor campaign. What we know about politics as in warfare is that circumstances change, new allies bring different resources to both sides, and the only thing that can be predicted is that something unpredictable will happen.
You may be immune to the implicit genderism and implicit racism, but I am skeptical of your critical thinking about lines that have been fed you by the Obama campaign about their opponent. There is a well-known military tactic of portraying an opponent negatively on a tactic that you have used yourself or that you intend to deploy.
I would ask that you keep an open mind while you read www.attacktimeline.com. Then look at some of your own biases and their sources.
by pan230oh on Sat May 17, 2008 at 04:14:24 PM EST

Re: You Still Drank the Kool-Aid (none / 0)

You're telling me Clinton didn't run a horrible campaign? She's tens of millions of dollars in debt, has had several high-profile staff shakeups, they didn't have any plan beyond Super Tuesday because they hubristically thought they'd have it wrapped up by then. And that's just for starters.
by sidwood on Sat May 17, 2008 at 04:49:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You Still Drank the Kool-Aid (none / 0)

Forgive me, but is there anyone (even among her own supporters) who thinks Senator Clinton has run a great campaign?  From Ohio/Texas on, she has held her own and run a dogged, attack-style campaign.  That's politics, I respect it and acknowledge its place.  I think if she had run that campaign all along she would be the nominee.

This is what we do--when the campaign ends, we analyze and try to determine why one candidate won, and one candidate lost.  Almost by definition, the winner ran a great campaign while the loser ran a campaign that was second-best.

Are you suggesting she ran a better campaign than Senator Obama?  Are you denying she ran a flawed campaign?  The bigger question--a question I haven't even begun to delve into--how does the conduct of one's campaign project onto how they would run the country?  Her campaign shortcomings, inconvenient as they are to acknowledge, are not caused by you or me.  She is responsible for them--it seems your fire on this issue is misdirected.


"The only way I can lose this election is if I'm caught in bed with either a dead girl or a live boy."
by AK Democrat on Sat May 17, 2008 at 05:00:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sexism (none / 0)

I think there's clearly been some sexism in the media, as well as some racism. I am sure Hillary has lost votes from people who don't want to vote for a woman, just as Obama has lost votes from people who don't want to vote for a black person. Both have undoubtedly gained some votes because of it as well.

Clinton may have faced some sexism from the pundits, but I take exception to those who claim that she is losing because of it, or that she is being told to take a back seat to a "less qualified" man.

She is losing because she ran a lousy campaign. She started out with all the advantages and blew it. I read the New Republic article describing the problems inside the Clinton campaign, with the factional rivalries and failure to develop a clear chain of command, and it makes me wonder 'is this how her White House is going to be run?' Her campaign started with every advantage and they blew it. They spent too much money on consultants and not enough on field organizers. They blew too much money early on and did not have the resources to compete for hte long haul. They failed to plan beyond Super Tuesday, and they underestimated the competition.

For her or her supporters to claim that she is losing because of sexism trivializes women who have legitimate claims of being passed over for promotions or fired because of their gender.

The media may have written her obituary too quickly after Iowa, but they did the same thing to Dean four years ago. The difference was, as a white male running against other white males, Dean did not have a natural constituency in New Hampshire to rally to him and prop him back up the way women did for Clinton. It's hard to imagine any other candidate being treated as relevant after losing 11 contests in a row in February. And if we're going to complain that she was "passed over" for a "less qualified" man, shouldn't we examine the fact that she jumped ahead of three men with longer resumes than hers?


by democrattotheend on Sat May 17, 2008 at 05:53:14 PM EST

Re: Sexism (none / 0)

Please.  Lots of people have been calling all those white women racist.


by Montague on Sat May 17, 2008 at 10:11:15 PM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.