DISQUS

dula · 1 year ago

Another intelligent, educated, successful woman blinded by her vagina.

blackwolf · 1 year ago

LOlllllllll....easy Hoss:) They'll be all over you when they read your post.

I think you need to "concede".

John Aravosis · 1 year ago

I'm going to assume you're a woman? If you were a guy, I'd delete this comment. But as a woman, you'd have the right to make that observation in my opinion. So, which one is it? :-)

Hack · 1 year ago

I have no doubt I would be blinded looking at even a small portion of it.

ZennButtKicker (tlhwraith) · 1 year ago

Hold on there John. Whats up with that statement! The gender of the person making the comment shouldn't be the determining factor of whether or not to delete a post, isn't that the main heart of sexism, treating one person differently than another based on their gender?

John Aravosis · 1 year ago

Sure is. I can call myself a fag. A straight person can't. It's a fact. And it's a justifiable fact. I'm not being homophobic when I'm saying it because I'm gay. A straight person saying, odds are they're not being nice, and there's far too much uncertainty to permit them to say it. A woman can talk about her vagina. I can't.

dula · 1 year ago

Well the word fag is derogatory...the word vagina is not. If women can say that some men think with their dicks then why can't men say that some women are blinded by their vaginas?

MorgaineSwann · 1 year ago

Your name implies you're female -- a dula is a woman who assists women in childbirth, yes?

Your question is interesting. Can men say that about women? I'd say not, if only because it makes no sense.

blackwolf · 1 year ago

How easy they all forget the truth! I like the revelation. It's like a keg of dynamite.

PeteWa · 1 year ago

It is really disappointing that people like Steinem see sexism in every corner (and like John noted, where is the evidence of such?), yet the racism during Hillary's campaign and from various other quarters remains a willful blindspot.

Actually, disappointing is far too mild, I am quickly becoming disgusted with this bullshit.

Sage24 · 1 year ago

As a woman, I do not think Hillary losing the nomination had anything to do with the fact she is a woman. The Clinton supporters, especially women, should get realistic about this fact. She lost because she ran a lousy campaign, despite being the inevitable nominee, she lost many supporters because of her kitchen sink politics, she lied about Bosnia, and got caught very easily, and that gave her the dishonest label, she misspent and is debt, and underestimated Senator Obama. Losing the nomination had nothing to do with the fact she is a woman. The Clinton camp should try to stop blaming everyone else and look inwards.

John Aravosis · 1 year ago

Exactly. And the one thing the Clinton supporters can't explain with their sexism allegations is why the media, and the rest of the punditocracy, including the blogosphere, had declared her the inevitable winner for an entire year. Did we all just suddenly become sexist at Christmas?

PeteWa · 1 year ago

"Did we all just suddenly become sexist at Christmas?"

I know I did, it was a present from Santa!
j/k

schmed · 1 year ago

Well, I'm not sure comments made in the "inevitable" period demonstrate a lack of sexism; they simply demonstrate the lapdog press' slavish fawning over the presumptive nominee. The tendentious feminist argument would highlight the glee with which the press "enjoyed" the loss of her inevitability, but of course the response to that, is the press love to turn on a frontrunner, as they did when prompted by Rev. Wright and SNL. No, the real counter-argument to the "Steinem" thesis is the way in which HRC's campaign hopes were indulged LONG AFTER the game was over.

consult · 1 year ago

You have to be able to hold two thoughts in your mind at once- yes she lost because of her own poor campaign and two, there was sexism that while not accounting for her loss, was certainly a factor in the way people expressed themselves when talking about her. People seemed to feel completely free to say any horrible thing about her they wanted and in terms that denigrated all women. Is that why she lost? No. Is it something we all should be concerned about? Yes.

Ann_in_KC · 1 year ago

People seemed to feel completely free to say any horrible thing about her they wanted and in terms that denigrated all women.

By people do you mean the press and pundits? Because blog people seemed to feel completely free to say any horrible thing about all candidates they wanted.

"Terms that denigrated all women"
See, you're not being specific and no one will grow from this experience if they don't know what was said and how it affected women. Blanket statements get us nowhere. If there's been a problem about this, this has been part of it. I mean, I don't even get it, how do you expect men to?

consult · 1 year ago

I mean both the msm and the blogs. I have posted numerous, specific
examples here but been roundly dismissed because they just sound too small
for people to care about and that is the difficulty with sexism. Its so
insidious that its just like background noise, but language does matter.
Mike Barnicle's "Hillary looks like everyone's first wife outside probate
court" comes to mind not because its quite as vicious as some but because
the language itself implies that this is not just about Hillary, its about
all women- you know all those vindictive women who will take you for
everything they can get. The constant comments about her being too shrill-
a term that is never used about a man. The f*ing B* that was all over the
comments Tuesday night because people were so angry at her for not
conceding. Andrea Mitchell saying just yesterday that Obama needed to do
something soon about Hillary lest he seem "hen-pecked". Do I need to go on?

consult · 1 year ago

For Ann- here is an example from today's comments:

Shrillary has been sabotaging the dems chances since she realized that she
wasn't going to win. She wants to prove that Obama can't win, so she can run
in 2012. WRONG!!!

You are a psycho. And people were right to compare you with Glenn Close in
Fatal Attraction. You can't beat him, so you must kill his chances. Just
like Close can't get the guy in the movie, so she must kill him.

lovepeaceandallthat · 1 year ago

Really? I am asking sincerely. Did people "feel completely free to say any horrible thing about her ...and in terms that denigrated all women?" Honestly, I didn't see or hear any of this. But then I get most of my news from news blogs and left talk radio.

Are you including calling her a bitch? If so, I feel confident to say that I can call selfish, meanhearted women (when I am feeling less than classy, and with close family or friends only) WITHOUT denigrating all women!! I have been a woman for 42 years and when I hear another woman or even a man call describe a woman as a bitch I always feel like they are saying that because it really is the best, at least in a casual context, way of describing someone who is acting like a bitch. Well, enough on the bitch word.

But my point is that I truly didn't see the sexism as being at all a big enough of an issue to be... well, an issue. Also, I have always wondered why we are surprised? I mean, we have a woman running for president, breaking glass ceilings and all -- shouldn't we expect resistance from those less enlightened? I think those who are wise "ceiling breakers" except it and use it to their advantage. They use it as a teaching moment, not as a moment to point fingers and blame. Her job as a leader, and as the "first" is to point out the sexism but not to name that as a reason for her losing. Because the whole point is for her to look past it and teach by example.

That said, I feel proud of my country for NOT resorting to racism and sexism to a degree that many, many people would have predicted. We should be proud of the positives and learn and teach from the negatives. But blaming is not a sign of a leader. That is the difference between Obama and Clinton. Well, one of them.

bluestockton · 1 year ago

What a tiresome lot these professional feminists are becoming. So Obama has to apologize for saying "you're likable enough, Hillary"? When is SHE going to apologize for saying he's not a Muslim "as far as I know"?

Jimpy · 1 year ago

You said it. This is exactly why today's feminist leaders need to be kicked out of office. What a bunch of whiny, overentitled, victim-complexed, sneaky, pompous and sanctimonious jerks.
Feminists have become exactly like their sworn enemies: the Pro-Lifers.

JacksonThersites · 1 year ago

Kicked out of office by whom? You? You've devolved into sillyness. Grind your ax on your own time.

Polly_Tics · 1 year ago

It is NOT in Hillary's vocabulary to apologize for anything. And it would seem that she has galvanized her "followers" into believing all of this crap as well.

It is a sad sight to see what has become of a once great movement...

Jimpy · 1 year ago

It's time for Obama's women supporters to make their voices heard. It's time for them to proclaim their anger and disappointment with the feminist establishment at how the feminist establishment has condoned and enabled racism and bigotry from Hillary Clinton and her female supporters.
A lot of the old-school feminist resentment towards Obama strikes me as them being angry that they didn't get their quid pro quo tit for tat tribute from black people. I think many old-school feminists believed that they were owed the Presidency by black people.
What I'm hoping will happen is that the relics of the sixties will be buried and we can move on without having to hear any more whining about Strong Women and their Sacrifices and how much they care about civil rights because they got high and thenmarched in some rally forty years ago. I don't think any of these 60s feminists truly cared about racism and civil rights.
I think all they cared about was looking like martyrs and victims and finding an empty and fake solidarity with other perceived martyrs and victims.

PeteWa · 1 year ago

Honestly, I think you are being incredibly dismissive of other people's efforts, not to mention over-generalizing.

I believe that MOST are the opposite of what you see, while some of the pundits (who have been living their strange, insulated, media fostered and pampered lives) have succumbed to what amounts to tunnel vision.

Jimpy · 1 year ago

I appreciate that you disagree without flaming me. I must say though that as someone who has been around a lot of Boomer/ex 60s-hippie feminists, the stench of condescension towards anybody of a non-white ethnic/racial background is palpable. Many people claim that they're not racist at all because they don't hate people of a different race. But that's not enough. One must also respect people of other races the same as one respects people of one's own race.
Also, if white feminists had no problem at all with people of other races, why then is the lack of minority and immigrant presence such a huge issue in feminism? This is feminism's dirty secret that is discussed loudly in feminist circles, but never in the presence of the enemy ie: men.
Finally, white feminists have completely failed to acknowledge Hillary's white privilege. They keep referring to the contest as between a black man and a woman. They never mention her whiteness. They never acknowledge that Hillary's whiteness gives her an advantage. If her whiteness was not an advantage at all, then why don't we see any minority women running for President?

Polly_Tics · 1 year ago

Are YOU actually lecturing ME about racism and my fellow boomers? Do you truly ASSUME that just because of your own limited experience with a group of people, that your impression is the truth and only truth?

You thanked me for disagreeing with you while not flaming, well that is not how I work; but you are making it so damn hard to actually carry on any kind of a conversation with you.

Let me give you a hint: when trying to discuss any subject (right now it's racism and the 60's) then perhaps you need to discuss your impressions, both learned first hand and through books, WITHOUT ACCUSING an entire group of people of something as horrid as racism!

Jimpy · 1 year ago

Yes I am actually lecturing you about racism.
And I wasn't thanking you for not flaming. I was thanking PeteWa.
The fact that you cannot talk about your Great Heroes, the Feminists without hyperventilating about how none of them, ever, could possibly be in the slightest bit racist suggests to me that you're clueless about racism.
Racism is everywhere. There's a reason why minority women don't congregate to worship at the Church of the Sacred Feminine and fall in line behind white feminists.
You don't have to hate a race to be a racist. You just have to accord them less respect than you would a member of your own race.
Affection and respect are not the same thing.
Hate and disrespect are not the same thing.
Yes, liberals can be just as racist as anybody else. It's one of the myths of feminism that feminists are conferred this exalted status as Wondrous beings who could never ever be racist. That only members and enablers of the Patriarchy could be racist and no one else.
Liberal feminists can be just as clueless, condescending, patronizing, backward and ignorant towards people of other races as shudder...gasp...those Patriarchal Conservatives.
Oh and I'm sure your best friend is black.

Polly_Tics · 1 year ago

You're an idiot, plain and simple! When you actually can walk the walk, maybe then there will be hope...

Shessshhh

Jimpy · 1 year ago

You haven't refuted any of my points.
You have decided that i am personally accusing you of being a racist when I'm simply saying that racism is prevalent everywhere and feminists are lying to themselves if they cannot acknowledge that themselves are often guilty of racism.
And just what the hell do you think was going on with the feminists and their High Priestess Hillary ? If it was not racism, then what the hell was it??
Oh and I know you're a 57 yr old Boomer and all, but don't talk to yourself so much.. It reeks of that Boomer narcissism.
Oh sorry, that was me being sexist.

Polly_Tics · 1 year ago

This is me ignoring you...

PeteWa · 1 year ago

Another thing is that all of these pundits like to also overlook the fact that Hillary has led a life of extreme privilege since the sixties.
She is not just any woman.
She has been in politics for almost 40 years, has a huge number of connections that would make anyone jealous, as well as having been a first lady of the US, and the spouse of one of the most popular presidents in our lifetime.
However, this is also not acknowledged by all the pundits.
The nomination was Hillary's to lose, and she did lose it - much the way she lost me, although I was tepid at best in my support, I was planning on voting for her if she got the nod until I was witness to her campaign.

Still... I think it is important to keep your personal experience with what sound like the worst "feminists" in America separate from what other people did and what their motives were.

takeasiesta · 1 year ago

"why then is the lack of minority and immigrant presence such a huge issue in feminism"

The rest of the world does not have those freedoms. I am Hindu and a feminist because I am an American and have shed a lot of the part of my culture that keeps women down. Arranged marriages still happen. Look at Muslim and Asian culture that are inherently patriarchal. My dad once hit me when I was 7 because I asked him why he didn't help my mother with the housework because I didn't understand it.

Polly_Tics · 1 year ago

Pete,

Is this for me? If so, please can you rephrase, I'm not understanding what you are saying here.

PeteWa · 1 year ago

Sorry Polly, I was responding to Jimpy and I think Jimpy was responding to me when you thought it was directed at you. I blame disqus.

Polly_Tics · 1 year ago

Yes, I hate this DISQUS software...

Polly_Tics · 1 year ago

Being "one of those 60's feminists" of which you speak, I take issue with your assessment of the situation and intent. I don't know if you are a man or a woman, or what age you are, or what experience you may have had with such a hard fought battle, but how dare you attribute such horrible intent with what was done during that time.

I am terribly disappointed with what many of the national feminists are doing with Hillary's campaign and how they are making the movement look "foolish", but damn you, learn something about the fight that many of us fought, both then and now!

Jimpy · 1 year ago

Why is it so blasphemous and heretical to question whether the motives of those 60s-feminists were as milky-white pure as they made it sound?
Why is it so horrible to question whether 60s-feminists expected something back from black people in return for supporting black people's civil rights?
Why is it so horrible to surmise whether at least some of those 60s-feminists wanted their pound of flesh from black people ?
What is so wrong in asking if some of those 60s-feminists expected that grateful black people would get right in line behind them and vote for a 60s-feminist to be President?
Being a feminist does not make you a Goddess, infallible and free of all Machiavellian calculation.
Can you honestly tell me that Harriet Christian who yelled that the DNC was betraying a woman for an inadequate black male was really not at all regretting that at one time she spent time and money and energy campaigning for black people?
Can you tell me that Harriet Christian was not feeling that black people betrayed her and other feminists ?
Just because one calls oneself a feminist, it doesn't mean that their motives are henceforth pure and noble. It is perfectly possible to be Machiavellian and feminist.
Exhibit A: Hillary.

Polly_Tics · 1 year ago

Why is it important to assign such a negative opinion about an entire movement just because you don't like what some of the spokespeople in that same movement are now doing?

What is it necessary to damn millions of people who worked so hard at civil rights for ALL?

Why is it necessary to be so damn thick that you can't ask questions about SOME within a group, without making it all be about the group?

Unless and until you can speak about your questions in an intelligent manner without allocating RACISM (or whatever other horror you might want), I think discussion with you is not something in which I want to indulge. I don't and won't speak to someone who insists that I (or the entirety of Boomers) am racist, stupid and the entire gambit of which you speak.

Open up your thoughts and discuss what is upsetting WITHOUT assigning such crap to all and maybe then, MAYBE, we can talk.

dula · 1 year ago

I'm going to assume you're a woman? If you were a guy, I'd delete this comment. But as a woman, you'd have the right to make that observation in my opinion. So, which one is it? :-)

I'm whatever you need me to be, Daddy.

TheOriginalLiz · 1 year ago

I agree that it is sad when someone like Steinem sinks to such sound-bite courting answers, in spite of all evidence to the contrary. Is she so desperate to have a female president that quality doesn't matter?

I think it would be great to have a female president, certainly, but I'd really prefer a competent president (for a change).

Jimpy · 1 year ago

Wow, that's a good point.

applepie · 1 year ago

LOL, even I won't talk about my vagina on a blog.

Sexism, racism , ok we have seen it all and it's human nature, time to move on and defeat McCain instead of rehashing.

Obama and Clinton both have said things that may not have been perfectly accurate at times, both have some skeletons in their closet. In the end Obama ran a better campaign with better staff, hindsight can't be recouped.

The situation now facing us is the electoral map and how to best crush McCain. While Roberts aka CNN map whiz can be boring to some extent, he has shown an ability to be very accurate. His assessment of Obama +Clinton against McCain shows a crushing defeat for McCain and a close race with just Obama against McCain without Clinton on the ticket.

We may dislike Clinton in varying degrees but the fact remains her supporters guarantee defeat of McCain. I can bite the bullet if it means a crushing defeat of McCain.

LanceThruster · 1 year ago

Good-bye to all that

HILLARY CLINTON: So that’s it? Good-bye and good luck?!?

LANCETHRUSTER: I don’t recall saying good luck.

ikonoklast · 1 year ago

Whatever, Gloria.

We are witnessing the last dying gasps of Boomers who can't bear to think they are no longer relevant or in control. I see all of this as more of a generational thing than a gender thing.

Jimpy · 1 year ago

Oops sorry, I meant my comment below for your post. Good point. I do think that this is part of a feminist Boomer wave of resentment against who they think is a young whipper-snapper who needs to be shown the ropes.

Polly_Tics · 1 year ago

I'm a 57 year old white feminist (woman) and I am so incredibly embarrassed by some of the most well known feminists spouting this kind of CRAP. These are the types of comments and gestures that make the movement look foolish not to mention "limited" in scope.

It is this kind of attitude that is now turning off younger women to the important needs of women; this makes the movement look foolish, not crucial.

ZennButtKicker (tlhwraith) · 1 year ago

Welcome to the boat of us black folks. 90% of the time, when one of our "leaders" like Sharpton gets on TV, you can feel a collective cringe go out over the population. Just because someone has proclaimed themselves a spokesperson for a group of people doesn't mean they truly represent how those people feel. However, given the laxy media the tendancy today is to simply place the microphone in front of whoever is a "known" figure in a field. Gloria Steinam, for better or worse, has been the flag-bearer for feminist causes for a long time, and a lot of people perhaps defer to her opinion too easily on issues of gender bias. My thinking is that no ones opinions are above analysis and we all have a right to not agree with everything they say.

PeteWa · 1 year ago

Well said, Zenn.

Polly_Tics · 1 year ago

Agreed, however I take issue with their "whining". Yes whining! It is one thing to object about issues and in this case an election which has shown signs of sexism, just as it has with racism, BUT to make the election about that one thing is astoundingly shallow and just plain WRONG.

I have always taken issue with national spokespeople, no matter what group they may represent, as there will always be a differing of opinion; however these days the feminist movement is looking weaker and more infantile by the day.

Yes, it gets me mad, be it about sexism, racism or any other kind of issue at hand.

Jimpy · 1 year ago

Pull your head out of your ass. Feminists can be just as racist as anybody else. Case closed.

Polly_Tics · 1 year ago

Your reply to my post shows that you are not even reading what is written.

Please, I don't know if you have a problem with reading, women, people of color, Caucasians, Catholics, Christians, Mulisms, Agnostics, Atheists, or people with large ears; in any event I don't care.

Your lack of civil discourse is astounding.

dula · 1 year ago

The whole generational thing vs. gender thing is a great observation. It must drive the elders crazy that their manipulative spinning doesn't seem to be quite working the way it used to...and the pundits are sick with the idea that they are becoming more and more irrelevant and unable to set the tone within their own frame.

gwpriester · 1 year ago

If Obama or anybody else pulled the same kind of underhanded crap as Bill and Hillary have in tearing down Obama and the party at the same time, then they are deserving of the hate.

It has nothing to do with gender or race.

Karl Rove is not a woman and yet I would defy you to find any self respecting liberal who thinks he is a swell guy.

Hillary lost because she and Bill and her campaign ran such a despicable and Rovian campaign of race baiting, smear and innuendo, and they offered no reasons that had any traction as why Hillary was the better candidate.

Obama offered youth, enthusiasm and inspiration. Hillary offered more of the same piled higher and deeper.

LeslieB · 1 year ago

Hillary ran a historic campaign. She's the first viable woman presidential candidate. It's amazing what she's done for women. So to say that she was defeated by sexism is, I believe, a real put down. It diminishes her accomplishments.

Yes, there was some sexism...Tweety for example. There was also racism. It would be difficult to quantify either at the polls, however. But Clinton came really close to winning the nomination. That's huge!

Plus, Clinton had everything going for her and was believed to be a shoe-in. Her campaign blew it. That's the reason she lost. For example: If she'd voted no on the Iraq war resolution, Obama might not have joined the race. Or if, she'd just apologized for that vote, she might've won. Because that was one of the biggest differences between her and Obama. Then there was her nuke Iran comment, the "I'm staying in this race in case Obama is assassinated" comment, her refusal to make her tax returns public, the lobbyists on her campaign...I could go on.

Coming Undone · 1 year ago

Hillary's supporters that are keeping up this sexism charge cannot even see the irony in everything that they say. On the one hand Hillary is strong but if anybody says anything about her ,then the men are supposed to come her rescue and apologize for what has been said. Hillary can throw the kitchen sink but the men cannot even come into the kitchen.

People did talk about her laugh but people also talked about Bush's laugh. People talked about her pantsuits but they always talk about a mans tie or how his suit fits or if his suit looks cheap.

I think the real problem is that they want to be put on a pedestal and all the men are supposed to be gentlemen all of time but they are still supposed to be treated as equals. Obama problem with them is that he was supposed to be a gentlemen and bow out when it was just the two of them.

Barnaby34 · 1 year ago

Billary and her band of lunatics will never accept that a "biatch is a biatch". It has nothing to do with sexism. If a man was a jerk like Pat Buchanan, he is called out as such. Shillary and Bill Clinton are nothing more than the worst type of dishonest and corrupt people who are attracted to politics out of pure greed and desire for power.

kevinbgoode · 1 year ago

You know, I'm getting sick and tired of listening to that "feminist" crap about the media hating Hillary. Did these people not see the high NEGATIVES recorded about a Hillary candidacy LONG before any official candidacy was announced? And were those high negatives attached to her because she is a woman?

Yes. . .the Right has demonized Clinton for years - and often unfairly. Which once again leads me to ask people WHY she would run this year, knowing the residue of that eternal damnation from the Right was still being used to motivate conservatives to the polls? For chrissakes - the Right, never known for ever taking any personal responsibility, was still blaming the Clintons for every fuckup in the world and used it to motivate their own base.

Hillary's failed candidacy had nothing to do with her being a "woman." It had everything to do with poor timing, an expensive and lackluster campaign, poor organization, too many mis-steps in speaking, negative campaigning, and her all-too-willing acceptance of endorsements from the same far-Right wingnuts who have spent years demonizing her and her husband.

Most people within the party, at the beginning, felt that she would be a good candidate - because of her positions - not because of her gender. But the worst thing that happened during this primary season was that she lost that trust from more than half of her own party while courting support from the crazy-ass right-wingers who wanted to play "operation chaos" in the democratic campaign.

When the Clintons were in office, they enjoyed widespread popularity, despite Bill's indiscretions and a lot of questionable dealings. When her campaign now complains that the media demonized her candidacy, one has to wonder why her people are so intent on sounding so much like the same conservatives who refuse to accept responsibility for anything they've done. That certainly did not help her case at all.

Polly_Tics · 1 year ago

The Clinton's think everything is about them and only them I'm afraid. They love the manipulation of people and politics gives them that tool they crave. Heck Bill was even great at it (ONCE), but these days both of them appear OLD, WILTED and USED UP.

Their using sexism is to deflect what they viewed as a tough issue to campaign against (a black man) and they seem to follow Karl Rove's tactics quite well.

Even though it "appears' that Hillary is suspending her campaign, do NOT believe this is the end of it all. I really predict she and her campaign will rally at the convention and try to pull some of the same shctick of the 1972 convention and steal the nomination. I am just hoping that the leadership is ballsy enough to prevent such a travesty.

Dave of the Jungle · 1 year ago

We would be remiss if we failed to point out that a few of us had Hillary's narcissism nailed significantly ahead of the curve.

But, enough about me. What do YOU think of me?

Judd · 1 year ago

"There may have been some sexism during this campaign, but it wasn't significant and it didn't impact the race (name a state in which sexism may have hurt Hillary's vote). Simply claiming it did, without offering any facts, does a disservice to all of us who fight bigotry every day."

**cringe**

When I read posts like this, I can't help but hear it being narrated in your shrill, self-righteous voice.

KathyphD · 1 year ago

Like most Democrats, I looked the other way during the 90's when Bill and HIllary were involved in one scandal after another. I kept making excuses for their corrupt dealings and widespread immoral hijinks. When I finally read the book "Unlimited Access" by a top Clinton FBI officer, it blew my mind. Bill and Hill trashed the White House just like they destroyed the economy of Arkansas. Finally the truth is coming out about these white trailer trash.

JMOHR · 1 year ago

There was sexism and racism involved in the campaign. You can not help but to remember those KY voters who freely admitted that they could not vote for a black man to be president. There were those voters who admitted that they would not vote for Hillary because she was a Clinton and they hated the Clintons. This is just part and parcel of every campaign. We all know that the press had it in for the Clintons when Bill was in the White House. Now we see Hillary trying to hijack the primary based on sexism. Sorry, no more a factor than racism. Press give you a hard time - Sorry, legacy of your husband. However, your own selfish quest for the presidency now threatens the party and the nation.

LeslieB · 1 year ago

The media didn't bring Hillary Clinton down. It wasn't the media who called her yesterday, it was Rep. Charles Rangel, Senator Schumer and 23 other members of Congress. Her own supporters asked her to quit. Perhaps Gloria Steinem would like to discuss their sexism?

And her contention that the media was in love with Obama is equally bogus. Did she miss the 24/7 news loops about the Reverend Wright, Obama's alleged ties to the Weather Underground, the attacks on Michelle, Hillary's comments that Obama hadn't been vetted, lacked experience, didn't have commander-in-chief credentials while she and McCain did. Did Steinem miss how the media has treated McCain by comparison?

MorgaineSwann · 1 year ago

I was buying that line of b.s. until Hillary and Bill started race-baiting. Feminism is about inclusivity - justice for all, not just for women. We are a world of women and their children. There is no one that doesn't fit one of those categories. Obama was gracious and classy throughout this process, while Hillary was vindictive, racist and shameful. She tried to use her gender as a wedge issue, instead of showing she could make the case for her election without playing the gender card. She made a few historic firsts, but she set the women's movement back 30 years.

I've been very disappointed in Gloria and some of the other feminist icons who have whined all the way through this process. We're better than that. There was certainly some sexism going on in the MSM and in the blogosphere, mostly because our culture hasn't come up with a way to insult somebody without feminizing them, but also because the ones with the voices are men. When that happened, they deserved to be called out on it, but that isn't what the Hillary supporters did. They twisted every negative or unsupportive comment into sexism. If all criticism of a particular woman is sexism, then the word has no meaning. I am not the same as Hillary, or Gloria, or even my Sister bloggers who are off the hook over this issue. Women are no more monolithic in our politics than men, or latinos, or any other group we want to paint with a broad brush.

It benefits the society to call out actual sexism when it occurs. Media Matters for America did a spectacular job of that where Chris Matthews was concerned, and they had an effect. It will take a while, but as Matthews said, he's trying to learn. This is a re-education process for all of us, because this is still a gender identified society. Muddying the waters by attributing sexism to a person who objects to an odious candidate actually hurts the cause.

I support the idea of more women in government, to the point that I've got a feminist project that is attempting to address the issue proactively, but I don't have to support every woman for every office. That woman was not going to improve the image of America in the world. Her campaign did plenty of damage we didn't need. She was crass, she was unethical, she was reckless. We've had enough of wannabe cowboys and girls in our foreign policy, thanks. I want someone in that office with some elegance, some grace, some common sense and some vision. The only option that fit that bill was Barack Obama. He wasn't my first choice, but when the field narrowed to two, and one of the two acted like George Wallace and the other like JFK, it became very easy to make my choice. Genitalia and chromosomes notwithstanding, Barack was the feminist candidate. The bottom line is that a feminist who believes in peace, social justice, and equality would NEVER threaten to "obliterate" an entire country. When she did that, she stopped being a woman and became another patriarchal problem just like the men who got us into Iraq.

tlsintx · 1 year ago

thank you morgaineswann!

mirth · 1 year ago

Hear Hear.
This comment is a joy to read and it reflects my beliefs.

mirth · 1 year ago

I add:

Two female leaders, Hillary Clinton and Nancy Pelosi, have done great harm to the recognition of women as capable leaders. Further, the "sexist" screechers reflect our society's low-functioning love of minutia.

consult · 1 year ago

Funny- they just happen to be the two most powerful women in the Democratic Party. Which women leaders are acceptable to you? I would guess we are all screechers in your book.

Polly_Tics · 1 year ago

I would love to see more women like Kathleen Sebelius and Gennifer Granholm come into the fore...and I think that is in the works.

mirth · 1 year ago

You make my point, milosarah.

Yes, both Pelosi and Clinton (because of her presidency bid) are two of the most powerful women in the Dem Party, yet we have an ineffectual leader who refuses to fulfill her oath of office and a woman who ran a despicable, divisive, racist campaign.

consult · 1 year ago

So then answer the question- name a woman in power is meets your standards.

mirth · 1 year ago

If you mean females on the national stage, I would really have to think before I could answer your question.

Who do you see as a strong female leader, one who is addressing the devastating issues we all face regardless gender and race?

consult · 1 year ago

Well, Donna Edwards is a great example. I can't wait to see what she does in
Congress. Patti Murray is another. I like Blanche Lincoln although she might
be a bit too conservative. Hilda Solis is great. I have always admired Rep.
Lynn Woosley, who talks about the time she spent on welfare as a single
mother and how important subsidized child care was to her being able to work
and take care of her kids. That would be a great issue for Obama that would
resonate with women.

mirth · 1 year ago

I will agree that in an Obama administration these women, particularly Lynn Woosley, and others have potential as leaders.

mirth · 1 year ago

As for the "sexist" screechers, when the real issues that have brought this country to an abyss are largely ignored by them, they are furthering the idea that females are incapable of leadership.

Polly_Tics · 1 year ago

Let us not forget those Hillary supporters who have become well known in this campaign of hate: Geraldine Ferrara, Reps. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) and Stephanie Tubbs Jones (D-Ohio).

Wretched screechers all.

jr · 1 year ago

every day the media showed Rev Wright clips but these feminists for McCain claim they were against Hillary

slappymagoo · 1 year ago

I wrote a ridiculously long post, but realized I could sum up how I was feeling thusly (thusly?) :

Anyone who thinks people were voting for Obama because he's a man, or WEREN'T voting for Hillary because she's a woman...probably voted for Hillary because she's a woman. They are guilty of the same kind of bias (with a different target) they accuse others of having.

Of course, if you accused them of only voting for Clinton because she's a woman, they'd give you a long list of reasons why they thought Clinton was the superior candidate. But the list of reasons YOU have for thinking Obama was the better candidate? Invalid. It's because you're threatened by a woman in charge, don't deny it.

It's that sort of horseshit that makes it harder for REAL charges of sexism to be exposed and condemned, just as, if a black person cries racism every time things don't go his or her way, it makes it that much harder to believe him or her (or worse, sadly, to care) when there are legitimate charges of racism. It's just as bad as if a woman's experience with men, or a black person's experience with white people, tainted their view of ALL men or ALL whites so anyone else would have to bear the brunt of their bias.

(and for what it's worth, the ol' vice versa applies, Obama supporters claiming that ANYONE and EVERYONE who didn't vote for Obama was a racist probably voted for Obama BECAUSE he was black. but shhhh! Don't tell them! They won't believe THAT either!)

Racism and sexism exists. I know, Breaking News. But when you assume everyone's a racist or a sexist or otherwise biased against you, because they don't agree with you on things based on opinion, you come across as a regular ol' gender & color neutral asshole.

LeslieB · 1 year ago

You know there's something else about this argument that really gets me....
It ignores all the racist remarks the Clintons hurled against Obama. But more importantly, it ignores the history of racism in this country and Obama's significant and historic achievement: He's the first African-American to win the Democratic nomination for president.

Polly_Tics · 1 year ago

I believe the Clinton's used Sexism as a tool against what they perceived might hurt them in the campaign, racism. I think they wanted to overwhelm the media with that it is sexism that is the trouble and that racism isn't all that bad. Heck look at Geraldine Ferrara's comments, they positively tried to cast racism as if it was nothing more than a teenagers plague of acne.

Shameful!

JacksonThersites · 1 year ago

Last summer I met Gloria Stienem and asked her why she thought Hillary Clinton was publically effacing herself of all the warmest qualities one often heard she exudes in one on one meetings, was it sexism, I wondered but did not directly pose in the question? Perhaps it was my lack of specificity but Ms. Stienem gave a sadly pat answer, the voters would decide and she, Gloria Stienem, would support who ever the Democrats nominated. Step up to the plate on that one Gloria! In the heart of my perhaps poorly posed question lies a good deal of what was wrong with Hillary's run and the sexism that lay firstly in her campaign organization. They tried to turn Hillary into a man and ran her as a man. She was held back from expressing anything that may have been interpreted as a female quality (whatever that means). She was tougher than any (male) candidate. Her war votes more hawkish. She turned off the electorate for whom I believe it didn't matter that she is woman but really cared to see a real person under all the posturing. Everyone says yes there was sexism in the press, I can think of Chris Matthews, and there are probably other examples, but nobody is talking about the inherent sexism in her staff that sought to protect her from sexism by making her public persona a hawkish steely unnuanced personality nobody could relate to. She had to cry in New Hampshire for that to begin to change but by then the die had been cast.

Polly_Tics · 1 year ago

Yes, she became a cartoon, a sad and creepy version of a woman.

LeslieB · 1 year ago

I don't quite agree with this assessment. Hillary's Iraq war resolution vote had nothing to do with marketing her as "tough" during the campaign. That was something she did by herself, prior to the campaign. And, if Hillary "held back" as you say, then that was probably an indicator of her personality more than anything else.

As for her alleged crying...for me, that was an example of media sexism. How many times has Bush cried [eg. for the troops] without the same media attention?

tlsintx · 1 year ago

i've wondered about Hillary's Iraq vote for a long time. I think she may have been positioning herself way back then to head off accusations of being a weak liberal (ie: woman) by voting for the war and supporting a ban on flag-burning and all that crap. and as the first woman with a real shot at the presidency, sort of paving the way for those coming behind, maybe she believed she had to do it this way, that she had to kind of sacrifice herself and act more hawkish/conservative than she really was. who knows. but she definitely sank herself during the campaign...no excuses.

Smarmy · 1 year ago

Everyday people hated her too, not just the media. If anyone expressed aloud any of the hate, they were shouted down and branded a misogynist. As a female, I'm neither sexist nor misogyist; but rather just a woman who saw a phoney and heard a liar everytime I saw or heard Hillary. And this started way back in 1992.

Coming Undone · 1 year ago

Hillary surrounded herself with men, ran her campaign like a man, tried to be more manly than any other candidate, she tried her best not to show any of her feminine qualities, and then complained when people did not treat her as a woman.

A woman has to break the glass ceiling by being a woman not by turning her into a man.

OleHippieChick · 1 year ago

The Clintons' crude manipulations and transparent wranglings were NOT what we needed from them. Had she won, I would've voted for her anyway. But what about people who are just plain sick and tired of the Clintons? Those 8 years were really enough and the feeling they'd overstayed their welcome at the party loomed larger and larger.
It's like the guests who stay till 4AM and then demand breakfast. Sheesh. Goombotz already.

lynchie · 1 year ago

How about more people thought Obama would do a better job than Hillary. It is not about sex it is about qualifications, integrity, ethics and fair play. You failed the last 3 when the campaign hit the Obama bus. No one questioned your qualifications Hillary until you had to tell us 30 times a day why you were and Obama wasn't. When Bill started pointing his finger at us and you started using him to speak on your behalf. . If you had kept this primary about you and your beliefs you would have won.

debbsmith · 1 year ago

All you have to do is read the comments on this blog to know sexism played a major role. The stunning hypocrisy of Obama supporters has been evident. They loudly tout their liberal cred, then spit on Hillary in terms that are blatantly anti-woman.

Polly_Tics · 1 year ago

You must reread the comments. Whereas some of them definitely are sexist in nature, many of them are trying to recast the problem to see it clearly.

This race has been complicated with sexism and racism both; and the idea that there should be some sort of contest between the two scourges is just plain insulting.

John Aravosis · 1 year ago

Except some of the most vicious criticism is coming from fellow women. So are they sexist too?

Oh and I just did a quick survey of the comments. As usual, you guys talk a good talk, but your facts aren't quite there upon closer inspection. I found one comment where she was called a "biatch" because someone was trying not to be a total ass. That was it.

Dave of the Jungle · 1 year ago

I am not anti-woman. I have known many outstanding women and have deep regard for them all. My personal physician is a woman and I retain her services because of her excellent clinical competence and superior communication ability.

I am anti-Hillary because I am appalled by her campaign tactics and her obvious narcissism. Gender not relevant.

Polly_Tics · 1 year ago

Well stated!

Jimpy · 1 year ago

Here honey, let me tell you and Hillary ( and all the other Strong Women fighting on behalf of one of the most racist primary campaigns the US has ever seen) exactly what you want to hear:
Poor You.
Oh and Women Rock etc.
When are you going to get tired of the pandering and the cliches and the buzzwords like Empowered Woman and Strong Women and Womyn and Wimmin and get a clue and realize that in the real word reclaiming the c-word and the b-word doesn't count for anything? It's who you appoint as your campaign managers and the decisions you make with them that decide whether or not you win the campaign.
Hillary's problem is NOT that she is a woman. But like many women, she decided that that was her single biggest handicap.
She didn't look to see if she was indeed hiring the right people, if they were keeping tight enough control on her finances, if she was raising enough funds from the right people.
Nope, from the beginning, she focussed on running as an underdog simply because she is a woman.
Just because you FEEL like an underdog doesn't mean you should proclaim your underdog status to the world constantly.
Hillary was constantly howling from the rooftops about how she was victimized because she is a woman.
She never reached out directly to the millions of men who are not sexist and want to move past sexism. She never had faith that the electorate could forget that she is a woman and see her as a person first.
ironically the feminists' biggest wish has come true: hIllary is treated now as a human who screwed up, not as a woman. But you and your ilk don't want that. You want the empty platitudes.
You want special treatment for the poor little lady. This despite that is Hillary was a man, she would have been ripped to shreds by the media for her racist remarks.

rhyta · 1 year ago

You prove Debbsmith's point, calling her honey then ripping into her. I fail to understand the hate that Obama supporters have for anything to do with the Clintons. I look at all this viciousness and wonder how the party will get any unity for november. It seems there is some latent ageism as well, throw out those old boomers, who needs them? I think those old boomers will need to cast votes for your candidate if he is to win but then what do I know? I am saddened that so many of the so called progressive blogs have morphed into freepers. It seems like an upside down world in the blogosphere.

p.s. as for Matthews being chastized for his misogyny, he was talking Tuesday night whether Clinton could be obeident and subservient enough for the party...guess someone forgot to give him the memo.

come on people, stop it with the hate

sandyboy42 · 1 year ago

Very good post. Obama will need all these voters who
have been offended by the radical left-wing blogs. Better
start "making nice." He can not wind without us 18 million! That's a f
fact.

FightForJustice · 1 year ago

As a woman in the HRC core demographic, who has fought against sexism in society, I found one of the most tasteless, and good heavens with the narrow definition of sexism given by so many crying "SEXISM", definition, "sexist" comment was when her mouthpiece Carville made the remark "If Hillary gave Obama one of her cojones, they'd both have two." If Obama or anyone on his campaign had made that remark or any remark about Hillary's cojones, I think it would have been placed well above the Hillary vs. Coffeemaker tape...

Sugapea · 1 year ago

Most men don't even realize how their life has been influenced by sexism/misogyny.
Here's a perfect example of that:

Living here in the SF Bay area and listening to programs on the subject of Sex-Change, specifically men to women. I've learned that Gay men haven't a clue regarding the unbelievable lack of respect they will receive as a women. In the past...the realization of that was a shocking discovery for those who took this brave path.

Now days...extensive psychological counseling before a sex-change entails deep discussion regarding the loss of stature men will inevitably experience in a women's body.

Believe me...sexism does exist...
And some of us clearly saw it during the Clinton run for the nomination!

Jimpy · 1 year ago

Of course sexism exists. So does racism. And they both will continue to exist for quite a while.
The point is that Hillary did not lose just because of sexism. And neither was sexism a huge contributing factor to her loss.
If you want Hillary to be treated objectively like a human being, then you should be willing to criticize her for running a really terrible campaign.
You feel guilty for thinking outside the narrow confines of the NOW talking points. The whole point of feminism is to treat women no differently from men. And if you refuse to acknowledge the barenaked truth: that Hillary ran a meanspirited and ineffective campaign, then you are as dogmatic, as blind, as delusional as your arch-nemeses: the Religious Right.

Polly_Tics · 1 year ago

I don't think most in here are denying that Sexism exists, but rather they are trying to discern the issues in this specific campaign and the divisions created by false flags.

Coming Undone · 1 year ago

I am sure we have all heard that if a woman becomes President that she would base everything on her emotions or feelings and there would also be a lot of drama. Hillary and her supporters have brought this stereotype to life.

Women like Gloria Steinem no longer have a clue about what the women in todays world want.

munjoyfan · 1 year ago

I want to say that I know many many strong, "feminist" (what an outdated term) women like myself, women who campaigned for equal rights. who have fought in the workplace for family supports, who have always admired the Children's Defense Fund, who didn't wear bras in the 70's (gravity has taken that freedom away from us), who have filed human rights complaints and won---who do not feel that Hilary's campaign was a failure for women or the result of misogyny. In fact, Hilary was an unappealing personality. Period. And she continues to lack grace, magnanimity, and courage--all critical leadership qualities which obama has in abundance. Women were not on trial with Hilary's campaign. Hillary was. And I caucused for Obama, as did an overwhelming number of women in the state of Maine. Let it go, ladies. Your candidate lost. I am sure you are sad about this. But it wasn't sexism that caused her to lose. It was herself and her mate.

MorgaineSwann · 1 year ago

Let's not limit this to "Ladies" - there are plenty of men who are furious that Hillary didn't win. This campaign wasn't about gender, it was about whiteness. Hillary is every bit the entitled rich white girl who grows up and thinks she should be handed something no one else ever was. She used dirty tricks that would NEVER have been tolerated in a man's campaign, and the irony of that is that the people who are bitching about Hillary losing are the very ones who would lead the charge against a man who tried such racist tactics. She claimed all kinds of authority based on her husband's presidency, which is also b.s. She did try to do some good things, but she failed, though it was through no real fault of her own, Trying is not succeeding. But those aren't even the reasons I say this was about whiteness.

I live in an area populated by Dixiecrats. That's not a slur - it's the way they describe themselves. They thought Hillary was our only hope. They know John McCain is a phoney, he's too old and he wants it so badly that he has abandoned any principles he had to get the nomination. Obama scares the hell out of them, and yes, it's because he's not white, not American enough, and doesn't speak "Bubba." The Christian Right is convinced that he won't salute the flag, is a Muslim or the antiChrist, can't be trusted, works for Al Quaeda, etc. They don't get MSNBC and rarely watch anything but local news. The local news here has made several blatantly inaccurate statements about Obama, and that won't change. Obama has a lot of work to do here that needs to begin immediately.

This isn't the only place that he's got this problem, though, it's just the most honest. There are older, poorly educated racist whites in every major city, every suburb, every rural area of the country. Hillary had a chance to help them find their way to Obama, but she drove them toward McCain instead. That wasn't just unethical politics, it was poisonous.

Ultimately, the majority voted for the Obama movement rather than the Clinton establishment. Hillary could have redeemed herself on Tuesday night by showing some grace and some class, but no - she took Obama's historic achievement, one of the most important moments in American history, and she pissed on it. She's the new George Wallace, standing in the doorway, not wanting to let the African American guy into a place he has every right to be. Mark my words, history will not look kindly on this.

Everything about her speech the other night was slimey - she held it in a venue 2 stories underground so no one could get news of Obama's victory by phone or BlackBerry; Terry McAuliffe introduced her as the next President; she didn't concede, didn't congratulate Barack, didn't urge her followers to give their support to Barack as the party nominee. She was vindictive, selfish, smug and short-sighted. I don't see how rational people can defend that behavior, so i suppose it's no wonder the people defending it are behaving so irrationally, but seriously, that was appalling. I can't be proud of what she did achieve because she's a sore loser. She stopped being the stereotype of a vindictive nutcracker and became the archetype of the castrating female. I don't want her associated with feminism in any way.

Feminists don't ride their husband's coat tails.
Feminists don't appeal to racist fears to get their way.
Feminists know that sometimes you have to walk away with some dignity and grace so you can fight another fight.

As for the VP talk, I hope Barack is smarter than that. One of the first things he told members of his campaign was that he didn't want any drama. The Clintons are pure drama. I can't take another 8 Clinton years, no matter how good they seemed economically. I'm looking forward to having a President who has some grace and a sense of propriety. What a wonderful change that will be.

mirth · 1 year ago

Once again I salute your excellent comment and thank you for saying it so well for me too.

takeasiesta · 1 year ago

Cheers to that. I started a joke with my friends that McCain is going to claim ageism when he loses in November.

Anyone see the Daily Show today? They had an excellent piece on sexism where their female correspondent stripped off a piece of clothing as a cry out against sexism and underneath her clothes she is wearing a Wonder Woman costume.

MorgaineSwann · 1 year ago

I saw that - they actually sell Wonder Woman undies on one of the feminist sites. Feminist Majority, I think.

I'm not going to be able to relax until after the convention. I'm not convinced Hillary won't attempt a coup at the last minute. I can't believe she acted like such a Republican.

Antigone · 1 year ago

Oh cry me a river. The thing that irked me the most about HC, besides the fact that she and her hubby deliberately injected racism into the primaries, used RFK and the 'A' word (I don't really like writing it either) as some sort of justification for staying in the race - was the way she wanted to have it both ways and whine and cry about these so called instances of sexism. With the exception of the two rubes in NH who told her to go iron their shirts or something, I can't think of a single one. The media gave her a free pass the whole way through - no matter what low class, outrageous thing she said or did. And as for sexism - I almost gagged when I saw her in that debate, when somebody asked her a question, and she made this stupid face, did this little laugh and said, "You hurt my feelings." Playing the poor little victim in the middle of a debate. Was that her plan of action, what she was going to do, if she found herself across the table from Iran's president and negotiations weren't going well? That woman is a total disgrace and an embarrassment to real feminists everywhere. She's bitter, deceitful, manipulative, and narcissistic. It's always all about her. And that's why I voted for Obama. When he looks at the Presidency, the power it gives him, and the country - he thinks to himself - how can I use this power to help the people of my country and make their lives and my country better. HC looks at it and asks - how can I use this power to help ME, further MY agenda, and make MY life better and to hell with everybody else.

DoctorJ · 1 year ago

Amen! I'm sick to death of all those bitter, foolish women who still scream sexism over Hillary's loss. What a load of crap -- she lost for a whole host of reasons that have nothing to do with her gender. But those women who've wrongly made it their cri de coeur are an embarrassment to my gender (yes, I'm a woman) and only damage the cause of feminism and gender equality.

sandyboy42 · 1 year ago

Hell yes there was sexism from the start: Here's a small list:
her tone of voice
her style of dress
showing emotion
her laugh(cackle)
"looks haggard"
"I cross my legs when she come into a room" Tucker Carlson
"Iron my shirts"
right wing four letter slurs
her cleavage
her pantsuits
The woman who asked,"How do we stop the bitch" McCain just laughed
"pantsuits to cover her heavy botton." Chris Matthews again
Obama"She is likeable enough."
"Uppity woman"
she was compared to a stripper saying she's "flattered by all the attention."
I did not support her because she is a woman but because she is the stronger candidate (18 million agreed with me) and I am a white, college educated retired RN 66 years old. I would think those who are in denial about the misogony revealed in this primary should remember the man-child current president who lives in perpetual denial. You have joined him in his bubble!

JamesR · 1 year ago

Sticks and stones.. Politics is a contact sport. Get over it. Half of what you cite was courted by the campaign and used to garner more attention. Attention attention attention - negative attention is still attention. I did not say that in furthering your analogy to her and a stripper, the visuals are unwelcome. Most of that is subjective and I couldn't expect you to entertain these analyses as valid but I must point out that the reference to her laugh is not sexism at all but a true reaction to a form of body language that is viscerally discordant and usually evidence of nervous dissembling. Maybe it wasn't, but, really, most people would find that it is. NOT BECAUSE SHE'S A WOMAN. Because she's a human being being observed by other human being and we notice these things.

She only laughed naturally a few times that I saw, which was also a tad dischordant as it revealed what she truly found amusing, like in one of the last debates, at the misfortune or putting down of her opponent - these suggested character weaknesses undesirable in a Presidential candidate I want... Good God: It's not rocket science, it's simple human behavior. Elanor Clift pointed this out over a year ago on Washington Week in Review or somesuch, did a most excellent impression of Clinton's voice pitch, and the psychology of pubic speaking and it's perception. Ignored of course by the other males on the panel, which might or might not have been sexism, but there it is. Guess Clinton never got the memo.

And, not to get personal or anything, but if I could infer from your post that you are a Registered Nurse, I would be a bit worried getting any medication from you, properly measured, if you seriously use that number you posted. If I needed 17.5 cc of some medication I would be poorly served by getting 18 cc. Right? Go here: http://openleft.com/showDiary.do;jsessionid=CE4... and here: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/pr... and get the facts and define your terms before you post. Evidently with Clintons not only do you have to agree beforehand what the word "is" is, but what the word "vote" is too. Enough with fake "talking points."

MorgaineSwann · 1 year ago

I agree there was s sexism in the media, but that isn't why she lost. She lost because she was divisive, unbending, helped the opposing party over a member of her own, flat out lied about several things and went places no politician ever should - race-baiting, the A word, refusing to bow out gracefully - and generally showed no class at all. I started out rooting for her and now I can't stand the sight of her.

sandyboy42 · 1 year ago

I do not believe I said that is why she lost. I am saying we have not "come a long way baby." There is as much distain for females as there ever was. As to losing, in my book, the one who has the most votes should be the winnner. When Al Gore lost to Bush,even though he had the most votes, true democracy died. In Canada, a campaigh last 3 months and the candidate with the most votes is the winner. THAT is democracy!

MorgaineSwann · 1 year ago

I agree - we've got a long way to go. I also agree that the one with the most votes should win, and in this case, that is what happened. The only place Clinton had more votes wa in her head. Al Gore won in 2000, but the Supreme Court messed that up.

I think we need to get rid of delegates and the electoral college and go with the popular vote, but for this election, we have to play with the rules we've got. I do worry about the Republicans stealing this one, too.

ggm1957 · 1 year ago

If we look hard enough, we can find anything. Sexism? Most of that is a bunch of bs. I am a 50 year old white working woman and I haven't seen the sexism in this campaign. I did see a whiny female who cried, "sexism" whenever she wanted someone to feel sorry for her. That does not mean it was there and it was certainly not directed at her by Obama. She certainly attacked him more than enough and that caused me to be 100% against her. Obama took the high road and Hillary got down in the dirt. For once, justice served and she got just what she deserved.