Is this an endorsement of misogyny or a reaction to feminism on some level?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s so frustrating that you can’t see that Democratic policies lost this race, not the candidate’s gender or color. Identity politics is not a winning strategy. Figure it out.

+1

[Anonymous]

If it was misogyny, would we have any elected female officials?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I didn’t vote for Kamala because I thought Kamala would be an embarrassment to the country and women everywhere if she became president. I want someone who isn’t a blathering idiot to be the standard by which we elect women into the top job of this country. Someone like Gretchen Whitmer, as an example.

I also don’t agree with electing someone into office that I didn’t vote for in a primary. That is so wrong on so many levels and shouldn’t be tolerated from either side. I’m glad we didn’t allow that in the end, if I’m being honest.

This was going to be a case of “history repeating itself” either way: they have both had ample opportunity do good in office, and they have both failed. But we had a choice to make between two idiots. With “history” in the back of my mind, the age old question of “are we better off today than we were four years ago” played a role in my decision making, and, well, no. I’m sorry, but no, we aren’t better.

I don’t like either, but I know what to expect from both. If history is going to repeat itself, then so be it.

It is disingenous to say you didn't want a "blathering idiot" or that you would have preferred Whitmer and then to be okay with Trump becoming president. Trump is a blathering idiot and Whitmer wasn't on the ballot. You had two choices. You either voted for Trump (wholly unqualified for the job due to his performance the first time and behavior since, plus older than Biden was when Biden took office) or you didn't vote for anyone thus enabling Trump to win.

If you voted for no one I just think you are derelict in your duty as a citizen. If you voted for Trump I think misogyny HAD to play a role because even if you think Harris is unqualified there is no way she is less qualifed than Trump. Objectively. He is a bad person. He's corrupt. He failed to protect the country on J6. And he's too old.

I don’t like blathering idiots from either gender, but when it comes to the first female president, I don’t want her to be a blathering idiot like the men. I want her to be better. So I chose the idiot man we can expect instead of the idiot woman, just because, when I know we can do better. And I hope we learn a lesson and do better in four years.

So you held the woman to a higher standard.

That's misogyny.

You can justify it all you want but that's what it is. By definition.

[Anonymous]

It’s economic plain and simple. People vote with their wallets. If a female candidate can put more money in all of our pockets, we would vote for the female. The Democrats think they can win on issues but when it comes right down to it, people care about their finances and that’s the bottom line.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Polling shows Biden would lose by more. This is about inflation, pure and simple. Which neither candidate will fix, ironically. Where’s a Volker when you need him?

And crime

So let’s vote in a criminal so he is immune from facing charges. Makes sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s so frustrating that you can’t see that Democratic policies lost this race, not the candidate’s gender or color. Identity politics is not a winning strategy. Figure it out.

It's both. Can't you see that it's both?

The Dems need better policies and to articulate them better.

Harris's gender (and likely race but definitely her gender) worked against her in trying to combat this issue.

Trump also has TERRIBLE policy proposals. He got some benefit from being the challenger non-incumbent (though less than a typical challenger because he was recently president and did such a poor job he was fired). But he also got benefit from being a man and therefore getting more of a pass on having stupid, bad policy proposals and being unable to string two coherent sentences together and being tempermentally unfit and all the other stuff wrong with him.

Like you can't blame the whole thing on Harris being a bad candidate and the Dems having inadequate solutions when Trump is ALSO a bad candidate (arguably much worse) and ALSO having inadequate solutions.

Like do you think Harris would have won if she'd advocated for tarriffs and mass deportation? No. Get real.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I didn’t vote for Kamala because I thought Kamala would be an embarrassment to the country and women everywhere if she became president. I want someone who isn’t a blathering idiot to be the standard by which we elect women into the top job of this country. Someone like Gretchen Whitmer, as an example.

I also don’t agree with electing someone into office that I didn’t vote for in a primary. That is so wrong on so many levels and shouldn’t be tolerated from either side. I’m glad we didn’t allow that in the end, if I’m being honest.

This was going to be a case of “history repeating itself” either way: they have both had ample opportunity do good in office, and they have both failed. But we had a choice to make between two idiots. With “history” in the back of my mind, the age old question of “are we better off today than we were four years ago” played a role in my decision making, and, well, no. I’m sorry, but no, we aren’t better.

I don’t like either, but I know what to expect from both. If history is going to repeat itself, then so be it.

It is disingenous to say you didn't want a "blathering idiot" or that you would have preferred Whitmer and then to be okay with Trump becoming president. Trump is a blathering idiot and Whitmer wasn't on the ballot. You had two choices. You either voted for Trump (wholly unqualified for the job due to his performance the first time and behavior since, plus older than Biden was when Biden took office) or you didn't vote for anyone thus enabling Trump to win.

If you voted for no one I just think you are derelict in your duty as a citizen. If you voted for Trump I think misogyny HAD to play a role because even if you think Harris is unqualified there is no way she is less qualifed than Trump. Objectively. He is a bad person. He's corrupt. He failed to protect the country on J6. And he's too old.

I don’t like blathering idiots from either gender, but when it comes to the first female president, I don’t want her to be a blathering idiot like the men. I want her to be better. So I chose the idiot man we can expect instead of the idiot woman, just because, when I know we can do better. And I hope we learn a lesson and do better in four years.

So by your own logic you voted for the stupid man rather than the stupid woman because the default is a stupid man is better than a stupid woman … the primary difference being their gender. Society can embrace a stupid person so long as they have a penis. Got it. No misogyny to see here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I didn’t vote for Kamala because I thought Kamala would be an embarrassment to the country and women everywhere if she became president. I want someone who isn’t a blathering idiot to be the standard by which we elect women into the top job of this country. Someone like Gretchen Whitmer, as an example.

I also don’t agree with electing someone into office that I didn’t vote for in a primary. That is so wrong on so many levels and shouldn’t be tolerated from either side. I’m glad we didn’t allow that in the end, if I’m being honest.

This was going to be a case of “history repeating itself” either way: they have both had ample opportunity do good in office, and they have both failed. But we had a choice to make between two idiots. With “history” in the back of my mind, the age old question of “are we better off today than we were four years ago” played a role in my decision making, and, well, no. I’m sorry, but no, we aren’t better.

I don’t like either, but I know what to expect from both. If history is going to repeat itself, then so be it.

It is disingenous to say you didn't want a "blathering idiot" or that you would have preferred Whitmer and then to be okay with Trump becoming president. Trump is a blathering idiot and Whitmer wasn't on the ballot. You had two choices. You either voted for Trump (wholly unqualified for the job due to his performance the first time and behavior since, plus older than Biden was when Biden took office) or you didn't vote for anyone thus enabling Trump to win.

If you voted for no one I just think you are derelict in your duty as a citizen. If you voted for Trump I think misogyny HAD to play a role because even if you think Harris is unqualified there is no way she is less qualifed than Trump. Objectively. He is a bad person. He's corrupt. He failed to protect the country on J6. And he's too old.

I don’t like blathering idiots from either gender, but when it comes to the first female president, I don’t want her to be a blathering idiot like the men. I want her to be better. So I chose the idiot man we can expect instead of the idiot woman, just because, when I know we can do better. And I hope we learn a lesson and do better in four years.

So by your own logic you voted for the stupid man rather than the stupid woman because the default is a stupid man is better than a stupid woman … the primary difference being their gender. Society can embrace a stupid person so long as they have a penis. Got it. No misogyny to see here.

I didn’t want Kamala Harris to be the basis by which we choose female presidents! That’s the best we can do?

I don’t have to keep explaining myself, I think the results speak for me. I’m sorry you’re upset today, truly. I hope we can do better the next time around.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I definitely think misogyny played a role. I saw so many interviews where people said they couldn’t vote for Harris “because of her laugh” or “I don’t think she’s ready to be president.” That second one is complete BS when you compare her experience to what Trump had in 2016 or what Vance has now.

It’s so depressing. Women are criticized for not smiling enough or for laughing too much. Meanwhile a man can joke about sexual assault and comment how he could shoot someone on 5th Ave and not lose any voters (which is commentary on the stupidity of his own base) and get elected.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s economic plain and simple. People vote with their wallets. If a female candidate can put more money in all of our pockets, we would vote for the female. The Democrats think they can win on issues but when it comes right down to it, people care about their finances and that’s the bottom line.

Yes and no. People vaguely remember being financially better off during Trump (pre-Covid which we memory holed) and things are really frustrating now financially so I get why people would think Trump is better for the economy to some degree.

But then Trump ran a campaign in which he advocated for a bunch of economic policy that would be bad for average Americans and Harris advocated for some moderate policies that would actually help average Americans on the margins (no panacea but that's because there isn't one -- contrary to popular belief you cannot just bully away inflation or fix housing costs by being "tough"). And this isn't just my opinion -- most financial analysts including conservative ones thing Trump's plan will explode the budget and increase prices. Even Elon Musk is like "people need to get ready for pain" when they implement these policies. Obviously his argument is that if we tough it out then it will all work out but... isn't that also Biden and Harris' argument with the current financial issues? That inflation is finally coming down and if we can address price gouging and make housing more accessible we will all do better?

So yes people vote with their pocketbook and yes in a challenging economy that benefits the challenger but this challenger as bad ideas and most people agree they are bad and their own campaign even admits they will be hard on people for some undefined length of time, and still people voted for Trump.

Also by the last couple weeks of the campaign polls were showing the majority of voters preferring Harris to Trump on the economy. And yet.

Anyone who blames the entire election on misogyny is myopic. But anyone who thinks it had nothing to do with the outcome isn't paying attention.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I definitely think misogyny played a role. I saw so many interviews where people said they couldn’t vote for Harris “because of her laugh” or “I don’t think she’s ready to be president.” That second one is complete BS when you compare her experience to what Trump had in 2016 or what Vance has now.

It’s so depressing. Women are criticized for not smiling enough or for laughing too much. Meanwhile a man can joke about sexual assault and comment how he could shoot someone on 5th Ave and not lose any voters (which is commentary on the stupidity of his own base) and get elected.

When you're a star you can do whatever you want.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s so frustrating that you can’t see that Democratic policies lost this race, not the candidate’s gender or color. Identity politics is not a winning strategy. Figure it out.

It's both. Can't you see that it's both?

The Dems need better policies and to articulate them better.

Harris's gender (and likely race but definitely her gender) worked against her in trying to combat this issue.

Trump also has TERRIBLE policy proposals. He got some benefit from being the challenger non-incumbent (though less than a typical challenger because he was recently president and did such a poor job he was fired). But he also got benefit from being a man and therefore getting more of a pass on having stupid, bad policy proposals and being unable to string two coherent sentences together and being tempermentally unfit and all the other stuff wrong with him.

Like you can't blame the whole thing on Harris being a bad candidate and the Dems having inadequate solutions when Trump is ALSO a bad candidate (arguably much worse) and ALSO having inadequate solutions.

Like do you think Harris would have won if she'd advocated for tarriffs and mass deportation? No. Get real.

The much higher level of support of male voters, including low propensity voters, is crystal clear.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I didn’t vote for Kamala because I thought Kamala would be an embarrassment to the country and women everywhere if she became president. I want someone who isn’t a blathering idiot to be the standard by which we elect women into the top job of this country. Someone like Gretchen Whitmer, as an example.

I also don’t agree with electing someone into office that I didn’t vote for in a primary. That is so wrong on so many levels and shouldn’t be tolerated from either side. I’m glad we didn’t allow that in the end, if I’m being honest.

This was going to be a case of “history repeating itself” either way: they have both had ample opportunity do good in office, and they have both failed. But we had a choice to make between two idiots. With “history” in the back of my mind, the age old question of “are we better off today than we were four years ago” played a role in my decision making, and, well, no. I’m sorry, but no, we aren’t better.

I don’t like either, but I know what to expect from both. If history is going to repeat itself, then so be it.

The phrase is “blithering idiot.” Oh, the irony.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I didn’t vote for Kamala because I thought Kamala would be an embarrassment to the country and women everywhere if she became president. I want someone who isn’t a blathering idiot to be the standard by which we elect women into the top job of this country. Someone like Gretchen Whitmer, as an example.

I also don’t agree with electing someone into office that I didn’t vote for in a primary. That is so wrong on so many levels and shouldn’t be tolerated from either side. I’m glad we didn’t allow that in the end, if I’m being honest.

This was going to be a case of “history repeating itself” either way: they have both had ample opportunity do good in office, and they have both failed. But we had a choice to make between two idiots. With “history” in the back of my mind, the age old question of “are we better off today than we were four years ago” played a role in my decision making, and, well, no. I’m sorry, but no, we aren’t better.

I don’t like either, but I know what to expect from both. If history is going to repeat itself, then so be it.

The phrase is “blithering idiot.” Oh, the irony.

I’m wise enough to accept your correction. Thank you!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I didn’t vote for Kamala because I thought Kamala would be an embarrassment to the country and women everywhere if she became president. I want someone who isn’t a blathering idiot to be the standard by which we elect women into the top job of this country. Someone like Gretchen Whitmer, as an example.

I also don’t agree with electing someone into office that I didn’t vote for in a primary. That is so wrong on so many levels and shouldn’t be tolerated from either side. I’m glad we didn’t allow that in the end, if I’m being honest.

This was going to be a case of “history repeating itself” either way: they have both had ample opportunity do good in office, and they have both failed. But we had a choice to make between two idiots. With “history” in the back of my mind, the age old question of “are we better off today than we were four years ago” played a role in my decision making, and, well, no. I’m sorry, but no, we aren’t better.

I don’t like either, but I know what to expect from both. If history is going to repeat itself, then so be it.

It is disingenous to say you didn't want a "blathering idiot" or that you would have preferred Whitmer and then to be okay with Trump becoming president. Trump is a blathering idiot and Whitmer wasn't on the ballot. You had two choices. You either voted for Trump (wholly unqualified for the job due to his performance the first time and behavior since, plus older than Biden was when Biden took office) or you didn't vote for anyone thus enabling Trump to win.

If you voted for no one I just think you are derelict in your duty as a citizen. If you voted for Trump I think misogyny HAD to play a role because even if you think Harris is unqualified there is no way she is less qualifed than Trump. Objectively. He is a bad person. He's corrupt. He failed to protect the country on J6. And he's too old.

I don’t like blathering idiots from either gender, but when it comes to the first female president, I don’t want her to be a blathering idiot like the men. I want her to be better. So I chose the idiot man we can expect instead of the idiot woman, just because, when I know we can do better. And I hope we learn a lesson and do better in four years.

So by your own logic you voted for the stupid man rather than the stupid woman because the default is a stupid man is better than a stupid woman … the primary difference being their gender. Society can embrace a stupid person so long as they have a penis. Got it. No misogyny to see here.

I didn’t want Kamala Harris to be the basis by which we choose female presidents! That’s the best we can do?

I don’t have to keep explaining myself, I think the results speak for me. I’m sorry you’re upset today, truly. I hope we can do better the next time around.

Why would she be the standard by which we evaluate all female presidents? Do we judge all male presidents based on George Washington? No because that would be stupid.

Look you had a choice between two imperfect candidates and you chose the more imperfect male candidate because the female candidate was not your ideal. You are goign to have to justify and explain that one for the rest of your life in one capacity or another. Especially when the entire Supreme Court majority will have been selected by DONALD TRUMP and when democratic norms about government corruption and peaceful transfer of power disappear because you helped affirm that it is okay for a guy who behaves like this to be president again. All because Kamala Harris didn't match your dream of the ideal female candidate.

You're gonna wear this one.