Reply to The sexist nature of Washington Post endorsements

Forum Index » Metropolitan DC Local Politics

Reply to "The sexist nature of Washington Post endorsements"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]The chair endorsement came out last week and Alicia was the only one singled out for extra scrutiny.  I am not upset at their endorsement (I had planned to vote McKay anyway) but to take shots at her and her specifically was unnecessary and uncalled for.  There were 2 other White male candidates who barely got a sentence.[/quote]

Alicia Plerhoples could be a political star some day, but she entered the BOS race with no relevant political experience, based on a hunch that one woman running against three men in a Democratic primary might benefit from a split vote.  It sucks if the WaPo asked her sexist questions, but she’s also running a campaign that is fundamentally gender-based. McKay seems like the far stronger and less polarizing candidate.[/quote]

I’m not arguing that she doesn’t have the experience, but please read the endorsement.  There was maybe a sentence each about the 2 other white male candidates’ weaknesses.  They decided to write an addition section at the end pointing out multiple flaws for her.  Why not the other candidates?  I don’t care what you think of her or her campaign - it was an attack on just one candidate (a female POC) when there are 2 other challengers in the race.[/quote]

That’s ridiculous.  The Post basically ignored the other two candidates altogether.  It hardly gave them preferential treatment. [/quote]

No, they had already stated weaknesses for her.  Then went on to add another section at the end with more.  Why?

Are you really failing to see how this was unnecessary?  I really don’t think it is a stretch to feel that their treatment of her in that endorsement of another candidate can easily be viewed as racist and misogynistic.[/quote]

Yeah, I think you are being ridiculous.  There are four candidates running in the primary.  The Post dismissed two of them - both white men - out of hand and treated the race as essentially involving only two serious candidates, McKay and Plerhoples (despite the fact that McElveen and Chapman both have more political experience than Plerhoples).  The Post then made the case for why they thought McKay was the stronger of the two candidates.

In doing so, they further raised her profile.  It might have been racist and misogynistic if they wrote her off like they did McElveen and Chapman, but that’s not what they did. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics