Reply to Sexism is the sole reason Hillary lost

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "Sexism is the sole reason Hillary lost"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]People shouldn't vote for Hillary because she's a woman, but there's no denying that she is held to a much higher standard than the males running against her. She had to be perfect; just like everyone expects black to be perfect. If she did half the shit that Trump, or even Bernie did she wouldn't have gotten that far. There's also no denying that she lost many votes, soley for being a woman.

Before you accuse me of bias, the sand held true for Sarah Palin. [/quote]

Yes, but here's the thing that people like Barack Obama have known all along. You have to work twice as hard. She didn't. It's as simple as that. She was completely complacent because she knew she was the better political candidate, she had more experience in all fields of knowledge, she was smarter, she was more articulate, she had bigger donor numbers, she was the favorable candidate. She let all of that get to her head and she [b]coasted[/b]. Do you think Barack Obama got to be President twice with a 10,000,000 vote lead over McCain just because he was the better candidate? Hell no. She should have known that and she should have worked her ass off.

Instead she:

- Dialed down campaign add runs
- Didn't step it up in key states
- Laughed at and mocked his antics on social media
- Didn't distance herself from staff that core constituents objected to
- Spent more time with donors than with blue-collar voters[/quote]

Oh, so Hillary had to work her ass off? Did Trump? Hardly. He's a cult of personality. I didn't say it was the sole reason. However, EVERYONE is blaming it on other factors - not even accounting for sexism. A woman will never get to the White House if we don't acknowledge this.[/quote]

A woman will get to the White House, just not that woman. [/quote]

I no longer believe this. Hillary was as qualified a politician as you're going to get. Still and all, she continues to get shit for being "cold and shrill" unlike the magnetic Obama. When she gave her concession speech people on THIS BOARD were saying "she's so soft and maternal... I could have voted for THIS Hillary." Think of how freaking tough this woman hadto be to run the DC gauntlet the last 20+ years. She easily has to be 3x ballsier, tougher and braver than the men to get where she has. But that's not viewed as strength because she's a woman. It's viewed as being calculating and cold and shrill and robotic and inhuman.

I do not believe the us is ready to give a qualified woman a fair shake at this office. Not after Tuesday and specifically not after how people reacted to her loss. [/quote]

I agree.  I doubt Warren could win even though she's eminently qualified and should appeal to people who are angry and scared about the future.

"I'll vote for a woman just not THAT woman" is a moving target and frankly a load of bullshit. Warren would also be held to the same impossible standards. She's vowed to work with this administration but not to tolerate bigotry. Who's to say that the same "anyone but Hillary" people won't, if Warren ever gets close to the presidency, suddenly demur with statements like well Donald sucked and she tried to work with him, she's so cold, she's an insider, whatever.  Not tolerating bigotry will be spun as encouraging all of Mexico to come here and settle right in your hometown. Plus Harvard!  East coast elite!  I don't vote with my vaginaaaaaaa.  Meanwhile the Nugent / Duggar ticker just barely wins, but no, it couldn't have anything to do with misogyny. [/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