2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumWho’s excited about a woman president?
She doesnt want to sound old, but in the waning minutes of a rain-soaked Clinton event at the Derry Boys and Girls Club, she wanted to say what Hillary Clinton means to her, and it meant tracing the years they both lived. She came out of high school at the same time as us, Hutchinson says. She pauses. We went into teaching and nursing. She became an attorney.
Hutchinson, strictly speaking, went into teaching, but also politics. She served in New Hampshires 400-member House of Representatives for two years, until 2008. New Hampshire happens to be a rare bastion of women holding political office: Both its senators, its governor, and one of its two representatives in the House are women.
Still, theres one position no woman has held. No one ever said to any of us, Hutchinson says, when you grow up, you can be president.
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/hillary-clinton-whos-excited-about-woman-president
Trajan
(19,089 posts)That's the outfit that paid Hillary in excess of $300,000 for one single speech, is that correct?
I hope she spoke directly to the kids afterwards, and imparted some words of wisdom ...
Um ... What? ... You don't say?
!#=$&
TheBlackAdder
(28,203 posts)roguevalley
(40,656 posts)I have no sentiment about this. Someone like Warren compels me deeply because she has her priorities right: Us.
avaistheone1
(14,626 posts)Don't think so. Thank God most of us are beyond such naivete.
BlueMTexpat
(15,369 posts)dripping with misogyny ...
avaistheone1
(14,626 posts)You have no idea of the meaning of misogyny.
Certainly the idea that women who instead choose to vote for Bernie Sanders instead of HRC are
misogynist - is a childish and a foolish attack on your part.
Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)condemn us women to hell if we don't support Her Majesty.
Talk about misogyny!
Orsino
(37,428 posts)The penile requirement is a bugbear that has long needed slaying.
It's not reason enough for me to prefer Clinton, but there are plenty of single-issue voters out there.
SheilaT
(23,156 posts)I would love to see a woman in the White House. But not Hillary.
99th_Monkey
(19,326 posts)A guy who -- if elected-- will be the first Jewish President. <-- Bonus points.
Cleita
(75,480 posts)2pooped2pop
(5,420 posts)avaistheone1
(14,626 posts)KansDem
(28,498 posts)But Elizabeth Warren isn't running...
in_cog_ni_to
(41,600 posts)And if this gender shit doesn't stop, she going to lose even more voters than she has already lost.
It's not helping her, at all!
Sheesh.
PEACE
LOVE
BERNIE
oasis
(49,388 posts)I know it's hard for some to get used to the idea.
And despite our repeating - over and over and over again - that the main reason women voters choose to vote for Hillary is NOT BECAUSE she is a woman, they refuse to acknowledge that.
We choose to vote for HIllary because she is, hands down, the best all-round candidate in the running in 2016 - of either gender - and she also happens to be a woman who has walked the walk, talked the talk and been on the front lines of advocacy for women's rights both in the US and around the world.
The patronizing sexism in the continuing failure to acknowledge that has completely turned me off. All one has to do is to look at most responses to this OP. And then come the comparisons: ah, so you would vote for Sarah Palin or Carly Fiorina or some other totally unqualified RW scam artist. B***S***!
There is NO comparison. The mere fact that such comparisons are made is misogynistic through and through. The most patronizing and sexist thing that John McCain did in 2008 was to think that Hillary supporters would automatically support Sarah Palin because SHE is a woman.
If women want to vote for Bernie Sanders, fine. Many of them will ultimately support Hillary in the GE - unless they are totally insane. But I personally believe that those women who are most strident in asserting that they never will vote for HRC have never really known - or simply have chosen to forget - how things were and in some ways still are insofar as women's rights are concerned.
I know and have never forgotten. I do not intend to forget. And I will vote for Hillary Clinton. Proudly. Period.
oasis
(49,388 posts)BlueMTexpat
(15,369 posts)It's been a lifetime a-coming.
ohheckyeah
(9,314 posts)6chars
(3,967 posts)you don't see men saying "let's block her to make sure there's no woman president" so no downside.
Orsino
(37,428 posts)I'm fine with that.
Our fault for not admitting or supporting enough (and better) female candidates long ago.
in_cog_ni_to
(41,600 posts)Voting for someone based on gender and not issues, is pathetic. Then people wonder why this country is so screwed up? That's why it's screwed up. People voting for movie stars, just because they're movie stars...Reagan, Schwarzenegger, Sonny Bono, Fred Gandy, Fred Thompson, etc..., the most handsome, the prettiest and now gender. It's ridiculous.
PEACE
LOVE
BERNIE
Orsino
(37,428 posts)At least not until election winners statistically resemble the populations that vote.
Until that far-off day, candidates are going to get votes just because they're _________. There's simply no way around it, or around the blame we earned for not insisting on equality sooner.
Ferd Berfel
(3,687 posts)Hillary? Nope
basselope
(2,565 posts)If the issue you are voting on is whether or not the candidate is a woman, you aren't really smart enough to vote.
The sex, race, creed, etc.. of a candidate SHOULD NOT EVER be an issue for why you are voting FOR them, because it is the same thing as if you voted AGAINST them because they are a woman.
Beacool
(30,249 posts)I am voting for Hillary and I understand the issues quite well. I also understand when a candidate over promises on things he will never be able to achieve. I prefer someone who will get things done, even if it's in increments.
LondonReign2
(5,213 posts)Strangely (not really) the Hillaryites never answer that one.
basselope
(2,565 posts)who is voting for Clinton BECAUSE she is a woman.
You believe Clinton will get things done and that is why you are voting for her... great.
As someone who studied logic and reasoning, Clinton's entire platform falls apart b/c she has no more chance of getting anything done than Sanders, so I would rather vote for the person with the better chance of getting a high turnout... but that is a debate worth having, instead of this "it's time for a woman president, so we have to be stuck with this one" line.
LondonReign2
(5,213 posts)Who needs facts anyway when you can simply make unfounded claims? Hey, it works for their candidate...
BlueMTexpat
(15,369 posts)and you likely do not even realize that.
The Wielding Truth
(11,415 posts)Hillary is still my choice over any Republican.Man or woman.
basselope
(2,565 posts)bravenak
(34,648 posts)I like making history
treestar
(82,383 posts)She is best qualified and very smart and a good successor to President Obama and will keep the Republicans from going wild.
Beacool
(30,249 posts)There'll always be a "but" when a woman is in the running, but hopefully this time around we will prevail.
oasis
(49,388 posts)cali
(114,904 posts)No one can possibly turn out the vote like Hillary. She's the best GOTV imaginable. For republicans and she's alienating millions of would be democratic voters.
oasis
(49,388 posts)The polling of millions of "wouldbes" can be a tricky business, but I'm not one to dispute the accuracy of your state of the art clicker.
Beacool
(30,249 posts)Logical
(22,457 posts)cui bono
(19,926 posts)Can't wait until there's a woman running who I think would be a good president.
.
dreamnightwind
(4,775 posts)for Nina Turner.
Krytan11c
(271 posts)I hope she's considering a senate run. Another strong, progressive voice is sorely needed there.
jen63
(813 posts)catapults her national exposure. She is the real deal.
cali
(114,904 posts)SoLeftIAmRight
(4,883 posts)Yea
southerncrone
(5,506 posts)ohheckyeah
(9,314 posts)It's honest to promise things you have no hope of schieving. Sanders is either stupid enough to believe his own rhetoric or is knowingly lying neither of which shows integrity.
stillwaiting
(3,795 posts)You should listen to any one of Sanders' speeches so that you can understand what he is for.
Any speech will do.
And, his supporters know this is but the beginning of a very long and hard process. We know. We really do!!
Beacool
(30,249 posts)Promises are cheap and asking for a political revolution to fulfill those promises is utter B.S.
But, apparently people will believe anything.
The Wielding Truth
(11,415 posts)..."We choose to go to the Moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard; because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one we intend to win ...
This was the dream at the time. Now we need a major political challenge. Bernie has put it out there.
southerncrone
(5,506 posts)I personally don't like the status quo very much. Obama has made some positive strides while digging us out of a huge hole caused by the Bush administration. From where I sit, the Clintons are much too cozy w/the Bushes & have been for decades.
Trajan
(19,089 posts)Yep ... FDR, what a dreamer! ..
Good thing people saw right through him and his fancy dreams about helping the middle class ...
They immediately turned him OUT of office!
Well, almost immediately, because it took time to see what ....
Oh ... Wait ... The people loved him?
He got ALL that stuff PASSED? ... HOW CAN THIS HAPPEN??!#+&$
Yeah, well, he only lasted one term, and ...
Oh criminy! ... FOUR FUCKING TERMS? ...
I'm thinking he might have won a fifth term had he survived the fourth term ...
It seems that people REALLY REALLY REALLY loved that seminal Democratic Socialist ....
They REALLY loved FDR ....
I'm thinking this is Bernie's moment ... His FDR Moment ...
You Hillary supporters, rejecting a better world because it's too hard! ...
NO WE CAN'T! ....
mainstreetonce
(4,178 posts)Hillyes
Arazi
(6,829 posts)onehandle
(51,122 posts)Women will surge for Hillary and her coattails will be strong.
Nanjeanne
(4,960 posts)Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)I guess it depends on the woman.
RiverLover
(7,830 posts)Oh, wait....
Bad Dog
(2,025 posts)I'm not excited, I'm just hoping for a sense of relief when it all gets decided.
artislife
(9,497 posts)Gothmog
(145,288 posts)NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)... the next president will be a woman is just the icing on the cake! Maybe I'm being a bit Pollyanna-ish, but I think that there will be some noticeable changes in the way women are perceived, treated, and paid.
Avalux
(35,015 posts)In this election cycle, Hillary isn't that person for me and all attempts to guilt me into voting for because she has a vagina only make me pissed off.
Justina For Justice
(94 posts)Thatcher was the first female prime minister in Britain. The Ronald Reagan of her country, she devastated the unions and set in motion the reversal of Britain's health and welfare laws, to the detriment of millions of women and children. Then, to prove how "macho" she was, Thatcher started an absurd war with Argentina. The only major difference between Thatcher and Clinton is that Thatcher never lied about her reactionary conservative politics. She was quite honest about them. Clinton is an expert at obfuscating her plans.
Hillary Clinton has already demonstrated her war mongering "iron ladyness" by fomenting the CIA triggered coup in Libya resulting in the butchering of one of Africa's most progressively socialist leaders and destroying the lives of of its then quite liberated women. Now those once independent women have been forced out of their egalitarian jobs and, on the pain of death by reactionary religious terrorists, into purdah.
The women of Iraq, once working side by side with their men at all levels of jobs have, thanks in part to Clinton's vote to allow Bush's invasion of Iraq, are now prohibited from such equality and hide, segregated behind black cloth, like their Libyan sisters.
Since leaving Libya in warring chaos, Clinton now calls for similar actions in Syria. Her demands for a "no fly" zone exposes the Middle East and the rest of the world to the outbreak of World War III, risking as it does a direct military confrontation with Russia. That would undoubtedly resound to the benefit of millions more women and children, if they survive the bombs.
Clinton and her celebrated surrogate, former secretary of state Madeleine Albright, welcomed the draconian sanctions against Iran which resulted in the deaths of more than 500,000 children and, upon John Kerry's successful negotiation of a treaty diminishing a possible nuclear threat from Iran, Clinton immediately called for new bellicose sanctions against Iran.
Yes, just what we need, another Margaret Thatcher! Forgive me if I am so sexist as to prefer to wait for a honest,rational and truthful woman presidential candidate. In the meantime, I'm voting for Bernie Sanders, an honest, rational and truthful human being -- and the most truly feminist -- the best candidate, bar none, to have appeared in all my seventy years of existence.
Vinca
(50,273 posts)When I clicked on it I thought I was going to have to yell at you about Margaret Thatcher. LOL. I just got back from voting for Bernie.
in_cog_ni_to
(41,600 posts)Clinton and Thatcher are sisters separated at birth.
Great post!
PEACE
LOVE
BERNIE
Myrina
(12,296 posts)"Screw your courage to the sticking point and we'll make small advances"