America hates Hillary Clinton and Company

[Dancing_Dave]

Source: Telegraph.co.uk

We set out from Portland, Maine, on the north-east coast of New England on a diagonal route to the California port of San Diego in the south-west. The return leg started in the Seattle suburbs of the Pacific north-west and ended at the Atlantic on a beach in Florida, America's most south-eastern state.

Mrs Clinton might be the frontrunner in the polls, but almost everywhere we went people questioned her candidacy. Many stated bluntly that they did not want a woman in charge. "It's a man's world," said Hugh Laflin, 62, a Kansas truck driver. "Would a Middle East sheikh talk to a lady president?"

A Vietnam veteran in Arizona and a Florida gun-shop owner were among those who made crude jokes about America "going to war every 30 days" under a female president. We never brought up Bill Clinton's sexual dalliances, but many ordinary Americans did. "She couldn't keep her own home together, so how can we trust her to manage America?" asked Micki Martinson, a housewife in Somerset, Pennsylvania.

While we found many people who hated Mrs Clinton, those who loved her were few and far between. Certainly, many said they would vote for her, but the reasons cited tended to be her status as the top Democrat, the fact that she was battle-tested against Republicans and - for some women - the fact that she would be the first female president.

Read more: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/11/24/wamerica124.xml&CMP=ILC-mostviewedbox

---

The Telegraph is a rather conservative British newspaper. I have to admit, their reporting rang true compared to my own experience with all to many Hillary hating Americans in the Midwest.

[ccpup]

1. I hate to point out the obvious

elephant in the room, but if these people aren't accepting of a woman, what makes you think they'll be accepting of a black man or a Hispanic or anything other than a white man?

[Dancing_Dave]

5. We actually have a Democratic woman Governor in Kansas now

But I doubt Hillary Clinton will get the kind of votes that Kathleen Sibelius did here.

I also have a Democratic woman Representative, Nancy Boyda. I talked to her recently at a Democratic party event, and she stressed that she was afraid she couldn't get re-elected if Hillary was the Presidential nominee. So this doesn't all boil down to gender politics. Some women politicians are well-liked in Kansas, but Hillary just isn't one of them

[mps]

13. Fifth Columnists among us???

Why does DU permit Fifth Columnists to post in this Democratic Party Forum? Can't the moderators expose them? What do these cowards add to the debate on who would make the best president for America?

mps

[yurbud]

24. it's not that Hillary is a woman, it's her policies for progressives and her personality for Cons

I never got the personality criticisms. She's not as charismatic as Bill, but who is? She's competent technocrat. The only question is who that competence will be in service to--us or Wall Street.

[CreekDog]

2. Except for all the Americans that don't hate Hillary and Co.

...like me and most Democrats that I know.

But I guess we don't count as Americans or Democrats anymore.

[AllegroRondo]

3. funny, those are the same memes Fox News has been repeating for the last 5 years

[Dancing_Dave]

4. Does Murdoch own the Telegraph?

Maybe that would explain it.

[Briar]

7. It's certainly a tainted source

high Tory, war supporting, neocon influenced etc. Completely unreliable on subjects like these. It has the highest circulation of the broadsheets (its almost the only one still published as a broadsheet). But no, Murdoch owns the Sun, the Times and a few other titles, not the Telegraph. It's now owned by the Barclay brothers.

[ihavenobias]

8. The problem is

even if it started off as fabricated memes, the end result may be that many people ARE anti-woman/minority when it comes to voting for a president.

Is it ridiculous? Yes.

But we can't say that racism and sexism are major issues yet at the same time pretend these things won't come into play when it's time to vote (that would be pollyanna-ish, right?). I know someone was offended when I said this last time, but I can't understand why.

I'm not *condoning* this idiocy, I'm simply pointing out the sad fact that it exists.

[Baby Snooks]

6. Maybe, just maybe...

Maybe the American people have woken up and realized there is no real party system in this country and that the Clintons are part of the same dynasty and empire as the Bushes. Along with a growing number of Democrats, and Republicans, in Congress. As always, all eyes turn to Madame Speaker. And as always, the question is raised as to why impeachment is off the table. The answer for some is that it is to ensure that Hillary Clinton becomes president. Pelosi serves the dynasty. And the empire. And serves them well.

They are all Republicrats. And the ones who aren't are quickly silenced or defeated at the polls. By hook or by crook. Don't think for one minute that there haven't been Republicans defeated by a Democrat as a result of the hook and crook of Karl Rove.

The one advantage of a Democratic Congress was that it would quickly pass an immigration reform bill which will do nothing but create a new worker class in this country and subject millions of Americans as well as millions of Mexicans to a life of servitude. And how nice to have finaly raised the minimum wage. Which no doubt will become the prevaling wage. Which few will be able to live on. But which will guarantee increased profits for employers. Older employees being paid $15 an hour will be laid off. And new employees, most of them "guest workers" will be hired instead. And eventually the American workers who refuse to work for minimum wage will be forced to. Fortunately enough Democrats joined enough Republicans to say no. Although most likely next year with a new Congress, including new representatives in the House and Senate, the answer will be yes. Karl Rove retired? Karl Rove is busy manipulating the primaries anywhere and everywhere he can. But the American people may not fall for it this time. Immigration reform has become the issue by which elections will be determined. Karl Rove is for it. The American people are against it. At least the Bush immigration reform. The American people want fairness. For all. He may get more Democrats. But they may be the Democrats he doesn't want.

The American people are tired of the dynasty. And of the empire.

[sallyseven]

12. And maybe your full of bull.

Dynasty smynasty. Typical repuk talking point.

[Baby Snooks]

21. "I told you so..."

Go ahead and vote for her in the primary and then vote for her for president and when she pulls a Pelosi on you, remember "I told you so."

[depakid]

9. Those are some pretty whack comments

Not at ALL representative of the "criticism" I hear IRL. And at any rate, the fools quoted here probably wouldn't vote Democratic anyway- no matter who was running.

[bemildred]

10. Hate is too strong a word. A lack of respect perhaps, or a wish that they would just go away ... nt

[MasonJar]

11. I am sorry but after the despicable (as Sylvester so spittingly says)

white male, arrogant and ignorant, who has led this country into the depths of despair and degradation for almost 7 years, I do NOT want to hear about men or women who will not vote for a good candidate because of the person's gender or race. If this country wants another loser just so they can have a white male, then fine; I will just relocate to a country which has a conscience and a semblance of sense. I am tired of white trash leaders and white trash voters.

[LibertyorDeath]

14. .

.

[ihavenobias]

15. I love this magazine cover

It neatly sums up the main reason I'm very much against Hillary getting the nomination (her insane amounts of special interest money).

I might have to borrow that image!

[LibertyorDeath]

25. borrow away......

Sums up the whole disgusting state of American politics

[Emillereid]

16. I think the Telegraph is picking some important signals -- I simply don't

know one democrat who actually wants Hillary. I admit I hang in progressive circles - but the animosity toward her inevitable candidacy is truly alarming. I pick up a strong Anybody but Hillary sentiment. I am simply the messenger here - just reporting the facts as I see them here in California.

I think she will be a very divisive candidate who might not be able to hang on to the democratic party base -- and like it or not it tends to be the hard-core activist base that does the work. I will reluctantly vote for her -- but I won't work for her.

How in the world we have managed once again to allow the media to tell us who is most electable, etc. boggles the mind. I think the most electable democrat is one who truly reflects our principles, will fight for them, etc. and for whom we are enthusiastic and will work our butts off for. Unfortunately that person is not Hillary Clinton.

[Prophet 451]

17. I'm mixed

The Telegraph isn't unbiased here (they were nicknamed the Tory-graph for years) but certainly, the impression I'm getting both from this board and from other Americans I speak to is firstly, that a Hillary candidacy seems inevitible (and a lot of people resent that) and secondly, that there's little real enthuasiasm for it. I'm not talking about the idiots, they'll always be there and there's not a lot you can do about them but the impression I get is a lot of people will support her if she's the candidate but not with any great excitement.

On the level of personal observation, Hillary's supporters are also starting to piss off a lot of people. Not because they support Hillary but because many of them seem to give the impression that if you don't support her, you're not a real liberal/progressive/Democrat.

[reprobate]

18. You sparked an interesting thought in my mind.

It's been apparent for some time on DU that some of the strongest Hillary DLC Puppet supporters are the very ones who viscously attack those who oppose her. It's long been a recognized Rovian tactic to plant agent provocateurs in places where they could further repug interests. And wasn't it Rove who first suggested that Hillary is the one they wanted to run against?

Knowing all this, in the future if you post to support a particular candidate, I expect you to state reasonable, rational reasons as to why you think I should agree with you. If you can't give reasons to support your candidate, or if your reasons amount to an attack on those who express support for others, I shall consider you to be the proverbial wolf in sheeps clothing - or elephant in donkey clothing - and that you post here only to cause discent. In which case you belong elsewhere.

So go ahead and flame away. I'm old and grizzled enough to take it. And besides you will just prove my point and convict yourself.

[Prophet 451]

19. Moi?

I take it the second half of that was using the generic "you" rather than directed at myself?

For myself, I've never made any bones of the fact that Hillary wouldn't be my preferred candidate (I'm for Kooch but I'll settle for Edwards).

[reprobate]

20. Sorry, Prophet. I should have been a bit more specific.

Yes, of course, only the first 'you', as in the title "You sparked an interesting though in my mind" was directed at YOU. Any subsequent 'you's'(OMG, now I sound like I'm from Brooklyn - actually from the Bronx, way back in the 1950's when it was really a nice place to live) were targeted directly at those who post in support of the DLC Doll whose rhetoric is limited to attacks and claims of inevitability.

From reading your previous postings I believe we think along the same lines. I agree tht Kucinich and I assume that the 'kooch' was referring to him, is the one candidate in the debates who answered question directly and intelligently. The rest, particularly Clinton were triangulating.

Unfortunately in this nation of beauty contest presidential campaigns Dennis cannot get enough media coverage to successfully run for dog catcher, while Clinton need only to hiccup to make front page headlines.

Once again this inquiring mind asks: Just who was it that decided for me that a Hillary Presidency was inevitable. Who besides KKKarl that is?

[Prophet 451]

22. Sorry, I'm a techie

We're not very good at adjusting context. This is what makes us good at being techies and bad at interpersonal relationships (humans don't come with a manual although they really should).

"Kooch" does indeed refer to Kucinich. I forget where I picked the nickname up from but it is meant to be affectionate.

I think there's a lot of different factors involved in HRC being annointed. There's the fact that she's teh first woman to have a serious shot at it which is naturally interesting (as is Obama for similar reasons). The fact that she's Bill's wife and he's still very popular. More to the point though, I think HRC is seen (rightly or wrongly) as being the most corporate friendly candidate and that creates a tendancy for the very corporate media (sadly, most of it these days) to back her. Oh, not consciously. I doubt anyone's slapping D-notices around or anything that crude but it creates an atmosphere of self-censorship and "benefit of the doubt" where there wouldn't otherwise be. It also creates a tendancy toward the simplistic and superficial (because they're cheap to cover), hence we get stories about Edward's haircut or Hillary's cleavage while Kucinich barely gets covered because he's actually trying to address the issues and explaining those to viewers takes time and therefore, money.

Apologies if the above sounds like a lecture, not meant to.

On edit: Thinking about it, the superficiality is what sunk Kerry too. Because he was a thoughtful man, his thoughts were complex and could rarely be explained in a soundbite.

[yurbud]

23. Telegraph might be conservative, but it's barely detectable compared to blatant right and tepid MSM

here.