I have a question. What to you say to millions of women who only bothered paying attention to politics because they were excited about voting for the first female president? Do you just say, i'm sorry that your candidate was tossed out to the curb like yesterdays garbage, but for the good of the country you should vote for the man most responsible for it?
Good lord. Okay, in answer to your "question"? Grow up. Clinton is not being kicked out to the curb like yesterday's garbage any more than Hubert Humphrey, Ted Kennedy, Dennis Kucinich, or any other man who lost a bid for the Presidency. [update: Howard Dean. Helloooooo?] It's politics, it's not "fair," and what's ironic is, Hillary Clinton totally understands that, because she's BEEN in politics for a very long time. Those supporters "who only bothered paying attention to politics" recently? Puh-leeze, most of Senator Clinton's supporters are working for her because they've paid attention for a long time. There are a great many more political neophytes in the Obama camp, which is part of why Clinton is losing. All of them have some catching up to do.
Oh, and now that you're paying attention to politics, commenter? How about some more political action from ya? You could even start with online feminist activism against stuff like this. The seeds of outrage have many verdant fields, my friend:
comments like that still amaze me.
ReplyDeleteI thought that more women voted than men... at least among older voters. Your video explains everything... Hillary needs to cull the bimbo vote!
ReplyDeletei have actually been quite disgusted by the 'vote for hillary because she's a woman' crowd for some time. how is that any different than the misogynist or racist crowd? i won't vote for hillary clinton because 1) she's my state senator and i know what her voting record is- and she hasn't really done much for upstate new york and 2) i know what her platform is for the election- and don't agree with it.
ReplyDeletealthough she cultivated this crowd- and at the very least the racist crowd- it is unfair for women to use her for their own agenda. especially since she really hasn't done much for women and children here in new york. actions speak louder than expectations- or words.
just found this:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.thenation.com/
doc/20080526/ehrenreich
Betmo writes:
ReplyDeletei have actually been quite disgusted by the 'vote for hillary because she's a woman' crowd for some time. how is that any different than the misogynist or racist crowd?
It isn't different. It is pure identity politics. I would think that the last thing Hillary would want is to be marginalized as the "woman nominee."
Obama supporters don't make the case that he should be the nominee because he is black, or that he should be president because he is black. They make the case that he should be the nominee because he has won more delegates (to say nothing of more states and more votes) than anybody else who ran for the Democratic Party's nomination this year.
And Obama's supporters argue that he should be president because his ideas are better than John McCain's ideas.
When my six-year old son asked me who this "Obama" was that my wife and I talk about all the time, I told him that he is a man who is trying to become president, the leader of our country. He asked me why I like Obama, and I said it was because he has really good ideas, and I want him to use those ideas to make our country better.
My son walked into the room during Obama's victory speech after his victory in North Carolina, and said "look, there's Obama. He's talking about his ideas!"
I loved that. I loved it more than knowing that seeing a black man become president will give my son a sense of the possible greater than any generation of black children has ever known. I deliberately emphasized Obama's ideas over his skin color for my son because I want him to know that it is what is his head and in his heart that really matter, no matter what you look like.
It makes me sad to see Clinton's supporters reach down to identity politics as a rationale for her continued candidacy. We were supposed to be transcending that in this election. She is not losing the nomination due to her having been born female. She is losing the nomination simply because more people chose the substance and, yes, the style that Obama brought to the campaign.
Hillary did her best and she came up short. One of them had to lose. That's politics.
Whining that she deserves more consideration than that diminishes her, frankly.
When my eight year old expressed an interest in politics and picking a team in the dem primaries, my wife told him, "Politics is grown up stuff. You have to be ready to lose, shake it off and move on to support whoever wins. There's no crying when your candidate loses."
ReplyDeleteProf.
I'm a manager by trade.
ReplyDeleteOver a decade ago now I was at a seminar on employment law and the subject of quotas came up. A couple of other managers got into an exchange with the instructor to the effect of "wait a minute, are you telling me that if I have a better qualified man but there's a woman in a wheelchair also applying for the job that isn't quite as qualified I have to hire her?"
As these jerks got my blood boiling I finally had to interject "excuse me, but where are you guys getting all these qualified employees where you have this problem? I'm lucky if I can get one applicant that has a record of being at work every day and on time."
I feel a little like this about the presidential election. We have so many damn problems yet we've let this descend a bit into an argument over identity politics.
In Iraq our troops are men, women, black, white, young and old. They all suffer if McCain is elected. Do they care whether it's Clinton or Obama who brings them home?
Don't get me wrong- the magnitude of what the Democratic party is about to do isn't lost on me. I just think about Obama or Clinton taking the oath and I get choked up.
But there's other stuff in play this election that's equally as important. If not more so.
Re: the comment. What if the woman running for president was, say, Liddy Dole or Condi Rice. There's my answer. Would I like to see a capable, principled woman run for the nomination and win? You bet your ass. Sadly, she didn't run this time.
ReplyDeleteWomen and African Americans have been the base of the Democratic party for a very long time. It's one of the reasons this contest is so close.
ReplyDeleteWhether you like her or not, out of 34 million votes cast the difference between Clinton and Obama is around 100,000 or so. In otherwords -- this is a virtual dead heat.
Yes there are a lot of women working for Clinton because they would like to see a woman president, but they would not support ANY woman candidate. Did you see them flock to Elizabeth Dole when she ran? No.
The women supporting Sen. Clinton believe she is the best candidate for the job. And I would imagine the 80% of African Americans supporting Sen. Obama believe he is the best candidate for the job.
Whoever comes out on top is going to have to do some serious courting of the supporters in the other camp. I think it is dangerous to believe otherwise.
And as for Miss Bimbo -- is he marketing the Miss Bimbo nutcracker yet? Just askin' ...
BAC
Hmm. What would I say to her?
ReplyDelete"This is democracy in action. Sometimes, your candidate loses. If my choices always won, Al Gore would be President right now."
Oh, wait. Maybe not such a good example.
Obama supporters don't make the case that he should be the nominee because he is black, or that he should be president because he is black.
ReplyDeleteAlthough this Obama supporter admits that he's really going to enjoy the thought of all the millions of racists who are going to be pulling their hair out during Obama's inauguration.
Mmm, sweet schadenfreude . . .
yes, i enjoy that thought as well.
ReplyDeleteit's just a little bonus for this older, white, working class female obama supporter in pa.