Why not say the same thing to Obama?

Obvious answer: He's winning in every measurable sense.

I'm a woman, and I'm voting for the candidate that I feel will be the best leader for this country. I determine my support by a careful weighing of policy positions, past actions, and demeanor.

I'm a woman, and I'm voting for Obama.

Hillary Clinton is not EveryWoman. To claim she is womenkind's Last Great Hope reduces the accomplishments she has made to a mere by-proxy gender vote. To claim that women who would rather have Barack Obama as president are "foolish" or imply that they're traitors to their sex is equally insulting.

I know, and your daughters will know, that they can do anything in America. They don't need Hillary Clinton to tell them so. They need positive role models -- not just on the national stage, but also within their own home -- who can assure them that they are equal in every way to their male peers, and must insist they be judged based on their actions and ideas. Not by their gender.

As a strong feminist, who took a minor is feminist literature during my Master's Degree, I am all for a woman running for and winning the White House. However, Hillary Cinton is not doing women and feminists any favors.

From my perspective, Hillary is running around twisting every bit of fact, using racism and fear, tearing apart the Democratic Party, and doing so in what is (ultimately) a shrewish demeanor.

From the moment she screeched out "SHAME ON YOU BARACK OBAMA" like some sort of she-beast.... Hillary began to embody everything that is stereotypically negative about a woman. (and i loathe these stereotypes) But she has been manipulative, conniving, whiney, and over-emotional.

I'm sorry but she is a TERRIBLE example about what is right with women in America. And she is a TERRIBLE example of feminism. In fact, her behaviors, in my opinion, have set back women a few steps. I think the next credible woman who runs for the Presidency (NOT Hillary) will have to tread through the garbage of the ghost of Shrillary Clinton.

Not exactly a role model for the progressive, powerful women in America.

Can you imagine this debate tactic at a summit in Greenland?

"SHAME ON YOU PUTIN! SHAME ON YOU!!!!!!!!!!!"

EEEEGADS....if Hillary was ahead by ANY legitimate measure of victory, or had the legitimate chance to achieve victory by those measures, no one would tell her to bow out. But she is NOT going to win pledged delegates, most states, or popular vote.

For god's sakes..... certainly even YOU can see how insane it is to ignore the reality/fact of the situation.

Hillary is NOT an example for a generation of women.

While I agree that it's about time we had a woman president, I disagree with the notion that I should vote for Hillary because she's a woman. That's just more sexism. As a third-wave feminist, I'm voting for the person I think will do the best job as POTUS, and that's Obama. I don't care what his gender, race, religion, or shoe size is. I really don't.

Bullshit. "All women need you to win this."

I'm a woman, I don't. Nor do my sister, my mother, or my grandmother, who are all supporting Obama. So are hundreds of thousands of other women.

If you want her to win as a symbolic victory for women, fine, but don't put that on the rest of us. Feminism doesn't mean that to me. To me it means we should all be judged on equal merits, by equal standards. I've done that with our candidates, and I've judged Obama to be the better candidate.

You can even argue that she's not being judged on equal merits by equal standards by the masses, and that's fine with me, but I'VE judged them equally.

Forgive the sports metaphor, but both Clinton and Obama had to be Jackie Robinson. They had to be, if not perfect, the closest approximation our failible selves will allow. They had to be all the things they are credited for; strength, confidence, and political prowess, and none of the things for which they are condemned; pettiness, dishonesty and egotism.

So far, one of the two has proven himself more capable than the other. Of course he isn't perfect. But he is the closest thing we've had to it my entire lifetime (a life that has helped put both Gwen Moore and Tammy Baldwin in the congress, (yes I admit, I'm from Wisconsin)).

There's a reason Josh Gibson and Satchel Paige weren't the first. It had nothing to do with their playing and everything to do with their ability to weather the greater storm.

As the mother of 2 daughters one of the things I am proud of them for is that neither of them are Clinton supporters. They see her as a manipulator, an exaggerator and certainly not a strong woman. I thought it was my responsibility to instill in my daughters that they could achieve what they wanted and it never crossed my mind to give that job to a politician.
You do not speak for me, I do not need Senator Clinton to be president to validate my worth as a woman. Nor do I see a win at any cost attitude as something to admire nor something that I want my daughters to emulate.

Your post gives only two reasons to support Hillary, that she is a woman and that she is a fighter. As a woman I can say that having the first woman president would make me proud, except if it were Hillary because she is embarrassing. There is a difference between an honorable duel and a Tonya style kneecapping. Hillary appears capable of only the latter. That's not a fighter, that's a frightened brat lashing out.

Louisville, people support candidates for a lot less good reasons than race and gender. What I object to is being told there's something wrong with me for not supporting HRC because she is a woman. And what I object to is this:

So why not Obama step down? Because he's a man, and it's OK for men to be harsh like he was to you in the first and subsequent debates.

It's crying sexism when there isn't any. Hillary should step down because she can't win, except by fiat. And it's fine for "men to be harsh" in a debate when she's the frontrunner. I would certainly not want anyone to tread lightly on her because she's a woman. Women can play just as well, and don't need coddling or special treatment. And I am free to choose whomever I think would be the best president, regardless of race or gender. And, frankly, I am more than troubled by Hillary's willingness to portray herself as a victim. It's obviously worked politically because her supporters want to come to her aid against all the evil men and betraying women), but I'm from a different generation and I see it as degrading.

"Fantastic point! The most vicious crime scenes involve family members."

Hillary's attempt to take Obama out at this point is nothing short of a crime of passion.....bystanders beware!

Anybody else notice how eager Mr. Louisville is to speak on behalf of women everywhere? We have a nominee, sir. If you're a genuine Democrat (or a genuine patriot, for that matter), you'd demonstrate it by doing everything in your power to get him elected. Otherwise, the rest of us will operate on the assumption you're a GOP operative paid (assuming you're not pathetic enough to do this gratis) to stir up e-trouble. Neither scenario paints a pretty picture. We've got a once-in-a-generation chance to recalibrate political discourse in this country in a way that slots so cleanly into progressive principles. Are you going to blow it out of hubris, pride, and/or egotism? (On that note, if you are in fact a Clinton campaign operative, I'd ask that you pose the same question to your "superiors." If you're not, well, then I've got nothing but my condolences for you, sir.)