« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
Clinton is losing because of Sexism
Or so say the group "Clinton Supporters Count Too:
An Ohio-based group of Democratic Hillary Clinton supporters say
they’ll work actively against Sen. Barack Obama if he becomes the
nominee, arguing that Clinton has been the subject of “intense sexism”
by party leaders and the media.
With growing calls for Clinton to leave the race, she said, women feel
like “we’re being told to sit down, shut up, and get with the program.”
Advertisement
Comments (14)
The problem with backlash is that it sometimes backfires. The lash ends up hitting you in the butt.
May 15, 2008 12:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
What a bunch of WATB. Just like Rev. Sharpton doesn't speak for me as a black person, these people don't speak for me as a woman. I agree that some media agents have been sexist AND racist against the 2 Democratic party candidates. But I'd love to see their list of proof of “intense sexism” by party leaders in particular.
May 15, 2008 1:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
I would LOVE to see a Madame President but not this one! She gives women a bad name.
May 15, 2008 2:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Who's calling for hillaryto leave the race? Didn't Tweety Bird Matthews and Terry "I have no shame" McAulife talk about this the other night? Certainly no one in the party is saying that, and certainly no one on TV is telling hillary to quit.
It would be nice if they had some evidence to support this claim.
May 15, 2008 1:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
http://www.nbc.com/Saturday_Night_Live/video/play.shtml?mea=250052
When reality follows comedy...
May 15, 2008 1:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sexism?
It couldn't be that she underestimated Obama because she thought she was inevitable?
I'm sure it wasn't related to the fact that she had no real plan after Super Tuesday.
I'm quite certain that it had nothing to do with the fact that she placed loyalty before talent in selecting her campaign staff.
Yeah, it must be the sexism.
May 15, 2008 1:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, clearly, since women are 55-60% of every state's Democratic primary/caucus turnout this cycle, sexism is the cause. Brilliant.
May 15, 2008 1:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ohio Democrats?
More likely Ohio Republicans in Dem's clothing...
These are some of the many concern trolls popping up all over the net and the MSM who want to split the Democratic party by injecting a lot of negativity at every juncture.
And the fact is, "Women" aren't being told to sit down and shut up, it's more the likes of Lanny Davis and James Carville who are at the receiving end of that admonition.
And they aren't women...
(...as far as we know!)
May 15, 2008 1:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually there is a lot of talk about what went wrong for Clinton.
I think it can be summed up in two ways...
1. She ran as an "incumbant" in a change year.
2. She didn't have a plan for post Super Tuesday.
Although i saw someone on MSNBC today talking about how different the world would be if she had chosen to move to Illinois to run for Senate instead of New York. Barack Obama would never have been a Senator.
May 15, 2008 1:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Personally, I think these woman should sit down, shut up, and get with the program.
They ain't seen nothin' yet. Let 'em help get McCain elected. THEN they'll know the true meaning of sexism.
May 15, 2008 2:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Gee, how did this just happen to get started with emphasis on targeting Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Florida?
Is it about sexism or vote counting?
How pathetic.
Is Hillary gonna tamp this down for the sake of unifying the party?
Nah.
May 15, 2008 2:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Blah, blah, blah, blah...
The problem with this is that people tune out when actual sexism raises it ugly visage and we need to address it.
May 15, 2008 4:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Anyone with Hillary's actual credentials would be lucky to be elected Alderman in Chicago. Without the affirmative action of her famous name, she would have been left to rely only on her personal talents, gifts and intelligence. Maybe she would have done great things. We don't know. She never did it. She latched on to her husband's coattails and arrogantly thought that should buy her the presidency.
There is no sexism that has defeated her when her claim to legitimacy is the man she's married to.
That ain't feminism. And this is coming from a 58 year old, white female and a feminist.
May 15, 2008 4:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Anyone with Hillary's actual credentials would be lucky to be elected Alderman in Chicago. Without the affirmative action of her famous name, she would have been left to rely only on her personal talents, gifts and intelligence. Maybe she would have done great things. We don't know. She never did it. She latched on to her husband's coattails and arrogantly thought that should buy her the presidency.
There is no sexism that has defeated her when her claim to legitimacy is the man she's married to.
That ain't feminism. And this is coming from a 58 year old, white female and a feminist.
May 15, 2008 4:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment