The South Has Not Yet Been Won
"Don't lose your head and win." That's what my father used to tell me, only half in jest, whenever I went out to play tennis with a boy. I grew up in Virginia, where the message was clear. Women could succeed, but never by beating men outright. Drew Faust, the first woman president of Harvard, had a similar tale about growing up in Virginia. In an interview shortly after being named, she explained that her mother had simply told her: "honey, it's a man's world." Southern women get what they want by indirection, by being steel magnolias, soft on the outside and seemingly pliable, but never giving in and ultimately finding a way around any obstacles.
I thought of this recently with all the crowing about how Obama is beating Hillary with southern white men. Indeed, in Ellen Goodman's recent column identifying 10 pieces of conventional wisdom that have been debunked in the election thus far, the only one left standing was that "Southern white men still won't vote for a white woman." In other words, many white men in the South may be voting against Hillary more than they are voting for Obama. That's not good news for the Clinton campaign. But it isn't necessarily good news for the Obama campaign either. Just because these voters prefer Obama to Hillary does not mean that they will vote for Obama over McCain, no matter what the polls say. It's very hard to believe that when the chips are down they're not going to vote for the guy who looks like them.
Hillary lost her head and won, again and again. And a lot of white males, particularly in the south, can't stand her for it, and for the qualities that she has had to develop to succeed in what, for much of her career, was still largely a man's world. Obama may well be able to convince some of those voters to cross racial lines, which would be great. But the depth of their antipathy to Hillary should warn all Democrats that the south has not yet been won.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
In 1954 a man called Darrell Huff published a book called “How to Lie with Statistics“. In the fifty-odd years since then the book has sold one and a half million copies making it the greatest selling stats book of all time.
For those who are running around using words like misogyny, and prejudice, and pointing to the South to explain Hillary's losses, I'd suggest reading the book and changing its name to "How to Lie to Yourself with Statistics." The thought process you're using to reach your conclusion is no more intelligent than that we might expect from a 8 year old. Using the same methodology and the most recent Quinnipiac poll for Ohio, I can just as easily make the claim that the North has not been won. And may I point out that Southern white men are voting for a black!
The fact of the matter is that people have a problem on multiple levels. I won't deny that for a few (who tend to be Republicans, not Democrats!) misogyny is in there somewhere. However, for the most part they're voting for Barack and against Hillary for what they see as legitimate political differences. Throwing the gender card without simultaneously mentioning Hillary's negatives, Clinton-fatigue, the clear distinction between Hillary and Obama in terms of special interest, the five Clinton-gates (check Wikipedia), the fact that Obama simply outshines her in terms of communication skills, etc.., shows nothing but your own prejudice. It's one track thinking, and not only does that tell me your political view, it's dishonest to yourself.
'"Don't lose your head and win." That's what my
father used to tell me, only half in jest,...
Hillary lost her head and won, again and again.'
Just goes to show that your parents can really mess you up,
even when they mean well. Anyway, at least HRC has realized
what a problem winning can be, and done something 'proactive' about it.
SHE IS RIGHT! I live in the deep south, not North Carolina, not Virginia, but good old dixie and let me tell you they did vote against her and if you don't believe drive down here and find out.
Congratulations, kirafa. You've stated the obvious. Hillary is losing in the South. Guess what? She's losing everywhere else too!
Out of 34 contests held, Hillary has lost 23 times. - Check a map for even more enlightemnet. She's lost in the South only 4 times.
And sexism too!
This is so dumb. They have the choice now to vote for Huckabee and McCain and even Romney when he was in. Why are they not doing it? Every day I drive around here in Florida, I see a Conservative flag, so I am aware! Stop pedding racism!
yuck. This blog made me really bummed. Ms. Slaughter is saying that hundreds of thousands of people voted for the guy simply because they are more sexist than they are racist? What a cynical small-minded view of americans. This is a very transparent and desperate attempt to try to salvage hillary's chances. She's a great choice, too. But not the choice of the people.
I know a lot of white men who hate Clinton, but not because she's a woman. It's because she's a Clinton. They hate Bill just as much. I don't think Southern men have any more problem voting for a woman than men from any other part of the country. And for Southern white men, McCain is going to be more comfortable for them than either Clinton or Obama, because he seems like a good ole boy. I bet this election polarizes a lot of Southern households, because Clinton and Obama both have appeal to some women over McCain. Even Republican households are split. It's going to be an interesting election.
I totally agree with you Anne Marie - racism and sexism go hand in hand. The very white males who are voting against Clinton because she is a woman will vote against Obama because he is Black in the general election. Obama is attracting hateful people to his camp.
Everything that goes around will come around - Karma.
The venum that some folks feel the need to assault Hillary Clinton with is the venum they will have to swallow in the general.
There are only two candidates with enough experience to be President in this Election - Hillary Clinton and John McCain. If the viciousness of racism (vote for Obama because he is Black and male) and sexism is what is motivating people to vote against Clinton, then John McCain will have won the general election.
It's a no brainer - McCain or Obama - I will vote for McCain. In fact, I am so convinced Obama is completely unqualified to be President that I might even campaign for McCain.
If the Democrats walk away from Hillary Clinton, they will walk away from the labor movement and from women in the Democratic party. Where does that leave labor or women's issues for another 4 years? We have to rely upon the fair-mindedness of John McCain, but Obama has made it perfectly clear he doesn't care about women's issues or about worker's issues. Obama is for Obama.
Why does Senator Obama's service in a state legislature not count for much of anything?
"Obama has made it perfectly clear he doesn't care about . . . about worker's issues."
With NAFTA, the Clintons and Senator McCain made quite clear their concern for workers' issues. It's her 35 years of experience . . . except, I guess, for that part or the other parts that don't quite fit . . . or the votes to invade Iraq.
Senator Clinton or Senator McCain?
It's no wonder you're having a tough choice deciding.
My question is this,if they wouldn't vote for Obama over McCain,why in the hell are they voting for him over Hillary?So they can vote for McCain in November?This makes no sense whatsoever.
I`M THE FAT LADY.......TRALALA !
As a country lawyer who just happened:
to grow up in Virginia (though I didn't play much tennis growing up, whether against boys or girls);
to vote today in Henry Country, Va;
and to also be a graduate of the University at which, and the school of which, Ms. Slaughter is a/the Dean,
I'd say to Ms. Slaughter: You need to come back the Commonwealth and spend some time before generalizing so broadly.
You should have been in Richmond last Saturday night to hear, among others, Governor Tim Kaine, former Governor Doug Wilder, retired Judge Anne Holton, former World Bank employee Lisa Collis, Virginia State Senator John Edwards (just as good a man as the North Carolina JE), Congressman Bobby Scott and Democratic House Leader Ward Armstrong -- blacks, whites, men, women from all parts of Virginia who recognize the effectiveness and ability to inspire of Barak Obama.
You should have been down in deep southern Virginia in Henry County today to listen to voters of both genders, many races and, yes, both parties whose names may not be as well known but whose votes for Senator Obama count just as much and who would have rejected your inaccurate stereotyping just as strongly.
From what I understand, you're a great Dean. Your commentary here, however, is extraordinarily disappointing.
Please keep these facts in mind as you consider whether Floridians votes should be counted:
The Florida Democratic primary election ballot had all democratic candidates listed.
Florida Dems have been disenfranchised, through no fault of their own
HB537 was written by a Florida Republican to change Florida's primary date.
A state legislature has interfered with it's constituents National voting rights.
The Florida Democratic Party did NOT change this date, the legislature did.
The Florida legislature has an overwhelming Republican majority.
The House of Representatives in Florida have 41 Democrats; 71 Republicans.
The Senate in Florida have 14 Democrats; 26 Republicans
The state of Florida has a Republican Governor.
The citizens of the state of Florida did NOT vote on this date change.
HB537 was passed in May 2007 & legislatively changed the Florida primary date.
This date was, and still is, unalterable by the Florida Democrats.
I'm a woman from the South, and I don't particularly like Hillary. Does that make me sexist? Ann Richards was elected governor of Texas so at least some white men must be "enlightened." But Hillary is NOT like Ann Richards. For one, Ann made a name for herself on her own -- not by marrying someone. And like her or not, Ann was real -- smart-mouthed, hard-drinking, big hair, etc. If Hillary were less fake and less manipulative (note how Hillary is including a lot more "we's" than "I's" lately since that is apparently working for Obama), I could have supported her. But I find it hard to even watch her anymore. Her interview on "Tyra" where she talked about Bill & Monica was so un-real. Sorry, Hillary is not a member of the sisterhood. Sisters don't fake it.
I was born and raised in the south and am a proud Georgia peach now.
At the start of the election, I knew two things...most Americans were fed up with Republicans and this misguided war, and racism is still alive. I was *this* close to supporting Hillary for that reason alone.
But, as a volunteer for Obama's campaign, I have seen and heard things that changed my mind on America and especially the south! The majority of the volunteers I worked with were White and both genders were equally represented. I've seen White men of all ages canvassing and phonebanking for a BLACK man. In SC, Barack won 25% of the White vote against Hililary and John. Me thinks he'll do okay in November.
People are willing to "overlook" their
prejudice if a candidate can show he/she doesn't meet those stereotypes. Unfortunately for Hillary, she has failed to change the negative perceptions about her and Bill.
I find the suggestion that Southern Democrats vote based on whether they are more racist or sexist horribly offensive. It's just taken for granted that we aren't voting according to issues (and that race and gender aren't motivators for voters in the North, East, and West.
It's this type of accepted prejudice that helps me understand why Southerners are not treated as equals by Democrats around the country. It helps me realize why news about Katrina and Rita continues to be buried in the media, and on HuffPo--in Harry Shearer's blog--mocked by every other headline on this site.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
