Why Do We Stick With Her?
Lately I am asked by lots of friends, including my new colleagues at the HuffPost -- who I am so privileged to work with -- just what it is about Hillary that makes me stick with her now, knowing that her chances to gain the nomination are slim to nonexistent.
I admire Senator Obama and the campaign he has run and I know I will be an enthusiastic pundit for him after June 3rd if the Clinton campaign cannot change the equation by then. The personal answer for me is that I am loyal. And it is not a quality I have ever needed to apologize for before. But I want to focus on trying to translate for my friends, just what it is about this campaign of Hillary Clinton's that keeps the enthusiasm of her supporters, particularly the women supporters who are following the campaign around the country, going and going even as the potential for victory is so dim.
There are all of the political reasons that keep her campaign going like the popular vote, the polling in swing states, finishing out the primary states before the superdelegates make their judgments, etc. But that doesn't explain the passion.
It endures out of, not just the determination of Hillary Clinton to be heard, but of her supporters desire to send a message to this country. A message that I am still not sure has been heard. For all of its historic firsts, this primary race has surprisingly not, until recently, generated a discussion of gender in the same way that it has triggered an education on race.
I consider myself one of the most race conscious, race sensitive people I know. My own children are bi-racial (like Obama -- white birthmother, black birthfather). And yet I learned something so important about race and black consciousness during this campaign. I learned that it doesn't matter if Bill Clinton (for instance) is a racist or not. The intentions of a person speaking are less relevant in the moment than the impact of the words being spoken. So whatever has been said about African-Americans by white people in this campaign has been heard by many African-Americans as one more layer of seemingly innocent comments built upon a lifetime of insensitivity and slights.
Yet, for the past few weeks, when Hillary's supporters suggest that similar comments made about gender have the same hurtful impact, Obama supporters guffaw and most of the media ridicules the notion and ridicules the Senator herself as though she is suggesting that she is losing because of her gender -- which incidentally I have never heard her say.
I don't really buy into this notion of the campaign is faltering because Hillary is a victim of sexism. I may part company with some of the Hillary sisterhood on this point. There has been lots of sexism in this race, but this campaign is losing because of choices and strategies of it's own making. Articles and books will be written after the fact about the lost opportunities, the mixed messages, the insular in-fighting, the financial recklessness and the lack of focus on delegates. She has never caught up in the delegate hunt from those early mistakes.
But that does not mean that the zeitgeist of sexism and the numerous comments and visuals that women have seen during the course of this campaign have not had the same impact on the woman who have witnessed or heard it in the exact same way that African Americans have heard comments about race.
And until that is really acknowledged by enough people, perhaps including Barack Obama, these women will not be sated. And in the meantime, Senator Clinton doesn't give up.
So why does this campaign endure? The obvious first answer is the Senator herself. Her campaign has fired on all cylinders since March with a field operation that wins states and a message that stays consistent.
Hillary has found her voice and she is using it to speak to a group of people often ignored in politics. Women who have felt powerless to change or even complain about their own lives because they are just too damn busy keeping it together for everyone around them. And they certainly haven't had time for politics.
From the waitress in the diner to the school teacher to the executive on wall street, women feel the daily slights that are often invisible to others. Yes, many of her supporters need real and immediate help from the government, but so many more are just grateful to be noticed.
Sure there are lots of women in this country who don't feel this way. And for all of you who are going to write comments saying as much you don't have to. I am happy for you. Genuinely.
But Hillary's campaign is still going for every woman who has spoken up in a meeting and was greeted with silence only to have a man say the same thing and be praised. It endures for the mothers who are taking care of their children and their parents and their home and has no time to take care of herself. It endures for women who are so scared to see her fail because of what it may say about their chances in life. And yes folks, it resonates for all the women who have seen the younger guy come along and get the promotion even though she has worked in the company loyally for years.
Too many supporters of Senator Obama get mad at this. It isn't his fault they say. It isn't easy for a black man they say. Take a white woman of privilege and pit her against a black man who started with nothing in life and tell me who has the worse odds they say. But it isn't about Obama, I say. I am not pitting them against each other. In fact last month I wrote to debunk the theory that Obama has had a leg up on this campaign as a black man. The sexist and gender noise has largely been perpetrated by others, not by Obama or his campaign.
It really isn't his fault.....but in a few days it will likely be his responsibility. Until then, Senator Clinton and her supporters carry on.
Follow Hilary Rosen on Twitter: www.twitter.com/hilaryr
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
Boy - the Obamaniacs are out in force on this one - glad to see it's touched a nerve. Yes, you should be worried.
Oh more threats from the HRC fans. I'm a man, why should I be worried. Roe v Wade getting overturned by a McCain appointee to the Supreme Court won't affect me. Equal pay, not my problem. Paid Maternal leave, not my concern.
So keep on with your threats of acting like a bunch unreasonable sore losers that think a slash and burn revenge tactic will affect all of us "Obamaniacs" and not your selves. Yeah that makes sense.
Read who voted to confirm Alito and Roberts, MarcRocks - look up what happened to Robert Bork.. the president does not confirm judges to the Supreme Court ...
BTW:Clinton and Obama voted nay on both (Obama didn't vote 'present' this time)- though a gang of Dems made their confirmation possible.
The Obamaniacs are threatening us with Roe... if only you people knew anything about how the government works.
To all the Obamabots here (so many women) - here's the current statement from Howard Dean as to the real problem Barack faces in the fall - rationalize all you want. The following is Howard Dean - yes, girls, he is a man so listen up!
Dean replied ( to Stephanopolous)
There has been an enormous amount of sexism in this campaign on the part of the media, including the mainstream media. We'll leave present company excepted, because I think that's true. But there have been major networks that have featured numerous outrageous comments that if the words were reversed and they were about race, the people would have been fired.
So that's a big issue. And there are a lot of women in this country who -- there's two issues here. One is one candidate is ahead and one is not. That happens all the time in primaries, and you get over that. What you don't get over is deep wounds that have been inflicted on somebody because they happen to be a woman running for president of the United States.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Does Barack Obama get over it by choosing Sen. Clinton as a running mate?
DEAN: We don't know. But I do believe that the issue of sexism in this country has to be addressed.
Since you continue to demean Clinton (despite the fact that this was a salient issue in the campaign), see how it works for you going it alone in the fall.
About your comment that the sexism that Clinton has encountered hasn't, surprisingly, triggered discussions about gender and sexism. That's because Clinton has chosen to play the victim and USE the issue of sexism for political gain rather than show some leadership and do some educating about it. She could easily have done this, in fact, she started out this race as the presumptive nominee for all practical purposes. I've come to the conclusion that she does not have good judgement or leadership skills.
As a woman and business owner in her fifties who has been through a lot, I don't feel Clinton speaks for me or reflects my experience as a woman in any effective way at all. I feel embarrassment for her. She hasn't found her voice--she changes it with every turn in the road if it will buy a few votes.
I don't know many women who support her. Those who do seem to cling with a kind of blind loyalty, and when we talk about the multitude of issues I bring up (assasination, fuzzy math, divisive racist statements from many in her campaign, and on and on and on . . .) they acknowledge that she's run an abysmal campaign.
Not this woman, not this time.
Right on the money, Anecdote. And refreshing to see you and other intelligent, straight-thinking women commenting in opposition to Hilary Rosen's blind loyalty to...I'm still not clear. Hillary? Doesn't seem to be. The idea of a female presidential candidate? Closer. But an ABUSED and MUSUNDERSTOOD female candidate, which this Hilary thinks that Hillary is. Hogwash. But I won't repeat what you and the others have already pointed out. What I find maddening about Rosen's position is the failure to specify the slights to her gender Hillary has heroically endured. I hear this from other women who essentially share Rosen's view -- but I have yet to get a specific example, other than Obama's comment "You're likeable enough, Hillary" in one of the debates. I think he would have made the same comment had the moderator's comment about unlikeability been addressed to one of the male candidates. Found her voice? More hogwash: she found a voice and thoroughly artificial persona -- hard-drinkin', down-home Wellesley/Yale Law earthy gal that she turns out to be [these last couple months -- that has worked. Remember the above-it-all, inevitable, presidential Hillary in the early debatest? Hadn't found her voice yet, I suppose. Your final words are exaclty the words I've used many times en route to finally convincing my wife that Hillary's not the woman she -- or I -- want to be president. Maybe Gov Kathleen Sibelius or Gov Jennifer Granholm. Not Hillary Clinton [even if she weren't marrie to Bill.]
Baby - get yourself out there in the world that accepts you and buy yourself a Hillary Nutcracker. Put the nut in her crotch and crack that nut to get out the meat. Then find yourself a Barry - Noose kit and hang your black dolls with it.
See dear, no one made up the misogyny your inept con man's taken advantage of - and look in the mirror and see what you've chosen. Sad, self hating - to have missed what so many educated women and Howard Dean noted today on The Week - He said that Obama biggest challenge is mending the rift that the media has caused by their blatant sexism during this campaign. That had the remarks been racial slurs of the same tone, the people who said them would have been fired.
So for the male-identified bloggers here - including andrecole - make note - the gauntlet has been thrown and since it comes from a man - you should take note. Your little buddy is going to lose in November because of this if you don't start making nice.
I feel Hillary clinton def. used sexism to her advantage. Clinton displayed the typical insecurites of a woman during the presidential race. SHe wanted supporters and changed her voice just to gain popularity. I am a young 20 year female and all woman go through the average typical insecurties, but Clinton dealt with them on a National level. WHich def. made her loose many followers, like me. B/c I want a STRONG canidate not one without a voice.
Hilary Rosen: Too bad you, and countless supporters got it all wrong. Your touted "loyalty" for this creature is based on duplicity. The feminist theme she has apparently drilled into your 70s psyche is little more than a talking point, of which she has dredged up many along the way. You've been duped and you don't even know it. Incidentally, wouldn't it have been precious for Hillary to have broken down in tears at a major international conference if she couldn't get "her way"? She is trying to use being female and pass it off as being feminist. Yes, I'm a 55 yr old woman and utterly disgusted with her demeanor.
I agree!! I think that she had played the victim role. She seems like she crawled into a corner and cried everytime something negatiave was said about her. I have heard so many say she is just the typical emotional women. Maybe america is not ready for a women to be in office.
I think I have the solution for all the super-passionate Hillary supporters who want to see a woman in the White House.
Qualities that are generally perceived as female traits: patience, empathy, good communication skills
Since Obama has all the above mentioned traits, and if Bill Clinton was our first black President - - then why can't Obama be our first female president?
corruption greed racism. Theres your reasons Obama will never be president. Have a nice day!
Thank you for your illuminating comment. Nitey nite!
I guess Obama winning yesterday was in our imagination. Bring your thinking out of the 60's,
"cuz Bama gon win". And you have a blessed day!
But thats exactly the point .If H.C used those traits she would be accused of not being tough enough for the job.Its the Catch 22 for women.
Not tough enough or a ball breaker - how can you win?
Thanks for the thoughtful piece Hillary. For those of us who were early supporters of President Clinton, we are all too familiar with the sexism that has fueled her treatment from the moment Governor Clinton announced in 1991. Amazingly, she has overcome this to become a U.S. Senator and, up until a few months ago, the Democrats' presumptive nominee for president. The race was hers to lose and, as you point out, she did just that.
Where we part ways is in her continued campaign. Senator Clinton is going beyond giving a voice to the "voiceless" (although today 1/4th of the Senate Dems are women), to fanning the flames of resentment by playing the victim. This includes comparing her plight to Zimbabwe opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai when in reality the better analogy is to Bill Buckner.
You conclude by saying that this resentment will become Senator Obama's responsibility, but fail to recognize Senator Clinton's role in creating and fanning this resentment. Nearly a generation ago, we stood behind another Clinton and embraced his call for a New Covenant that promised greater opportunity but demanded greater responsibility. The time has come for Senator Clinton to heed this call and actively work to unite the party and not simply passing the buck to Senator Obama.
Thoughtful comments, Bennet. I agree with everything you said, and especially the last sentence:
"The time has come for Senator Clinton to heed this call and actively work to unite the party and not simply passing the buck to Senator Obama."
Indeed this will be her ultimate litmus test: can she move past the divisive "gotcha" politics of the campaign, and put her own political aspirations aside for the moment, for the good of the Democratic Party? She said in her victory speech in Puerto Rico, that this campaign is "not about me". But as Markos M. says "I've never seen a campaign that was more about "me, me, me" than this one".
Now we will see if she is constitutinally capable of moving past this "me, me, me" mentality, and can really "campaign her heart out" for Obama, as she has promised to do if he wins the nomination. Sadly, I'm not very optimistic.
I have lost all respect for the Clintons over the course of this campaign. I never was a HIllary Clinton supporter because I felt she was too divisive. Rather than answer Jerry Brown when he brought up the potential conflict of interest Sen. Clinton had with her work on Whitewater, she decided to be dismissive and slam other women who are not Hillary Clinton by saying "I guess I could have stayed home and baked cookies." Hillary Clinton also took in upon herself to deride women who "stand by" their men, and then when she had a choice of putting the screws to Bill for his miscreant behavior with a woman young enough to be his daughter, Hillary Clinton raked Monica Lewinsky over the coals, and despite her earlier contention, Hillary Clinton did indeed, stand by her man, no matter how miserable his behavior.
In my book, Hillary Clinton's feminist credentials are suspect at best. Since she left law school, she has been riding Bill Clinton's coattails, and because of that she carries not only her own baggage of an abrasive and ruthless personality, but she also, of necessity, must carry his baggage as well, with a penchant to chase after women he is not married to, and to try to hang with characters of dubious repute.
How do feminists square the choices Hillary Clinton has embraced of her own free will with the whole idea that she is a feminst?
Ms. Rosen:
Thanks for at least taking a shot at this. I have been searching for a rationale explanation for the behavior of Hillary's supporters, especially those unhinged few who blame Obama personally for all slights aimed at Hillary by everyone since the beginning of the campaign, a few of whom decided to show up at the RBC meeting yesterday.
Unfortunately, your essay doesn't really get us much more than halfway there. We get that women are pissed about something. But after reading your essay, it remains a mystery why at least some seem to want to blame Barack Obama for all sexism everywhere, and worse, to project onto him offenses committed by Hillary herself (racism, "stealing" the nomination). From the screaching tone of some anti-Obama vitriol by Hillary supporters, one get the impression that this campaign has released a lifetime's worth of frustration on the part of some. Please keep trying to bridge the gap between us, both by providing insight into the Hillary-supporter's mind, and by correcting the misinformation rampant among the Hillary sites like Hillaryis44, TalkLeft, MyDD, and the other, even more strident locales.
You claiming Hillary is a racist is the same LIE the Obama campaign has been pushing since last year. There is only one racist in this campaign and that is your Obamessiah. As for stealing the nomination, well it wasn't Clinton people who committed the fraud being investigated in the Texas caucus, it was Obama volunteers.
We don't care if Hillary Clinton is racist, and that question is between her and her conscience, in any case.
What we're saying is that Hillary Clintons's campaign has made deliberate use of racism, including the appeal to racists, for Hillary's political beneft. That's something we're well qualified and well able to declare given facts available on the public record.
You said,
"But it isn't about Obama, I say. I am not pitting them against each other."
Maybe you're not, but many others are. They are saying that they will vote for McCain (who opposes the proposed provision of reasonable enforcement rights for women who do not receive equal pay for equal work, who will appoint anti-choice Supreme Court justices, who called his wife a c*** in public) rather than Obama.
No true feminist could possibly support McCain against Obama.
I hope you wil work as hard to convince Clinton's die-hard supporters that Obama deserves their support as you work to justify why Clinton deserves support.
Dear Hilary Rosen,
I submit to you that loyalty is not intrinsically a positive characteristic for a person with a liberal mindset.
Loyalty must be tempered with curiosity, open-mindedness and independent thinking.
In my political lexicon, the word "loyal" is a distant cousin to the word "conservative," describing someone who's opposed to change on principle.
True courage comes from a willingness to question one's choices, never get comfortable with one's own opinions, and always doubt one's alliances -- and break with those alliances when the situation demands it.
Many of those who profess loyalty to Hilary Clinton are, truthfully, loyal to her husband's legacy. To me, such a sense of loyalty represents a dynastic inclination that flies in the face of everything this country was built upon. It also relegates Hilary Clinton to the position of a derivative of her husband, when in fact she is her own person and should be judged on her own record.
As the former director of the HRC, you must recognize the importance of breaking with the past and shaping a better future for everyone. Judging by the very reasonable comments you've made here and on MSNBC, I'm sure you will come around.
But you would seem more courageous if you took a clean break from your "comfort zone" and argued your position solely on the candidate's suitability for office, rather than your personal loyalties.
You may want to stick with her, but the Nation won't be stuck with her.
What I find amazing is her campaign has blamed him for her stupid remarks to working somekind of voodoo over the MI and FL decision, and in the same breathe say "well if he gets the nomination, it will be up to him to unite the party." This angers me. At what point will Hillary take responsibility in her role of this "anger" she has created in the Democratic Party. I feel like she won't stop until she gets what she wants. I often wonder if the man was John Edwards would she have stooped so low? If she is the nominee, what can she say to me an African American woman who has been deeply offended at the lack of respect towards a fellow democrat who happens to be black? What is Hillary trying to do to restore the relationship of the many African American men and woman she has angered? Besides, any woman who says she is willing to "obliterate" a country who has no means (as of yet) to harm us, just to show she is "tough" shows how this woman (Hillary) can get caught up in her own hype and weaken a nation.
I'm going to make a prediction. Hillary and Bill Clinton are going to turn out to be Obama's trump card. He's going to unleash them on those Appalachian states and they are going to bring those states into the Democratic fold and its going to be a blow out election.
I started the year out as a Clinton supporter- I consider myself one of the most pro-feminist guys out there. I'm gay but I'm the honorary lesbian with all my lesbian friends (including the former seperatists)- that's how feminist I am and I am proud of it.
But I'm having a real problem with these charges of sexism against Hillary.
Here's why.
There are no concrete examples of this supposedly omnipresent sexism that the Clinton supporters can point to.
We have the racist statements of Bill Clinton, Geraldine Feraro and others associated with the Clinton campaign. They are a matter of public record. We can debate whether or not Hillary's remark that it took more than MLK to pass the Civil Rights Act is racist for example- it's a specific remark- it's quantifiable.
When it comes to charges of sexism we are getting vagaries- feelings- emotional hunches- with nothing to back up the charges
Yeah, yeah Obama said "sweetie" a couple of times and he apologized (unlike the Clintons)- but a few "sweeties" do not make a case women.
If women (and pro-feminist men) want to get somewhere, they'd better take a step out of gender theory land and start scrapping in the real world with the rest of us.
I know sexism exists but so does bad campaigning, bad financial planning and foot-in-mouth disease- all of which we can solidly say helped do Ms. Clinton in.
And I say that as a feminist.
The Clintons are not racist.
...they just use racism.
You continue to post this...you should continue to be questioned.
What is ORGANIC about Hillary Clinton's support, Mrs. Rosen? As you said on CNN. Clinton is continuing to promote incindiary remarks. They are all Declarative statements that have no truth. She is not the winner in the popular vote, she was not outspent, and she cannot rely on current polls. She was the coronated Democratic Presendial Candidate throughout 2007 and at the beginning of 2008. She had benefitted from more money given to her than any President Candidate at the start of their campaign. How much more did Hillary Clinton spend in Iowa and on Super Tuesday than any other candidate in the History of Democratic politcs. She had everybody on her side and was the machine, she was the establishment. At the end of this race, she is continuing to lie.
Who cares if now she put a spotlight on Puerto Rico, as she said in her remarks. That wasn't her initial intent. At the beginning of this race, she should have cared less about Puerto Rico But she continues to lie. This isn't organic, this is MANIPULATION. You continue to post this...you should continue to be questioned. She's not fighting, she's gaming the system.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
