Hillary's Superdelegates: Weighing Gender Against Momentum
Lynne Glasner, Gina Hardin, Karen Sellars, Annie Shreffler and Ellen Emerson White researched the superdelegates mentioned in this article. Editorial assistance: RedDeer.
In November 1965, Jackie Stevenson of Minnesota was a single mother, caring for two small children. Although employed, she couldn't get a bank to give her a home loan. "I was not allowed [a mortgage] because I was a single mother," she says.
Stevenson was regularly denied charge accounts for the same reason, even at a department store where she worked. In 1973, when Minnesota organized its Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party's Feminist Caucus, Stevenson was ready to join. "I was ripe for such a thing."
Now, more than 40 years later, Stevenson still plays a vital role in the caucus, the only one of its kind in the nation. She's also actively involved in the state party, a DNC member and superdelegate who supports Sen. Clinton.
In an election year where every delegate counts, female superdelegates may play the role of king-maker (or queen-maker). Since February 5th's Super Tuesday primaries, Obama has gained 55 superdelegates while Clinton has lost 5; this has narrowed the gap between them to less than 30. Despite Obama's gains, a strong feminist tide continues to run in Clinton's favor. Declared female superdelegates support Sen. Clinton over Sen. Obama by significant margins, and female superdelegates are endorsing at a faster rate than their male counterparts, according to OffTheBus's Superdelegate Investigation.
Many female superdelegates like Jackie Stevenson who have endorsed Clinton appear to have done so on the basis of generational and personal ties and because they self-identify as feminists.
Drawing from hundreds of superdelegate profiles compiled from interviews and material available online, OffTheBus researchers found that, of the 278 female superdelegates, approximately 116 have declared support for Clinton while 70 have pledged support for Obama. In addition, whereas 67 percent of female superdelegates have already committed to one of the two candidates, only 53 percent of male superdelegates have done so.
Female superdelegates who support Clinton feel they are backing a strong and experienced candidate. In most cases, feminism plays a key role in how they judge political issues more generally.
"When I first took my petition [to hold legislative office] around to get signed," said Pennsylvania superdelegate Ruth Rudy in an interview with the Associated Press, "there were people who said, 'I just don't think a woman is capable of handling the job.'"
Despite these hurdles, Rudy won a seat in the Pennsylvania House of Representatives in 1983, where she served for 13 years. During this time, she also served two years as the President of the National Federation of Democratic Women.
Rudy's casting her superdelegate vote for Clinton. "I'm supporting a women's group... It's the women of America who are putting votes up for Hillary," Rudy explained to the Centre Daily Times.
Quite a few of the female superdelegates interviewed by OffTheBus feel that Clinton is being judged too harshly due to her ties to Bill. They dismiss claims that she's riding his presidential coattails. (For a separate OffTheBus article examining this theory, click here.)
Stevenson is quick to point out the double standards facing women in American politics.
"Hillary Rodham could have done a lot of this herself." Stevenson feels Clinton definitely could have become a senator without the help of her former-president husband. Stevenson mused that Clinton could have even become senator of Illinois, had she stayed in the state of her birth.
Faced with everything Clinton's been through, Stevenson feels most of us would give up. She admires the Senator for her perseverance through the 1990s insurance battles and the scandals surrounding her marriage.
"It's like tearing a person up into little pieces and putting them in envelopes and sending them everywhere," Stevenson said.
In explaining her support of Clinton, Stevenson points to noted feminist Robin Morgan's updated essay "Goodbye To All That," originally published in the 1970s discussing the politics of accommodation and sexism. The ending sums it up best: "...I'm voting for Hillary not because she's a woman-- but because I am."
Early in February, when MSNBC correspondent David Shuster suggested Chelsea Clinton was "being pimped in some weird sort of way" by the campaign, superdelegate Judith Hope of New York was quick to respond:
"You know, no matter who your favorite candidate for president may be, can American women continue to look the other way while the national media spews such sexist contempt?
"If we learn nothing else from this long Democratic primary season, we now know this: It is still 'open season' on American women," wrote Hope in an email to Eleanor's Legacy supporters.
Judith Hope enthused her support for Sen. Clinton's candidacy over a year ago, just as it was made official. "I think it's an exciting moment in history for New York women, for American women and, in fact, for women around the world," she told USA Today in January 2007.
Female superdelegates who support Obama are just as quick to describe themselves as feminist. They don't see a vote for Obama as being at odds with feminism. Instead, they see Obama's voting record-- pro-choice, pro-woman, and pro-family-- and ability to build an impressive grassroots and fundraising machine as compelling and rational arguments to cast their votes with him.
Judy Bevans of Vermont, originally an Edwards supporter, was impressed by the amount of young people Obama attracted, and his grassroots organization.
"He speaks to the future, not that Hillary says anything about the past. That spoke directly to me," explained Bevans.
She also, like many of the female superdelegates supporting Sen. Clinton, identify with the historical obstacles facing women. Bevans points to the pressures of working in a traditionally male-dominated field.
"Years ago, I was the first woman fire-fighter in Westchester County, New York." Initially Bevans didn't give interviews or speak to the press about her unique position.
"I thought that if I gave interviews, I wouldn't be considered serious by the others," said Evans.
Not all Obama supporters came to their choice as easily. Mary Long was working at the Grady Memorial Hospital in Atlanta, Georgia, in the 1960s. In a 1999 interview with Georgia Women's Movement Oral History Project, Long explains "I would see women come in with such damage to their bodies based on all of the back road, back woods, back alley abortions, and how they tried to do self-induced abortions, and whatever."
One night, a young woman came to the hospital, nine-weeks pregnant and recently abandoned by her husband, hoping to terminate her pregnancy. This woman became Mary Doe in the Georgia case Doe v. Bolton, a companion case to Roe v. Wade. Long became one of the nine plaintiffs on the case, bringing federal action in Northern District of Georgia.
"...As a nurse, I just really felt that it was much better for women to have safe abortions. And it would be a woman's choice. I don't think anybody is out here yelling, 'Abortion! Abortion!' What we're saying is that it's a woman's choice, and I don't want to make that choice for anybody," Long explained to Janet Paulk during the interview.
Since then, Long's been involved in numerous health-based initiatives, programs and coalitions, and was involved with Georgia State University's Women Collection for many years.
Mary Long thought long and hard before announcing her support. In coming to her decision, she thought about balancing the need for a woman candidate with how her constituents voted: Georgia voted overwhelmingly for Obama-- he won the primary with 67 percent of the vote. She was elected to the DNC in 2007.
"It's not a personal decision, it's a decision about representing Georgians. I'm still a feminist, no matter what," Long explained. "This is not falling off the wagon at all; sometimes you have to make a rational decision."
Female superdelegate supporters of Sen. Clinton disagree. For Stevenson, it's now or never. Stevenson, who's in her early 70s, doesn't feel there will be another woman candidate in her lifetime. "If there is, I'm not sure who [it would be]."
In a state where Obama won handily with 66 percent of the vote, Stevenson faces pressure to change her endorsement. She feels criminalized by her support of Clinton, but refuses to back down. In fact, Stevenson empathizes with Geraldine Ferraro and the recent fire she's come under.
"How dare they criticize her for saying what most people in this country are thinking... If Obama was a white male..." Stevenson trailed off, not completing the thought.
Along those lines, she remarks, "I see and hear an anger [in the Democratic Party] that I've not been aware of in all my years of involvement."
Others see that anger, too, and are hoping to avoid an August convention meltdown. There are 92 female superdelegates that have not yet endorsed a candidate. Many of them, including both Christine and Nancy Pelosi, are committing their votes to the leader in pledged delegates.
"Many of us are elected by the grassroots of the party," explained Christine Pelosi, in a February interview with the Huffington Post. "And I cannot imagine going home in November to those people and trying to phone bank for someone who did not capture the [pledged delegate] vote..."
Betty Richards, an unpledged superdelegate of Texas, agrees, and doesn't think the decision of the nominee should be left up to the superdelegates. On CNN's American Morning, she stated that she "really [has] a problem with superdelegates making the decision....I just don't think that that's the way it should be."
Committed superdelegates for both Clinton and Obama have reserved the right to change their votes based on the pledged delegate numbers, including Clinton supporter Sen. Maria Cantwell and Obama supporter Rep. Zoe Lofgren. Although the superdelegates have the right to endorse whomever they choose, party unity in November is becoming a bigger priority than personal preference.
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
IF YOU CARE ABOUT THE BIAS BEING SHOWN TOWARD HILLARY CLINTON
CHECK THIS NEW WEBSITE:
http://www.hillaryclintonforum.net/prohillary/
The discussion within the democratic party is being turned inside out. We are entering an era of a higher and broader level of engagement and conversation within the party as we realize that governance is more than sound bites and talking points. While there currently is much hand wringing and hardening of feeling it will be this level of engagement by the electorate not witnessed for several decades that will unite our party and our nation.
As this article illustrates, many party members have a deep sense of investment this cycle in a particular candidate or perspective. Most of us do or will realize that the challenges we face collectively far outweigh the push/pull of our own perceptions regarding the campaigns and the causal factors of success or failure of one candidate or another.
This process will in the final analysis lead to a plurality of the electorate selecting a democratic president the country can rally around as we face some of the most challenging times in the history of our republic.
The democratic party will also have many engaged members that will take the lessons learned from this cycle and apply them to a higher level of activism within the party to our collective credit and benefit.
I often wonder if anyone reads any of these or just likes to hear themselves babble.
We must confront racism and sexism in this campaign. People have been excusing any such behavior because based on their personal feelings towards the person.How trite and petty which is what I find on most of these threads. I have found Obama playing to the sexual stereotype card and I am angry as hell. We are more tolerant of sexism from candidates than we are of racism. I am getting tired of it. Neither sexism nor racism should be tolerated period. No other senator like Leahy would say the stupid things he said if he were referring to a male candidate. John Kerry would be so stupid to beleive that Obama can deal better with the Arabs because he is black. Being Black or Being Female doesn't give you innate talents.
No we have stupid articles examining the women's superdelegate vote. They get asked why they are voting or not voting for another woman. African American candidates get grilled on their "loyalties" to either Clinton because of previous relationships or Obama..one of their own. Stop the insanity.
Fight Sexism and Racism wherever you find it. Not simply because you like the person. Because it is wrong. This is a historic election. How we behave now will effect the future in ways we don't even know about yet.
Minty, You are so right. I knew nothing about Sen. Obama when this process began, but I tried to keep an open mind even though I felt I knew Sen. Clinton and have deep respect for her. My heart has been hardened, not by Sen. Obama, but by the media and his supporters. There have been comments about Hillary on the cable news channels so biased and derogatory, it has illustrated a lack of respect not only for a former first lady, but by extension all women. Racism has not been addressed as it should have been, but most are aware it exists in our society. Misogyny has been hidden in the homes of abused women, reflected in pay scales and in the minds of men and, yes, even women. Efforts by women to elevate themselves have been turned into "feminazii"" and "bitch." It will be difficult to pull the lever for Sen. Obama in November.
It is hard to believe how imbedded the gender oppression is even coming from the women anchors, interviewers, and politicians.
I love this quote:
"Women must help other women. I have this saying that I use quite frequently, which is that there is a special place in hell for women who don’t help each other. A woman with power must understand that, in actuality, her role is to help others. For a woman who wants to be at the center of power, she must understand that her power is actually maximized by encouraging more women to participate in the system."
~Madeleine K. Albright former U.S. Secretary of State
That said, I still don't know how I will vote yet. I would love to push the button for a woman. But when i choose it will be for the candidate I think can best lead the country with preference given for race, gender, age, or even P.O.W. status.
For Kato,Kate,Nabel and the rest of HYPOCRITS, blacks or whites, for all of you,who choose to forget the prosperous years in Clinton presidency,I just want to remind for everybody,stop to criticize the Clintons.All the good thinks they get from the Clintons,now, the forget,just because on of theirs is competing for presidency. I, as a women,admired Hillarys tenacious character. I always,before judge one other person,try to put myself on her place.First, she is taking all the bashing from the bias media,press, she passed the wery hard period with Monica L., just to keep her family together.It takes a wery stong character to be able to lock all this pain in your heart. I suggest, to give her credit before judge her. This is the women, who deserve to be president,strong, beaten so many times,she stand -up and start again ready to fight with more determination and courage. The truth,I don't know, if many women would be able to be like her. For all MAN, who thinks, the women is just to bear children,clean and coock, to never forget, SHE is working shoulder to shoulder , carry the burden of daily problems of children and family, more than many man, and many times she is mother and father,that WOMEN, deserve to be respected and women like HILLARY,deserve also to be the next President of the U S A. KEEP UP HILLARY, WE SUPPORT YOU,WOMEN FOR WOMEN.
You know, as a woman, that reads very ...irrational to me.
What do I see in Clinton that makes her an admirable woman? Nothing. I mean seriously. I am at a loss to figure out why people think that "I was married to the president" as qualification FOR president is in any way "forward" for women. I am only 43 but my understanding was that women would be equal when they could get things on their own merits, not ride on a husbands coattails.
I could overlook that if I thought she was running a competent campaign - but she is not. She has totally mismanaged and misplanned, and behaved overall like a "spoiled princess". Her refusal to see the writing on the wall, combined with her low manipulation tactics only reinforce any and all negative gender stereotypes.
And if that weren't bad enough, whenever she is criticized, she herself hauls out the gender card and plays it. "Oh the boys are picking on me".
I truly do not understand how -ANY- self respecting woman can watch her behavior and think she is any sort of a fit representative of women, nevermind women in power.
She makes me ashamed.
It always saddens, Aleka, when I hear a person denigrates the accomplishments of women by saying she would be nothing without her husband. It is particularly hateful coming from another women. She bagan in college her support of the civil rights movement and Gene McCarthy's anti war campaign. She was not married when asked by the Democratic leadership to serve on the Watergate Legal Counsel. She was not married when she wrote her thesis on social activism or when she was chosen to give the speech at her graduation and shocked everyone with her antiwar statements. She got into Yale School of Law without Bill Clinton.. The first first lady ever to occupy an office in the West Wing of the White House, she began ON DAY ONE to work for universal health care. Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, Oct. 6, 2007: "The children's health program wouldn't be in existence today if we didn't have Hillary pushing for it from the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue. "
Two days ago she called for Bush to boycott the opening ceremony at the Chinese Olymics, but this wasn't the first time she has challenged China. NYT 9/6/ 95"She talked so eloquently about human rights, and I thought it was very effective, because all of the women here will know that the wife of the President of the United States also thinks about these things," said Maria Kamm, a delegate from Tanzania and member of Parliament there. You should be ashamed.
It is incomprehensible that one woman would say of another woman, she got where she is because of her husband. It denigrates everything women have been reaching for and achieving for the last century. Before she married Bill Clinton, she had graduated college, wrote a thesis on social equality, was asked to give the commencement address for her class, worked in a community center in a poor neighborhood. After she met (not married) Bill Clinton, she graduated from Yale School of Law, was appointed by Democratic leadership to work on the Watergate Legal Counsel, taught at the University of Arkansas Law school. She is the only first lady to have an office in the West Wing. You make me ashamed. For you to say, echoing Chris Mathews, that she has arrived to this level of accomplished as a result of sympathy is nothing less than an insult to everyone who supports her and every vote she has received in NY as a senator (70% is a lot of sympathy). You really need to crawl back under your rock and leave decisions to more mature people.
I don't think it matters how many words you wrap around it to justify the position, if ANY us:
a) Vote for because of
or
b) Vote against because of
we are guilty of ISM. It's just a matter of filling in the question marks with what form we practice.
It's an old saying'YOU KNOW WHAT YOU HAVE, BUT YOU DON'T KNOW, WHAT YOU WILL GET". The media the press,turned Hillary upside-down, even when she sneeze the comment is" no she caught". From her childhood, the media analysed,what she say,what she dreamed,how she walks,to make the long story short,the media depicted her from the day she was born untill today. WHAT you know about Obama?, he talks nice,sometimes arrogant,he see himself as the "for sure" president nominee, his association with Jeremiah Wright,Rezko, Auchi, the NY bombar, and so many other stories (read Chicago Tribune),we will never know. As I read the commnents,I almost can tell for sure, who is balck and who is white, just because the balck Obamas supporters are using a wery trivial language almost disgusting. You know, if you never get from your mother,the first seven - 7 - years of lessons, how to behave,to make a difference between good and bad, this years are not FOR SALE. If you missed this years ,later it takes a lot of self education,reading,traveling to recuperate some. So, it's nice to be civilized.
Congratulations LISABONA! You have the most unintelligible post that I have ever read! Between the numerous misspelled words and the grammatical errors I found it impossible to understand WTF you were trying to say. FYI, Obama's issues and associations have been thoroughly explored. The fact that they have not hurt him as much as you would like is a credit to his great political skill. He has run circles around Hillary, the so-called experienced, tough fighter. When potentially damaging media stories come up he handles them exceptionally well. When damaging stories come up about Hillary, she takes the following idiotic steps:
1. Deny -She tries to lie herself out of her own lies.
2. Distract -She says well look at what Barack's minister said.
3. Excuse- I misspoke. I was sleepy. I was told that there were snipers somewhere in Bosnia.
4. Whine -WAAAH, the boys and the media are picking on the girl! Boohoohooo. Mommy, he's spending more money than me.
5. Dismiss- She shows up on SNL or Leno and makes lame jokes about her lies.
You choose to support a whiny, lying loser. Judging by the way you write, I think it's safe to say that you DID NOT get your 1st 7 years worth of lessons. Or, according to your own twisted reasoning, you are black. Keep telling yourself that you are civilized. Your post speaks for itself and it's screaming Dumb Savage.
Your post is a perfect example of why many women will stay home in Nov. if Sen. Obama wins the nomination.
1. Deny- Twice he denied his campaign had spoken to the Canadian Consul
2. Distract- Hillary lied about NAFTA. She attened meetings so it must be true.
3. Excuse- I was a bonehead to get involved with Rezko. No one knew he was a crook.
4. Whine- Rev. Wright is like a "crazy uncle" so why should I explain why I went to his church for twenty years.
5.- Dismiss- She was embarrased by her exageration and had the courage to face it head on. Sen. Obama will not answer questions about the donations from Antonin Rezko. he dismisses any question he doesn't want to answer.
You know so much about a man you never heard of two years ago. All too common.
Washington is such a disappointment. Really, were can you find so many 'artist's' with the same cause?. And hopefully your owned by you're government, possibly a cabinet job, or Attorney General, as with Reno? Everything illegal is 'shredded. Secrecy is the key. The Presidency was purchased. At least it was / is in the Clinton Era.
You can't tell me he's "Worthy" or Senator Clinton?
The money that flowed into party's, the nation's that donated, amazing. The only problem is.....the media is also involved. No more little boy at the corner, announcing..."extra...extra...read all about it". Now, It's.....all gone. The CIA is especially interesting...they are the external link to other countries and product, whether it is drugs', money laundering etc., I know why the Clinton's were so suspicious for so many years....so many fire's to put out....they did it well...and elected for second term. Camelot II....Oh My. Gosh, she is "entitled", look at all the fire's she had to put out? Only in California....does it read like a book. A Satirical Murder Mystery. I wish it was sold 'only in America', unfortunately includes the entire globe. Ask a few people politically inclined? How American voters have enabled this 'crap' into office. And, willing to do it again. This time because she's a woman. How pathetic. American!
Part of a poem written by Maya Angelou, Poet Laureate and long time friend of Sen. Clinton:
You may write me down in history
With your bitter, twisted lies.
You may trod me in the dirt
But still, like dust, I'll rise.
Comment by Dr. Angelou: There is a world of difference between being a woman and being an old female. If you're born a girl, grow up and live long enough, you can become an old female. But to become a woman is a serious matter. A woman takes responsibility for the time she takes up and the space she occupies. Hillary Clinton is a woman. She means to rise. Rise Hillary.
Yes Hillary rise...Rise.... Rise and walk your lying, schizophrenic, incompetent a** out of this contest. Put your gender card away, grow up and try to regain your dignity.
Nice to see the "superdelegates" are basing their backings on facts and what the candidate stands for and not just because the candidate happens to be a woman, and that speaks to their feminist roots...
Oh...wait....
The superdelegates will vote for the person most likely to win the general. Given that Howard Dean and Nancy Pelosi have given MacCain 44 electoral votes, they will have to take that into account if they vote for Sen, Obama. As for other reasons to vote for a particular cantidate, the words mean nothing and they will not play recordings of his speeches as they decide. Your sarcasm doesn't help the debate. In 1967 the ERA was defeated., approxamently four years after Pres, Johnson sign the ciivll rights bill. It eventually passed, but the fact that there were women who voted against in, at least in my state, was heartbreaking. There are powerful forces fighting Srn. Clinton and she may not win, but she will never back down. She is the most capable, experienced and honest person running for president The lies told now are leftovers from the attempted coup staged by Republicans and those who believe them are fools.
Yes furelise she is the most capable, at lying, covering up, shredding documents that show how enethical she really is, and putting up with a man who for years made her look like a fool. The only reason she put up with Bill's crap all of these years is because she used his power and name to gain some of her own. If she was such a capable and powerful woman she wouldn't need her husbands name to run on. I find it curious how when Bill was elected she wanted to be known as Hillary Rodham-Clinton, but when she decided to run for office the Rodham mysteriously disappeared.
I am a 51 year old woman who has experienced being raped and an abusive marriage, so by some of those bitter female superdelegates I should be voting for Hillary because I should blame men for all of my problems. I do not choose to live my life as a victim but as a survivor and I have no respect for any woman who uses the victim or gender card as a means to get ahead, which is exactly what Hillary is doing. Most self respecting and strong women would have left a philandering husband like Bill years ago, but not Hillary because she knew he could get her where she wanted to be. As a woman I think that is disgusting and in no way speaks to her as being a strong woman on her own.
This is the "fact" (which I will continue to harp on because it's important) I keep stumbling into: despite her 16 years in the public eye, Sen Clinton still cannot find 50% support among the general population, especially among the Independents and moderate Republicans whose support is needed to win in November. So where do people dredge up all this "electable" talk?
Furthermore, this talk about "I'm not voting for Clinton because she's a woman, but because I am" is the greatest case of circular logic this side of Logic 100...it's the same basic argument, turned back upon itself. These arguments for her by women are just glorified sexism, dressed up but still sexist, and just as sexist as many men's put-downs of women.
Let us indeed hope that the female superdelegates (well. OK, ALL superdelegates) think very carefully before casting any vote.
Part of the reason that Senator Clinton cannot get all the votes she deserves is because of the prejudice of sexist males. There are far too many people I see who are willing to throw away their vote for an unproven male simply because he is not a woman and he is "politically correct" in addition. What about all the people who are talking amongst themselves and who will either not vote or will vote Republican rather than trust a politically correct upstart who doesn't seem to know enough to come in out of the rain. How many people will need to hold his hand and offer him help when he doesn't know where the phone is in the White House, let alone how to answer it?
An objective person would think Hillary was the "upstart" by the way she has run her campaign. She can't be trusted to hire scrupulous trustworthy campaign members. She can't be trusted to get universal healthcare. How could she when she doesn't even pay for her own employees healthcare consistently. She can't be trusted to be honest with us. She whines and tries to change the rules when things aren't going her way. She is simply pathetic! Barack doesn't need anyone to hold his hand. Hillary does.
Anybody who would vote for Mc "Crazy ass" Cain deserves him for a president. Hillary will answer the phone, alright. The question is... which one of her personalities will be talking? The crier or the liar...the fighter or the whiner. She is a super smart lady. She has just run this campaign like a "newbie". That's her own fault.
Barack has run his campaign like a streamlined, efficient well-oiled machine. That's why he's ahead. That's why people of all races ages and genders are voting for him. Not media bias, not racial bias, not gender bias. He's not perfect. He knows shady people and his spouse speaks too candidly sometimes. (The same things can be said about Hillary.) Barack is competent, capable, honest, trustworthy and a true patriot. If Hillary and McCain had Barack's foresight we might not have 4000+ soldiers dead and Billions of dollars wasted. We can't trust them with the presidency after they made those stupid, unpatriotic blunders.
It is a sad comment that 50 years of feminism should result in the idea that one should vote for someone simply because she's a woman. What strides have been made if this is the case?
It is sad some won't vote for Hillary because she is a woman.
.
I am a woman and can't see why any woman would vote for a person just based on that. If Hillary Clinton is the best that we women can do than we are doomed. She's a liar and can't be trusted. Surely a better woman will surface in the future. we should wait until we can support an honorable woman, not this woman
As a woman, I am appalled that women would vote for her simply because she's a woman. For pete's sake, so is Ann Coulter. But there it is, so many women have boiled down the entire election and the future of this country on their and her sex.
Someday, we will have a decent, honorable woman to vote for. There are such women in Congress and the Senate - really experienced, capable women - but they didn't have the chance she had - because she was married to Bill. I agree with you Nancyann, Hillary is a liar and we don't need another liar in the White House. She can't be believed, she has no credibility. She is Pinocchio (sp) in a pantsuit.
No sexism here. None at all!
[....] "Someday, we will have a decent, honorable woman (AA) to vote for. There are such women (AAs) in Congress and the Senate - really experienced, capable women (AAs) - but they didn't have the chance she (HE) had - because she (HE) was married to Bill. (A MAN). I agree with you Nancyann, Hillary (BARACK) is a liar and we don't need another liar in the White House. She (HE) can't be believed, she (HE) has no credibility. She (HE) is Pinocchio (sp) in a pantsuit (SUIT)."
Do you not see the blatant sexism here? Do you really NOT? If you replace the words and phrases as I have done, above, can you NOT SEE how if you used the same words and phrases about an African American, you would be accused of racism?
Every single time I see words like yours I know I'm listening to somebody who thrives on "isms" - whether they are age, race, gender, homosexuality, etc.
What you are saying here is that Hillary Clinton, because she seeks POTUS, is a liar, not credible, Pinnocchio in a pantsuit, as you put it. You suck up the media swill about HRC as easily as you sit down to take a drink of something, without EVER bothering to question what it is you are being told! And you believe every word out of Barack Obama's mouth - whether these words are true or not.
THIS IS A CLASSIC EXAMPLE OF
THank you. That's how my wife (33 years now) feels. She would like a woman with integrity and one who made it on her own. How shallow that her name recognition is as "wife of".
It is bigotry to vote for (or against) someone based on gender or race - it should be the best person, and clearly she isn't.
Exactly the same logic pertains to Obama. His experience is too skimpy to be trusted as Commander in Chief. Let's let him gain some pertinent national legislative and leadership experience and then reconsider him for president.
the more he spends in congress then he becomes tainted like everyone else. I like the fact that he's a fresh face. We need a fresh pair of eyes to straighten things out.
You must be a Republican. Democratic women have had enough of the hate speak of the media . Don'/t you see? Every time a woman runs for the presidency, it will be the same thing. It isn't because it's Hillary. It's because she's a woman. I am sure there have been as many votes against her for being a woman as votes cast for her because she's a woman. If you think John MCain will defeat her in a gereral, you are mistaken. It is time so get over it.
It's because it's Hillary.
Newsflash: Feminism has to do with embracing a set of values. Of course it makes sense that superdelegates who are feminists would support Senator Clinton because she and her policies engender those values. Feminists vote for feminists because they share the same values. Women, on the other hand, do not necesarily vote for feminists. Enlightened women who understand the sacrifices that women like Hillary Clinton have made on their behalf will support her. Unenlightened women, i.e., women who benefit from the battles that Hillary and other feminists have made on their behalf and often inspite of their opposition, don't. It's reminiscent of the women who opposed Susan B. Anothony, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, etc., for the right to vote. But once this right was ammended to the Constitution, well they went ahead a voted. "I guess we might as well...Why not?" It will be the same with Hillary one day as her opponents reflect back on her presidency. They'll jump on the bandwagon too, supporting "Uppity women" who want to be present and dare to be direct and undeferring about their ambition. Oh, and BTW, they used to say about Anthony and Stanton, "I don't oppose women getting the vote, just these PARTICULAR women like Stanton and Anthony who are so radical in how they do/don't do family... They're like men..." Sound familiar? LOL
Oh, good grief. If Hillary is, in fact, a feminist, then feminists should be running for the doors. Do enlightened feminists lie to get to their ultimate goal? We all know that Hillary will say anything, and I mean anything to get elected. She has been caught in lie after lie, even fabricating an event that never happened - just to make herself look good. Don't compare this woman to Susan B Anthony, compare her to Ann Coulter - they're more alike. They both play fast and loose with the truth.
Why couldn't we get the chance to vote for Jane Harmon or Louise Slaughter? I could get behind them and others but Hillary? No way. I honor the truth more than that. I'm tired of a liar sitting in the Oval Office. Male, female, a liar is a liar.
I can think of many honorable women who I would have voted for in the past: Shirley Chisholm, Barbara Jordan, or the present - Pat Shroeder, Barbara Boxer, Barbara Lee, Louise Slaughter, Jennifer Granholm(if she were American-born instead of Canadian-born), maybe even Kathleen Sebelius. Just because I can't support Hillary Clinton does not make me unenlightened. I'm one of those older females who had my eyes opened by Betty Freidan in 1963, and have always been working for equality for all. Unfortunately, Senator Clinton has what can be charitably called an "elastic" relationship with the truth. Back in the day there was a famous literary feud between the author Mary McCarthy and the playwright Lillian Hellman. It centered around the issue of truth. A paraphrase of what McCarthy said about Hellman was that every word that came out of Hellman's mouth was a lie, including the words "a", "and" and "the". These days it seems that Mrs. Clinton is approaching modern-day Hellman status.
How dare you ! I am a older woman and don't call me a Feminist! Itt's just another name that pulls woman down into the gutter! Every one has a right to vote how they want to! Mrs. Hillary has sacrificed little for you and me! She's a senator, because she likes Power! She stayed with Bill because he could further her ambitions to go on to History to be the First woman President! Don't put Hillary on some kind of pedestal for pete sake! She had a genda for what she did, and it was to lead up to this very time in her life! Now that she see's it slipping away she is loseing a grip on realilty of how it rreally is! She's lieing to make herself sound experienced or as if she care's for the poor, and low income and she's getting caught in the lie's. I'm a woman, and old------and I hope I am around to see the first Woman President-----------but I'll be darn if I'll vote for this woman simply because I'm a woman or because woman think she stands up for them! Good grief, my husband began by supporting her, but not any more!
I wouldn't dare call you a feminist. To be a feminist is to care about feminine issues. It is to support a woman's right to choose; it is to support academic achievement for girls; it is to not allow a victim of rape to be made responsible; it is to give women respect for their intelligence and talent; it is the establishment of planned parenthood clinics and concern for health care issues; It is to build shelters to protect abused women; It is the establishment of scholarships for women; To fight for equal pay; It is to try and make my daughters world and my granddaughters life better and encourage their dreams. You may not believe this, but even now there are some who would crush the spirit of young women and encourage them to believe the important thing is to have your make-up on and your hair permed. Get married cook, clean and have babies. I;ll bet you voted against the ERA? Right?
I am a woman enlightened enough to know that hawkishness is a nonproductive stance. So is shilling for corporations. I embrace a set of values that encompasses honesty, compassion, justice and nonviolence. Senator Clinton decidedly does not meet my standards. Fortunately, I am quite strong enough too say this with absolute confidence. Telling me I am "unenlightened" because I do not support her is fascist.
Whatever gave you the idea she is a hawk? Because she voted "Yea" on the Iraq Resolution? It is hard to look back to 9/11 because the country was hurting, but maybe you can remember how you felt. I have been a pacifist all my life and a buddhist for the last thirty, but I wanted revenge. I was happy we were going to Afghanistan to find the man responsible and horrified when I saw the bombs dropping. The agony watching rescue workers dig with their bare hands for survivors seem to be happening in another world. But it was Hillarys world and she looked into the face of sorrow. Maybe she voted for revenge. I don't know. Do you? Only seven senators voted "Nay" The other seventy three made a mistake. Maybe they trusted Bush not to use the power they had given him. I wanted to believe in him, needed to believe he would not begin an unnecessary war. Did they believe he wouldn't without more inspections and more consultation with the senate. I didn't vote for him. I didn't like him but I didn't know how arrogant and stupid he was. How do you know Sen. Obama would have voted with the seven instead of the seventy three. The answer will never be known, and a speech that cost him nothing politically is not good enough.
Thank you Hcange. wonderful and intellegent observations.
WHY DO AMERICAN'S GIVE THIS COUPLE THE TIME OF DAY???? THEY HAVE DONE SO MUCH DAMAGE PEOPLE.OF OTHER COUNTRIES, THEY'RE OWN CITIZEN'S. THEY'RE NOT FUSSY!!!...THEY ARE GARBAGE. POWER, POWER, POWER...THAT WHAT THEY WANT....THEY ALREADY HAVE YOUR MONEY.
I don't know how outspending someone five to one on ads and media, campaigning etc., can be considered momentum. Those poor black families that are making weekly payment s to the Obama campaign, are really going ot get screwed. I think this is just a case of using them for something they will never get anything out of. The country wants and needs Senator Clintons patriotism, intteligence, experience, expertise and hard work to save this country and to bring it back to prosperity. The last thing we need is a lot of hot air. No one needs this self serving empty suit, who is running for office on the backs of everyone in charge of anything..
Outspending her 5 to 1 - he can do that because hundreds of thousands of people across this country have donated small contributions and continue to do soi All the money he is getting, hey maybe people like him or something. Your poor black family comment is racial profiling at best. Please provide an example of Hillary Clinton's patriotism. Please explain your comment about experience, being first lady of a small state and then of te US is not POTUS experience. Please provide examples of her expertise on anything other than dirty politics and lies. Your empty suit comment is very lame. He has put out plans for the country just as she has so why the empty suit comment? If he is an empty suit, she is a stained blue dress.
Only 40% of his donations come from small donations. Do the math,
"poor black families making weekly payments" to Obama? What the hell are you talking about? That is by far the STUPIDEST thing I've yet to hear on HuffPost...bar none. And all those sunshine and butterfly adjectives you have missaplied to Mrs. Clinton don't even register, in my brain at least, as belonging in the same sentence with her name. "Patriotism"? LOL...ok. The last thing I need is THE ULTIMATE SELF-SERVING PANTSUIT BEING MY PRESIDENT.
Many of Obama's supporters (me included) do not belong to "poor black families", though there is nothing demeaning in belonging to a poor black family except the fact that our society has let them down. It is racist to imply that all of Obama's supporters are black, just as it is sexist to imply that if one is a woman one needs to vote for a woman whether she respects her or not.
Not all of Sen. Obama's supporters are Black and not all Blacks are Obama supporters.
Ladies, may I suggest an observation? Voting for Senator Clinton based on intellect, integrity, experience, resiliency, and substance is a rational reason for your support. Voting for anyone because of gender or race is not a valid reason for your support. I do not diminish either Senator Clinton or Senator Obama. However, I do believe questions about both candidates need to be asked. For example, to what degree has Senator Obama's political and religious beliefs FUSED with Rev. Wright? Morever, to what degree has Senator Clinton's views FUSED with her husband?
More than one comment in this queue centered on the conclusion that a woman in the White House would be a good thing...and I agree that this will happen...some day; but not this woman. And it isn't necessarily because of her ties with Bubba and her inability to shake him loose after all these years (that's a case for the psychiatrists if there ever was one!). Female superdelegates should read Edward Klein's book, "The Truth About Hillary." If you do, you will think twice about voting for her only because you are a woman (not a profoundly powerful example of logic at work!). HC is interested in the presidency for only one reason: she wants it. Forget the tears and the expressed concern about the American people and getting jobs. She could not give a rat's behind about anything but her own self-proclaimed emtitlement to the throne. Bosnia snipers?Just the tip of the decades-long "lie-berg" that continues to drag her down.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
