What Do Hillary Women Want?

I'll tell you the secret about what many of the millions of women who voted for Hillary really want: acknowledgement. Yep. That's it. Well, that's not all, of course. But that's the secret part, the part that appears to be eluding the leaders of the Obama campaign and making their efforts to win the allegiance of Hillary supporters so dangerously ineffective. The onus for winning over Clinton supporters is not on the Clintons, contrary to current conventional wisdom, but rather on Obama himself.

You've no doubt heard the media reiterating talking points about how the way to win the votes of women is to hit hard on economic issues since those are the issues that impact families with painful immediacy. There's some validity to that point. After all, many of the women who were and who remain most strongly identified with Hillary are mothers. We care about our loved ones. We carry the burden of trying to make it work when the ends don't meet the middle. We worry about the future. A lot.

However, if you listen closely, you'll also hear the unwritten assumption that appears to constitute the Obama campaign's strategy toward this large, critical and, usually, faithfully Democratic demographic: "Well, who else are they going to vote for anyway? Let's focus our energies on the Independents" I think of this as the "we've got them by their Roe v. Wade" presumption. The thought also has some validity since the stakes are certainly very high. However, especially with McCain's campaign aggressively courting Hillary supporters, Obama cannot afford to presume anyone's automatic support.

This was no ordinary primary season for Democrats. Women and people of color have been disenfranchised and taken for granted by the Democratic Party for years. This time, however, we were able to back candidates (candidates who actually had a chance to win) with whom we could personally identify. Whether you are a woman, a person of color, some other kind of "other" or some combination of the prior groups, the experience of witnessing a biracial man and a woman as the two final potential Democratic presidential candidates was powerful.

What continues to make it hard for many of us to commit to the Obama cause is his very lack of overt commitment to us. He and his campaign have focused too much on Hillary Clinton herself and missed countless opportunities to reach out directly to those of us who supported her. He seems to feel it is sufficient to lump us into his idealistically inclusive "we," and, in doing so, he fails both to respect and to witness the enormity of our loss. For it was our loss as women, not just Hillary Clinton's. The reality is that we are not bitter. We are grieving.

For all of us, not just Obama supporters, this Democratic primary season evoked intense emotions. We were called upon to be hopeful and we were. We dared to set free longings and desires so deep and personal that they have been contained historically in the secret places within our individual and collective psyches. And, now, some of those longings have been at least partially fulfilled. And some have not. The grief of those of us whose longings were once again thwarted accounts for much of the continuing resistance of Hillary supporters.

So what do we grieving women want from Obama? We want him to acknowledge that our hope was as valid as the hope of his supporters and that our longing will not go unrecognized. We want him to claim our loss as his own on behalf of his daughters and to speak to women's issues directly. In a very real sense, Hillary's loss is a loss for all of us. I celebrate the fact that countless children of all races and skin color will now see a world with new possibilities. But I mourn to my core that my daughter, like Obama's daughters, will most likely not see a woman president within my lifetime.

So, with all due respect to Michelle Obama (and I do mean real respect: she's strong without apology and we love her for it) and even Hillary herself, we do not want only to hear campaign surrogates giving us lip service. No, we want to hear from the man himself that he will represent and defend our interests and the interests of all of our daughters with ferocity. We want him to commit to us overtly and specifically, because the unfortunate reality is that we do not yet live in a society that transcends gender.

Barack Obama has the opportunity in both his acceptance speech and the campaign ahead to do what he has not yet done: to recognize and respect the intensity our grief by speaking directly to us and our issues ­ and then to challenge us to partner with him to mobilize that intensity to bring about change for all of our daughters. The onus is on you, Senator Obama. Speak to us. We'll be listening.

Leah McElrath Renna is a mother, a professional psychotherapist and a Managing Partner of the communications-consulting firm, Renna Communications.

For more Huffington Post coverage from the Democratic National Convention, visit our Politics @ the DNC page, our Democratic Convention Big News Page, and our HuffPost bloggers' Twitter feed, live from Denver.

Comments

[vsign]

Obama is the one who set up the expectation, promise that he would change the electoral map and win and that Hillary could not. Many of us knew early on that Hillary was actually the stronger candidate. I realized, along with many others, that trying to push Hillary out of the race would backfire. It is logical that more of her supporters would leave the party than O's supporters. It is logical because Hillary was experienced and represented the moderates of the party. What Obama did was a poker BLUFF when he really has a losing hand.

The argument was whom would or could most likely win over the most voters in the poll of polls - the General Election? The superdelegates were suppose to make the best judgement about this. They got scared. They got bullied. They opted out.

They and the party has not shown itself to be ready to lead with Obama as the nominee. They would look smarter and stronger to vote for Hillary tomorrow night.

[vsign]

Early on, Hillary and Bill communicated that Hillary was willing to offer Obama the VP position if voters would vote for her to be President. She had the confidence she could win and would be the best President.

The question was and is - can Obama win? Obama said he would win and Hillary could not. He did not ask for my vote. Obama said that Hillary voters would vote for him but - would his voters vote for Hillary? I call that a good poker player bluffing with superdelegates and voters. He never offered the VP position to Hillary if he won the nomination. Then Obama surrogates and supporters threatened there would be riots in Denver if the leadership of the party and superdelegates did not vote for Obama. His campaign was using a burn-baby-burn approach.

He never asked for my vote! Obama's campaign charged racism with every criticism by voters or the media. He did not leave it up to the voters. He continued to bluff and threaten the superdelegates and the AA community that they had to vote for him.

The question was and is - can Obama win the General against John McCain?

No one else to blame now. No one left to buy off. Obama has to stand on his own feet now. It is the American voting public now. What do you BET that Obama is holding a losing hand?

[dutt]

If Hillary Clinton had got the nomination, I would be excited about the possibility of the 1st women president and would confidently vote for her knowing that she would be by far the better choice in a match up with McCain. Obama won the nomination and instead I am excited about the possibility of the 1st African American for president and will confidently vote for him knowing he is the better choice in a match up with McCain.

Lets not forget that its not only women and people of color that have been disenfranchised by our political system. The Democrats have long counted on the environmentalist vote. Despite the Democrats dismal record on the environment they're a better choice than the Republicans. Truth be told, Cynthia McKinney or Ralph Nader both align more closely to my beliefs than either Clinton or Obama. I would love to vote for either of them but after 8 years of a disastrous Republican administration I know the importance of being practical. I hope disappointed Hillary supporters will also be practical. Our choice now is between Obama or McCain.

[kjdwyer]

Veiled in all of this "Hillary anger" is this idea of " . . . or else we'll vote for McCain."

The Clinton campaign misread the importance of the caucus states and lost the campaign. Also, many voters held her accountable for her support of the Iraq invasion.

Yes, there was overt misogyny in the press, but the tone between the two candidates remained remarkably civil, I thought, and the race for the Democratic nomination was won fair and square.

I understand the disappointment (I supported Hillary in the NY primary), but the PUMAs and all the rest of Hillary's supporters need to take their cue from Hillary herself and support Obama.

The idea that any woman, let alone one who supported Hillary Clinton, could think of choosing McCain over Obama is LUDICROUS. "Hillary didn't win, so now I'm going to support a man who referred to his wife as a c@nt."

WHAT ARE THESE WOMEN THINKING!!­!!!!!!!!??­????

I'm gay and am none too pleased by Obama's stance on gay marriage, but I'm adult enough to know that there are a lot more issues of absolute dire importance. To protest Obama's stance on gay marriage by voting Republican (a party that wears its homophobia like a badge of honor), would be spectacularly stupid.

It would be equally stupid for any woman to vote for McCain because of her disappointment over the outcome of the primaries and/or a "perceived" lack of overt support from the Obama campaign.

[BlueAsh]

Don't know what her supporters want (perhaps something they can't get in their own lives?), but this is certain: Hillary wants others to pay off her debt.

[PumaAnn]

I don't think acknowledgment is what I was initially looking for. It was bigger. I was keenly disappointed in the Democratic Party. Nobody stood up and spoke out against the sexism. They raced to defend O from any and all small slights, they were willing to humiliate entire states by saying that a vote for Hill was racist. But they never said one lousy word about the rampant sexism.

That just got my attention in a very big way. They were unfair in their criticisms of Hill. They obviously had their darling picked out, and the will of the people in major Dem states simply did not matter. And THAT got my atttention.

I felt by the end the Democratic Party couldn't have cared less about voters. They thought that they had us in their pocket.

[nomobull]

bs

[PumaAnn]

I have zero expectations that any real discussion could happen with O supporters.

That is why the polls are dismal. That is why the party is divided.

It's real.

[MrTessier]

I have asked before, are there any specific examples of the rampant sexism? I didn't follow the primaries in detail, but from the overall picture, I never saw rampant sexism or racism. I totally didn't get why folks were upset until I watched a video featuring clips of reporters saying horrible things about Hillary, but they were mostly from Fox News. I don't really watch that channel. Is it that you are upset that the republicans slammed her, so now it's the Obama campaign's fault? I'm still trying to understand. Any examples would be greatly appreciated.

[DXP]

Guess my earlier reply was censored, for obscene language. I was simply quoting, however, Randi Rhodes calling Clinton and Ferraro "BIG F**KING WH**ES" at a fundraiser for Obama. Its is on youtube. It is highly offensive - and you could imagine a counterpart of a high profile pundit/supporter of Clinton calling Obama obscene racist names. What did Obama do? NOTHING. Nothing at all. Here is what he SHOULD have done....immediately release a statement along the lines of this: "While this fundraising event was not officially organized by the Obama campaign, it was promoted by the campaign. The language used at the event was unacceptable and the Obama campaign will not accept the money raised at the event." Maybe donate it to some cause, like a cause to end sexism in the media.

The DNC did NOTHING to stop the rampant sexism on Fox, CNN and CNBC. Dean and Pelosi said that there was no sexism. They've changed their story now. However any hint of racism was attacked (as it should have been, but why such a double standard?). Also there were inaccurate accusations of racism aimed at the Clintons. Why, for example, is it racist for former president Clinton to say that Obama's Iraq policy is a "fairytale"?

You might want to go on youtube and review the good compilations of the grotesque sexism in the media. If you have any connection with females then it would be good to inform yourself.

[Shelly1970]

You're asking PumaAnn for specifics? Don't hold your breath. :) She hates everything under the sun.

[debwarot]

Your memory of what transpired during the primary is interesting.

[Shelly1970]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/08/26/chris-matthews-experience_n_121468.html

Yeah, the PumaAnns are pretty rational people *chuckle*

[AguynamedWayne]

Just to start maybe Obama should get his people, like his mentor and Ill. Senate President, Emil Jones to stop using race baiting tactics against supporters of Hillary Clinton. Jones was overheard by several witnesses calling a fellow African American, and female delegate to Hillary and "Uncle Tom"

http://www.suntimes.com/news/elections/1124667,CST-NWS-dem25.article

(copy and paste the link to your browser, if it does not activate)

[nomobull]

no sale

[patwal]

Ms Renna: You want to know who has a RIGHT to grieve? The mother in Darfur who has to comfort her 15-year old daugher who's been gang-raped by 14 men; the woman who goes to the distribution centre to scrounge for some food for her family knowing there's a 90% chance she'll be raped/gang-raped, but she has no choice because if her husband goes, there's a 90% chance he'll be shot.... now tell me again about women grieving over a lost political contest!!!

[Pupadup4oBama]

CLAP cLAP CLAP CLAP HUGE ROUND OF APPLAUSE!

[murphysgirl]

I think I can suffice to say that not all women supporters of Clinton will agree with this post. The supporters of Clinton throughout this primary have been acknowledged many times. Whether it was at a rally in Unity, New Hampshire or from various stump speeches that Obama has given, Obama has acknowledged the accomplishments that Clinton garnered from the Democratic primaries.

With that said, now that the primaries are over, it's time for those hardcore Clinton supporters to evaluate the similarties in policy that Clinton and Obama shar vs. McCaom's policy proposals.

The McCain camp is lurching at any opportunity where they see any angle of dissent among the Democrats. I think it's time to prove the CNN moderators and the rest of the Democrats who fear a 2008 GOP Swiftboat campaign that there will be more of a sense of unity after the convention.

[debwarot]

Smart comments - I hope Hillary's supporters will read and take them to heart.

[gotommy]

Here's where the logic fails me:

"I wanted Hillary to be the nominee, but because she's not I'm now going to vote for someone who is diametrically opposed to everything Hillary stands for, even though she herself is asking me not to, and even though Barack and Hillary are very close to each other on the issues I claim to care about. But No, I'm going to vote for the guy who doesn't give a rat's ass about my issues. Naturally."

Something else is at play here...

[CarbonDate]

I'd sympathize more if Sen. Clinton had shown a little more concern about the feelings of those of us who were sent to Iraq because Democrats (including Sen. Clinton) went along with the neo-cons' grand scheme for world domination. Instead, we got, “If the most important thing to any of you is choosing someone who did not cast that vote or who has said his vote was a mistake, then there are others to choose from." The point was taken, and we did choose from one of them.

I'm sorry women had such a poor candidate trying to break the glass ceiling. If it had been Sen. Boxer of California, I'd have been on that train all the way.

[rain39]

I've been a feminist since before many of you were born and all the crap that went with that. I marched for civil rights and choice. Had to fight for credit and insurance after an unexpected divorce in the late 60's. Got no alimony either! So, I've won my spurs and continued to sharpen them. Oh, I also worked for Gene McCarthy!

I, too wanted to have a woman president, obviously, but frankly, the way Hillary and Bill conducted her campaign made me want to throw up. But I went in with an open mind and soon I had to move to Obama because he was more in sync with my values.

Hard to believe but you know, not just any women will do and Hillary wasn't it for me and lots of other women I have talked to. I didn't like the negative way they campaigned, the team she had surrounding her, Bill's narcissistic performance and a variety of other things. I don't she she reached her stride and got close to being genuine until the end of the campaign and by then it was way too late for me.

I hope I live to see another woman come on the scene that I can happily support.

[deb123]

I agree 100 percent. I've tried to put myself in HC supporters' shoes and think how I would feel if the candidate I supported had lost. Yes, I would have been angry. Yes, I would have been hugely disappointed. But after all was said and done, could I possibly vote for a representative of a party that spawned GWB and Cheney? Could I possibly encourage the erosion of human rights and disregard of our Constitution? Could I, with my vote, say it's okay to cater to the haves at the expense of the have-nots? Absolutely not.

The Republicans are feeding HC supporters' disappointment and luring them into a more serious bashing than what they perceive they've received from the Dems. I believe HC would whole heartedly agree that Obama is not the enemy -- Republican ideology is.

[debwarot]

rain 039 and deb123: This middle aged feminist and ardent supporter of Barack Obama agrees will all that both of you ahave expressed. Thank you both for your comments.

[liberta]

We a are strong blue collar democratic family. We are a Latin family that wanted Hillary. Like a lot of our Latin friends and families in S. Florida we feel disfranchised about our votes for Hillary. Barack needed to extend his hands of "hope" a long time ago. Like he did in Chicago by means of manipulating the voting system, he repeated the same thing in Florida. We are bitter. Speaking on behalf of the three women in my houshold who believed in Hillary..we are bitter. Enough of the convention propaganda and bureaucratic minutiae. We are voting for McCain.

[Freesia2]

Forgive me. But you sound like a Republican plant. If I'm wrong - apologies. But I've started studying these kinds of posts. You stick in things that don't fit - like voting systems in Chicago and tie them into Florida. You start off with a desciption of yourself that isn't how a real family would even describe themselves - blue collar "democratic" and worked in women, bitter, the convention and a word that doesn't fit your speech pattern "minutea". And because you didn't get Hillary, and then didn't get some hope you are voting McCain. It's like you worked from a GOP check list. Did you?

Again, if I'm wrong I apologize. But you sound like a Republican pretending to be a Democrat.

[KNadine]

You're not wrong. Most of these "I was a Hillary supporter, now I'm voting for McCain" people are nothing more than Repugs stirring the pot. It's probably Rush & Sean themselves.

[DXP]

good for you Freesia2 - way to keep your mind tightly closed. You would not like to think that there were other pov dems inthe USA. Maybe Nader and McKinney will get those "repub" votes.

Also, IF *ANY* democrat is to win the presidency she or he will need independent and/or republican votes. If you and your ilk continue to just accuse 'team orientation' rather than actually engage in real debate and exchange of ideas, then you will help your candidate and party LOSE votes. But it seems that Obama and DNC extremists are not capable of either listening or actually communicating with fellow dems about their positions.

You sound like a nice person...but have you been in the Huff cult too long???

[zanzig]

"But I mourn to my core that my daughter, like Obama's daughters, will most likely not see a woman president within my lifetime"

Oh woe is me; more white woman blues. I am a black woman, and it was an easy choice for me - Clinton appealed to my desire to see a woman as President, but Obama appealed to my desire to have a President who would address the HUGE dichotomy of American public affairs - that half of the country is disenfranchised while America preaches to the world about human rights and equality and fairness and justice. Obama may not actually promulgate laws that change the situation for black people (at least in his first term), but the lawmakers will think twice before they unthinkingly propose laws that attack his colour. Obama is also not just a black man - he is a mixed race man, and a younger man who has personal knowledge of the world as it applies to several billion humans, not just the rarified world of the rich white woman.

[Yohomegirl]

This past week in North Carolina there were 348 new Republicans registered (very likely by BO volunteers), but there were 2,304 new Democrats registered! North Carolina will come out BLUE!

[Pupadup4oBama]

ha ha ha...what a way to end on a positive note! Love the comment!

[debwarot]

That is great!

[FogCityJohn]

Zanzig, you make an important point. A lot of these Hillary supporters claim to be representing "women" when they really should be saying "white women." They talk about how Obama hasn't done enough to woo women voters, or to ask for the votes of women, or how his support among women is weak, but they always seem to forget that the vast majority of African-American women are solidly behind Obama. Somehow, y'all don't seem to factor into their discussions of what "women" want.

I guess things really haven't changed all that much since Sojourner Truth pointedly asked the white suffragettes, "Ain't I a woman?"

[AvgPseudoIntellectual]

I will not attack Hillary supporters. We need to move beyond all of that in a big way.

But as a woman -- one who used to believe strongly in Hillary Clinton's leadership -- I implore any Hillary hold-outs reading this to try and understand this: Asking the leading nominee for POTUS to address your feelings, which the writer admits are not based on issues, is not feminist! I thought one of the major tenets of feminism was to prove that women do not fit the stereotype that women cannot think rationally, but rather allow themselves to be led (and often fooled) by their emotions. I have strong feelings about the fact that you are making this impression on our culture. Please attempt to empathize with that!!

[laire]

AvgPseudoI­ntellectua­l,

Thank you so much for your comments it seems as if women who are still supporting Hillary who are aganist Obama are taken two steps back when it comes to feminism. Where were all this women when Michelle Obama was being attack by the media as angry and militant and not soft enough.

[MrTessier]

I agree, but both Obama supporters and Clinton supporters were driven largely by emotions. I don't think the race would be very much different if Obama had lost and Clinton had won. I think he would have handled the end a little better, but there would be a lot of very upset folks.

To the larger issue, I agree that this has been a net negative for the feminist movement. Allowing the Clinton campaign to become synonomous with it was dangerous, and now the movement may be split. There is going to be an ongoing debate on whether or not to actively support Obama, and if the press gets a hold of any split there, they will be sure to add fuel to the fire.

[Yohomegirl]

Hillary: I'll lose when and if I decide to lose, and I ain't decided yet. Just give me another week or two. Maybe I can figure out how to throw banana peels under Barack!