The Real Feminist Thing To Do is Acknowledge Hillary's Failures as a Candidate and Move On

When wise pundits in 1987 asked potential candidate Pat Schroeder whether the Democratic Party should let a woman run again for Vice-President or President since the 1984 Mondale-Ferraro ticket had performed so poorly she said, ''The ticket was already down 19 points when she was put on it,'' adding ''perhaps they should not have put a man on the ticket; it was he who lost.''

I interviewed Elizabeth Edwards last week, and we touched on the effect of gender politics on this election, because 28 years later, we're still second guessing Hillary's presumed demise and wondering if it was because she was a woman. I asked Elizabeth, what do you think of the whole "bitch is the new black" approach- is that an effective strategy?

"No...I am concerned with the way in which the percentage of women voting for Hillary, the percentage of African Americans voting for Obama, will change. I'm afraid -- as many Democrats are -- of disaffection in these groups when their candidate is no longer in the race. Because the appeal has been made -- not so much by the candidates-- but certainly by surrogates and others -- this pitch has been made that this is important, for your gender, for your race. In a way it is important for them. But I'm concerned about the disaffection when the candidate is no longer in the race. That's the real argument for the forced marriage between them, is the possibility of disaffection."

I'd love an Obama-Clinton ticket. Gender is a hugely important consideration for me when considering who to vote for. But I completely disagree with Elizabeth on this point. If Hillary doesn't win the nomination women voters won't feel disaffected because the woman is out of the race. Do you really think those who say they won't vote for Obama if Clinton's out will show up on Election Day and pull the lever for McCain?? I feel Clinton's candidacy has opened the door for other women candidates, maybe even for Obama's (hat-tip to Donna Good).

I do feel disaffected by Hillary's campaign management, however, and I have changed my thinking on supporting Clinton. I feel disaffected that she ran a lousy campaign, she let Mark Penn make an ass of himself, she pursued a grassroots strategy stuck in 2000, and while proved she was tough, she failed to read her audience. I've no doubt sexism played a role. Do I want another woman presidential candidate in 2012? Absolutely! I want thousands of women candidates. I don't want Hillary anymore.

If feminists want Clinton to be seen as anything other than a token we need to recognize Clinton's merits, analyze her campaign's faults, and swiftly move on, as if a woman losing were the most normal thing in the world. Men lose all the time. Dwelling doth a token make, and then we'll be back in 1984, all over again.

Follow Morra Aarons-Mele on Twitter: www.twitter.com/morra_am

Comments

[stellanoir]

I had always been semi neutral about Hillary. I generally just thought, "Woh. . .wouldn't want to be her."

The way in which the media tried to shove her down our throats as the presumptive nominee since the mid terms if not before, was annoying so I thought about her a little more.

Primarily, my first thought was in this land of diversity, we shouldn't have two families dominating the executive branch of government for decades and Bill was a little too cozy with Poppy.

In as much as I would LOVE to see a woman president, I don't want it to be one who masquerades as a hawkish male. Her votes on HAVA, IWR, the Patriot Act, the Bankruptcy Bill, the MCI, have been entirely unforgivable and based far more on her singular agenda of electability than our overall well being.

Her campaign's ever mounting unpaid debts, sleazy surrogates, divisive tactics, dishonesty, and kitchen sinks, have been complete and thorough signs of LOUSY management skills, and total lack of integrity.

With her it's all about her, or attacking him with baseless BS. It's not about us.

I could never vote for her.

Obama is a phenomenon unlike I've ever witnessed in this lifetime.

We would be foolish to deny him this chance to ameliorate our country, and by extension, our world, in a completely novel way.

Peace.

[jsj20002]

Amen. There are many very well qualified, honest hard working women, in both parties, who have an abundance of the necessary qualifications for President -- Senators Barbara Feinstein and Olympia Snowe -- for example who did not have to use their husband's coattails to run for office. The real problem with Hillary Clinton is largely that she is married to Bill Clinton and she still wants to use his reputation as a reason for us to vote for her. Remember he lied, under oath, in a lawsuit he should have quietly settled out of court. But no, Bill had to fight on and in doing so was spectacularly unsuccessfully in trying to claim that a sitting president could not be sued for illegal conduct that took place during his governorship of Arkansas. I believe it was that lie and Bill's having to be dragged into federal court that really cost Al Gore the presidency and cost Bill his license to practice law. Had he quietly settled Paula Jones' lawsuit, there would have been no impeachment, he would not have been disbarred and he may well have been appointed to the Supreme Court by President Al Gore. And Bill just lied again about the circumstances that led to his wife's lying (four times, I believe) about her alleged endangerment in Bosnia. How many lies are the American people supposed to forget?

[desmirl]

The main thing wrong with Hillary's campaign is her voting record. She voted to authorize force in Iraq, she has consistently voted to fund Bush and Cheney's Iraq War, and she voted for Kyl-Lieberman. How about a candidate that is ANTI-WAR instead of being a WARMONGER?

[MichaelDeane]

Nicely done. I was an Edwards supporter who looked at both Clinton and Obama before deciding on Barack because I think he is the most capable and gifted of the two.

I have no problem voting for a women for any office. I have done so many times. More importantly I vote for who I think is the best candidate. Sometimes it is a women, other times not.

I have watched her campaign over the past five months and I'm so disgusted I don't know where to begin. More than her gender, HRC represents pretty much all that is wrong with politics. She drips with insincerity. She lies (forgot misspeaks please). She exagerates her own experience. And she attacks.

I'm not sure why her campaign did not resonate with voters the way his did. Perhaps it was Clinton fatigue or perhaps the voters saw through her.

She should be credited with being the first viable female candidate. And she should leave. I suspect both she and her husband have done some irreparable harm to their collective reputations. And that is sad.

[cheforacle]

Regardless of what else you may think about Bill, he did connect with voters. That ability is something you are born with. It can be nurtured but not manufactured; voters can spot artifice even if they don't understand all of the issues. Hillary has the Clinton name - and hence the opportunity to claim some of the positive things of the Clinton presidency. But she lacks the charisma and any claim on Bill's presidency that she may attempt to make opens her up to responsibility for the bad things (Monica excepted as she obviously did not condone that).

Before the race got going she was anointed the "inevitable one" because she was a Clinton, she is smart. she is hardworking and well-informed. But once the race got going voters did not connect with her like they did with Bill. Now that does not explain this race entirely. Obama does connect with voters and his message of unity and change is definitely appealing not only to the youth but many older voters like myself who believe as good as times were during the 90's, many things did not get done such as health care and the fight against global warming. Obama distinguished himself by not only opposing the war before it started but by predicting its problems. The fact he was correct was neither luck nor the result of some uncanny ESP but rather good judgment. His position before the war started is one thing that makes him so compelling.

[MoreCowBellNowPlease]

Good commentary but Obama is no Bill. I once read a fabulous book by Twyla Tharp who described true masters as being able to combine three components with perfection. Those three components are bit difficult to explaine but I'll try. They are ability to put into their craft the big picture, the medium picture (relationships btwn details, connecting, etc) and the small details. You can judge/appreciate any work of an artist, architect, politician, engineer, businessperson, teacher, etc on these three levels.

Bill deliverd on all three levels with brilliance
Obama has the big picture ideas and medium (connection with voters) but has no details
Hillary has all the details and big picture but lacks connecting with people

Neither Obama or Hillary is the whole package, but I think Hillary has the detailed solutions and is a fighter and why I prefer her. I want someone to TAKE the country back from the repubs, not ask politely and respeftully like Obama. After what the repubs have done to our country, they don't deserve our respect and aren't going to give us any latitude to negotiate with them. Since we don't have a choice of someone like Bill, I choose the fighter with the mastery of details to deliver the end result.

[jkpcguru]

Yea I hate that Bill has done harm to his legacy, I liked Bill clinton as a president

[jazzman]

For me whether I will sit out if Hillary gets the nomination has nothing to do with her gender and everything to do with her behavior. If I decide that I can't vote for Hillary it will be because she practiced a dishonest politics of personal destructoin against Obama while offering praise to McCain. It will be because she has so identified herself with the moneyed interests and insider politics of both the corporate Democrats and the neo-cons that I can no longer figure out what the difference would be if she were or were not elected. However, if Hillary shows class and somehow wins this thing, she'll have my support. None of this has anything to do with the fact that she is a female. It's all about character and nothing about gender or race for me.

[LeoMarvin]

"It will be because she has so identified herself with the moneyed interests and insider politics of both the corporate Democrats and the neo-cons that I can no longer figure out what the difference would be if she were or were not elected. However, if Hillary shows class and somehow wins this thing, she'll have my support."

Your second sentence calls the accuracy of the first into question.

I object to many of her campaign tactics also, but pretend away the consequential differences between her and McCain. It's not for nothing that her voting record is liberal, and his is conservative.

[stringer]

The author gets one thing right, there is a record number of viable female candidates lined up and more than likely soon to be running for the presidency:

Kathleen Sebelius, Janet Napalitano, Cristine Gregoire, Claire McCaskill, M. Jodi Rell, Kathleen Blanco, Sara Palin and Jennifer Granholm to name a few.

I'm not a woman and won't pretend to understand what sexism feels like. I also won't say just wait. I cannot guarantee that any of them will win. But I, for one, do think we will see a woman president and very soon in this country. I also think that some who view Hillary Clinton as the last chance to have a woman president in their lifetime, are mistaken.

Watch Sebelius. I'd be surprised if she doesn't make a run at it and at least win the Democratic nomination in 2016.

[Gma11]

I've been VERY impressed by Claire McCaskill!

[IndependentTogether]

Agreed. Further, for women to say that Hillary Clinton is the last hope for a woman president is auto-sexism (i.e. all the other clearly viable women out there shouldn't try because a woman has already tried and failed).

[edgeways]

That is going to depend largely who wins in Nov, if Obama wins then it will depend on who his VP pick is, and if they win again in '12...

I think it is likely those of us in the early 40s or younger will see a woman prez, the sheer attrition make sit less likely the older the population is, consider if: Obama wins with a male VP, and they win again in '12, that means '16 the VP will (most likely) be the nominee and who will he select?

My wholly blind guess is a woman prez in 12 to 16 years simply due to the length of terms.

[CalGoldenBear]

Excuse me, but the AZ governor's name is "Napolitano."

You've got to be kidding to include former LA Governor Kathleen Blanco of Hurricane Katrina fame (or ill-fame) in your list.

The Repub AK Governor's given name is "Sarah."

And unfortunately, MI Governor Jennifer Granholm is ineligible because she is foreign born, having been born in Vancouver, Canada, in 1959.

Sebelius, Napolitano, and Granholm are all second term Dem governors.

In 2004, MO and AZ were Bush's while MI was Kerry's.

[AnninCA]

I can't imagine supporting Obama after he allowed Wright to become a spectacle and now his overt disdain for core Democrats.

What that has to do with gender politics?

Nothing.

Absolutely nothing.

[BOb4BO]

I feel your pain. I was one of the many people hoping that this might be the time that we might actually have a female president. What a day that would be. Living up to the constitution's promise of equality. But Senator Clinton proved much too bad a candidate to bring about this change.

And unfortunately her abject failure did not have anything to do with some youtube video's of a minster's comments nor some out of context phrases that clearly do not have the kind of divisive traction Senator Clinton's camp wishes they did.

In the end the true failure of her candidacy does not have anything to do with sexism.

Senator Clinton failed because she proved herself to be unworthy in the end of our votes. Her current scorched earth tactics only reinforce this.

Your comment at the end of your post is right on the money. What does Senator Clinton's failure have to do with gender politics. Absolutely nothing.

It has everything to do with her old school, ineffective, uncaring, power hungry, entitled, disappointing pursuit of politics as usual.

[AnninCA]

Wright is right, but your choice of God is all about your bitterness. LOL*

And Obama is caring?

Please....that's just nuts.

[dill]

Anncoulterin CA, don't you ever do anything other than sit in front of your computer and spew hatred and lies against Obama

[Shelly1970]

Truth be told, "she" posts smears here all day long because she thinks her candidate is going to lose.

No faith in winning the whole thing. Just PA.

[Suzie813]

What the hell is a core democrat and in what way was he disdainful? How did Obama "allow" Wright to become a spectacle? How can he be in any way responsible for the actions of another?

[AnninCA]

Pocket-book democrats......registered Democrats.......blue-collar democrats........

This race is split, constinuent-wise, right along those lines.

[cheforacle]

Will you please explain how Obama who did not even see Rev. Wright's 2001 sermon that got so much air play has anything to do with the release of the video or him making a spectacle of himself? I'm know I'm repeating what other commentors have asked here but you constantly comment negatively on Obama, never say anything positive about Hillary and then come up with ridiculous assertions like this. Do you realize how nonsensical this is? I don't want to be mean about it but this is ridiculous. Obama does not control what other people who don't even work for him say.

[AnninCA]

Obama said in his speech even that, of course, he had heard Wright speak in that manner.

It would require a complete lobotomy to think otherwise.

[IndependentTogether]

AnninCA, you need to stop getting your news from Fox Noose. On second thought: http://www.foxnews.com/video2/video08.html?videoId=1fd1c0cf-5c80-4d75-996f-bd53b2461ae0&sMPlaylistID

In any case, if Obama's "spectacle" (as you put it) rusults in something a brilliant as his More Perfect Union speech, then let the spectacle begin!

[AnninCA]

Well, first, I don't believe that speech was great. It was entirely too self-referential to make me sit up, and I saw too many petty moments. That was nothing more than quite a defense statement. That aside, I don't watch Fox News or any of the news channels. It's all entirely too much screaming and silliness.

[klondiker]

Yes, a woman losing IS the most normal thing in the world. That's the whole point. Men do lose all the time, but men also win all the time.


Look, I don't want to argue that people should vote for Sen. Clinton because she's a woman. But, it wouldn't hurt to acknowledge that she's the most viable female presidential candidate we've ever had. And, it is entirely possible that if this opportunity goes by, a lot of us might not live to see a female president.


Again, I'm not saying that this should be a reason to vote for her. But, there are a lot of women who feel this way, just as many African Americans support Obama because he's our most viable African American candidayte - and you can't invalidate their feelings.


The second point I want to touch on is the argument that "I want a female president. I just don't want Hillary." Fair enough. But, when does it stop? When do we stop looking for a perfect female candidate and settle for a fine one. And, if we keep waiting for a perfect woman to come along, we'll be waiting for a long time.

[Schnitzel]

"Look, I don't want to argue that people should vote for Sen. Clinton because she's a woman..."

Actually, that's exactly what you're arguing. Your statement here contradicts itself . You're saying "I don't think people should vote for her because she's a woman, they should vote for her because she's a woman".

What makes you think you might not live to see a woman in the Oval Office? Are you terminally ill? Wouldn't you rather elect the "Right" woman for the job rather than ANY woman? If Hillary's as much of a drama queen in the White House as she is on the campaign trail do you think there's going to be any FUTURE women in the Presidency? I'm all for breaking that glass ceiling but choose wisely; if you don't you're not likely to get another chance; ever.

Personally I look at both candidates as being very risky prospects and by injecting these absurd statements of self entitlement into the race those prospects grow more distant for both. I will say that Obama has certainly conducted his campaign with far more dignity than Hillary. I haven't seen anything in her demeanor that I would categorize as "Presidential." Petty certainly, Presidential? No.
"The second point I want to touch on is the argument that "I want a female president. I just don't want Hillary." Fair enough. But, when does it stop? "
Ummm...maybe when the woman running isn't a two-faced ethics train-wreck.

[dwt]

"When do we stop looking for a perfect female candidate and settle for a fine one. And, if we keep waiting for a perfect woman to come along, we'll be waiting for a long time."

You completely missed the point. Which is that nobody and no candidate is perfect, male or female, so that is a straw, uh, person, and that HRC is anything but a "fine" candidate, gender be damned.

The only candidate who was more an overt pandering, manipulative phony than she was the unendurable and reprehensible Mitt Romney. He won the gold medal, but Hilary's silver was close.

[cheforacle]

Not only do Yale University and MIT have female presidents but many major corporations who fifteen years ago would have not been predicted to have a female CEO do. The notion that this is the only chance is not supported by her losing, it is belied by the fact that everyone considered her a viable candidate.

[Spontini]

What if I want to acknowledge Obama's failures instead?

[jazzman]

The same goes for Obama. Love him. Hate him. Support him. Don't support him. Just choose him on merits not by race. He's not a token any more than Colin Powell was a token. He's either good enough or he's not, period.

[Gma11]

Exactly as I feel, jazzman. Every individiual should vote their own conscience. And different individuals will make different decisions.

[IndependentTogether]

Out of curiosity, what are Obama's failures?

[Danigirl65]

I have got to say that, not only is this an impressive, well written article, the posts are articulate and well thought out, non-attacking, etc.

I'm proud of you ladies. I was for Hillary when she first announced and then Obama came into the race and I jumped ship and have never regretted doing so, especially with the attack campaign Senator Clinton has waged against Senator Obama - not my kind of gal for president.

I also would love to see Sebelius run as VP - that is one very classy, very intelligent, and very articulate lady who would make a great first woman president. Hillary was a bit too "entitled" for me.

[dadele]

I agree completely with your wonderful post, but I don't think Hillary Clinton is a feminist at all. Unless you would consider Scarlett O'Hara a feminist. She falls far short of that label.

[DickTater]

Yes, someone please, show me anything HRC has done for women in the last 8 years.
I liked her (for her just plain left viewpoint I assumed she had all these years), I even thought Bill might be a big plus. Then she went and carpet-bagged her Senate seat and sat waiting the whole 8 years for this. Never lifted a finger for women. Or anyone else except her lobbyist she was grooming for big cash. Her corporate ties and anti-people stance on issues ranks her as a non-progressive and non-liberal.....forget about the non-feminist part. If her healthcare plan leaves the Insurance industry intact - then it is pro-corporate. And there goes her only liberal-sounding issue. What's left? What has she done? At every critical juncture she has backed the Repubs, including this campaign.

Take it from me, I wanted to like her. She was the one big Dem name that I would've given a pass on being Rich. She did have a small claim to the throne, and was the one woman who could get there quick (without years of grooming and positioning.....mainly cuz HRC had already put in her time) But what time!? She spent none of it becoming our hero, standing up to booozxh as he rolled back all of our (especially women's) rights.

[JXB]

Clinton's refusal to accept defeat gracefully and with dignity does a disservice to women presidential candidates in the future. The style of her campaign does so as well. It invites comparisons to Veruca Salt and her reaction to being told she could not have one of Willy Wonka's golden egg-laying geese.

[joeholla]

love that scene

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vKNmqS4nSYY

I WANT THE WORLD
I WANT THE WHOLE WORLD
I WANT TO LOCK IT ALL UP IN MY POCKET
IT'S MY BAR OF CHOCOLATE
GIVE IT TO ME NOW
I WANT TODAY
I WANT TOMORROW
I WANT TO WEAR 'EM LIKE BRAIDS IN MY HAIR
AND I DON'T WANT TO SHARE 'EM
I WANT A PARTY WITH ROOMFULLS OF LAUGHTER
TEN THOUSAND TONS OF ICE CREAM
AND IF I DON'T GET THE THINGS I AM AFTER
I'M GOING TO SCREAM
I WANT THE WORKS
I WANT THE WHOLE WORKS
PRESENTS AND PRIZES AND SWEETS AND SURPRISES
OF ALL SHAPES AND SIZES AND NOW!
DON'T CARE HOW
I WANT IT NOW
DON'T CARE HOW
I WANT IT NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOW

[PumaJ]

Morra, thanks for your post.

I have never viewed Clinton as a mere token in the political scene. I have not always agreed with her point of view, but I do see her as a very smart and competent woman. I have spoken in her defense numerous times over the years when I have perceived her being judged harshly for qualities that in a man would be considered praiseworthy.

I am a 57 y.o. woman and an ardent feminist since my introduction to feminism in the late 1960's in San Francisco and Berkeley, CA. I was leaning in the direction of supporting Clinton in her quest for the presidency. However, over the past 7 months or so I have become increasingly impressed with the breadth of Obama's knowledge and intelligence. To me, his commitment to social justice and change is more real and tangible than is Clinton's.

I find her lies about her own experience and her disparagement of Obama to be abhorrent. However, if she were to win the Democratic nomination, I would vote for her if only because I do not believe that We the American People, or our beloved country could withstand another administration in the style of Bush.

Bottom line, for me, is who really is the most qualified candidate in terms of intelligence, skill and integrity. Clinton just doesn't seem to quite cut it.

[cheforacle]

Beautifully said, Puma J; I could not agree more.

[Tejano1]

thanks, a very thoughtful piece. i support obama, but not because of race or gender. if i did, i would've supported bill richardson, the only latino in the race and the only one to come along that has even had a prayer of coming close. but i never considered it because obama is head and shoulders the better candidate. more folks need to keep that in mind when aligning themselves. for women, african americans, latinos, etc, more chances are coming and "we" need to support the "right" candidates due to their leadership and principles. that will insure that more women and people of color are elected because good candidates will emerge as good senators, reps, and presidents.

[ruthinking]

Thank you, Tejano1. I am also a Hispanic woman and thus could have be expected to support Bill Richardson (and hope/expect he will be on the VP list), but like you, I support Obama and have since his 2004 speech, have read his books, and I sincerely believe he is the by far the best candidate.

But I am shocked and dismayed at how low Hillary Clinton has sunk. The list of her political crimes, lies, and simple bad manners is endless. The latest, slugging down those shots, is such a poor role model for young women. Thankfully, they were smart enough not to support her from the beginning.

[apoyo]

Women should be ashamed to be backing Clinton at this point. She has become the poster child of how not to act in public. And she didn't make mistakes running her campaign. She ran it just like she wanted to, as the heir apparent. Her first words were "I'm in it to win it". It was always "I" with her, never "we".
In her view this was owed to her so there was supposed to be smooth sailing all the way. Now she can't back down or back out. Not a pretty sight.

[L1standing]

There once was a senator named Hill
Who drank with boys from the mill
With a shot full of Jack
Tossed a cold one right back
And nary a drop did she spill

No Elitist Here!

Nothing to See Here!

Just Move Along!

There’s a Good Lad!