This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
It's always something, right? It's not anything she's done or said in the last 35 years or anything like that. She should make that a campaign slogan.
You are being disingenuous. Her attempt at health care reform was ahead of its time and was entirely political. To compare her approval ratings against first ladies who were non-political is apples and oranges and quite frankly, rather silly.
JFC
How so? I addressed Tim's point as false. You want to say there was a reason for that, fine. Tim's still wrong. If you want to create a justification for her low ratings then let's recognize the one point she had a high one had to do with just being a wife who "stood by her man" a la Wendy Vitter.
IMO, there is no woman in modern American history who has faced as much sexism as Hillary Clinton.
For the first time, I agree with you. Someone shouldn't be punished for taking a stand and being active. I'll restate my own opinion that my distaste for Hillary only began in earnest when I perceived the corruption in anointing her to the nomination despite the majority of Americans having (for whatever reasons) grown fatigued of her; and it the lengths that her forced ascention have taken in light of a CRIMINAL investigation.
Ever seen a Mad Men episode?
This is so F'n intellectually lazy...it is used as a crutch by people unwilling to look in the mirror or who can't understand that not everyone thinks like them...Hillary Clinton is a very unlikeable person regardless of her sex...she is corrupt regardless of her sex...she looks down on the regular folk regardless of her sex...she has been given a very easy path to power with limited accomplishments regardless of her sex...whether her name is Hillary Clinton, Hillary Rodham, Hillary Rodham Clinton, Fred Clinton, Fred Rodham or Fred Rodham Clinton she is a very easy person to dislike and it has nothing to do with whether she sits or stands when she goes to the bathroom...
Yep. Got to fall back to something when no one likes you. Sexism seems to be good a reason as any.
Her supporters are dredging up pretty much anything at this point to defend her. I'm sure we'll hear charges of racism next.
Nobody is arguing the "solely" part so please don't use that as a straw. But I am arguing the "in part". To me it is undeniable that she is treated differently in many ways as Milbank has detailed.
I wrote in part and/or solely.
Isn't Hillary appealing to the female vote to assist her? So isn't treatment based on gender a net gain for her if true? If she expects to be treated positively because of her gender is that a problem?
Of course. I've detailed a lot of them in this thread.
It's not the same, Bob.
Are there other reasonable explanations as to why someone might dislike Hillary aside from these insidious expectations?
I appreciate your perspective on this, and I certainly try to consider my own potential prejudices in situations like this. I feel pretty comfortable in saying that I don't want to vote for Hillary Clinton for reasons other than her sex or gender. I know a number of other people who I feel comfortable saying that about as well. I'm sure there are plenty of people who oppose her for misogynistic reasons as well.
You've asked the same question twice now. As I previously answered, of course there are. Keep in mind I don't agree with those reasons, but they ARE reasonable.
It's not a pathetic argument IMO. And I don't care whether people care about it or not.
You and Slapdash love to refer to me as a troll, and I really don't get it. I respond to nearly every post. I argue points; you don't have to agree with the arguments, but I make them. I engage in back and forth conversation. Based on my understanding of trolldom, I really don't fit the description.We can always count on tim to taking trolling to a new level.
Of course I understand. I think most of those reasons are wrong, but I understand them. I just believe there are subconscious issues at play as well, and they include not only her detractors but her supporters as well. I am certainly no exception. I think it's lazy to ignore it.
I"m on the fence about higher minimum wage. I understand what @Henry Ford is talking about, I just don't know that minimum wage gets us where we need to be. It's a stopgap, which he's o.k. with, but I'm unsure about whether it would be of any real benefit in the long run.
In recent months I have not encountered anyone from the left who is as much of a Hillary hater as HA Goodman. And he is constantly predicting an indictment, and also with confidence has predicted that she will not win the Democratic nomination. (Somewhat contradictory, he has also predicted several times she will lose the general election.)
You're looking for zebras amongst horses. There are plenty of more parsimonious reasons--and important concerns--that go into Hillary's abysmal ratings. And, by playing armchair psychologist here, not only is it a sloppy effort, it's dismissive of legitimate concerns many of us have with Hillary, none of which even remotely touch a hint of sexism.
It seems to be a non-credible argument that you don't care about whether people care because (a) you brought it up in a public forum as a means of advocating a position and (b) you will spend the next three days responding to posts about it.
You drop too many bombs casting large nets trying to group others motivation in opposing your viewpoint usually in simply terms of sexism or racism. It really pissed people off and for good reason when you do such. You probably wrongly believe many people think in those terms, but I think it is utterly ridiculous and you overplay it in nearly every political thread.
1. Absurd.
I don't really believe that people don't care about this. That reply was a quick response to jon's assertion that nobody cares. What I should have written is that I don't care that he believes that nobody cares.
