Feminism, the presidency and Hillary Clinton?

**Zacha341** · January-02-16, 10:20 AM

Women Who Say There’s a Better Feminist in the Race Than Hillary Clinton
Read more at: http://time.com/4107286/hillary-clin...ampshire-2016/

"It’s not about gender. It’s about empathy"

From article:
Some reject the premise that Clinton is the only woman likely to reach the presidency in their lifetime, citing other possibilities like Elizabeth Warren, the Massachusetts Senator who decided not to run this year. Most take pains to say they are not rejecting Clinton, but are just excited by Sanders and his more liberal policy agenda. And almost all say the fact that Clinton is a woman simply doesn’t matter to them as much as they thought it would.

-----------------------

Ok, yes this second article is from what some here may deem a conservative rag. However....

Hillary Clinton Is Not a Feminist
Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...sexual-assault

From article:
Since Hillary announced that her husband would be joining her on the campaign trail, people have been debating whether or not it’s fair for the GOP to attack Bill’s sexual misdeeds in order to indirectly attack her.

This makes sense. After all, we’re talking about a guy who has been accused of the sexual assault of more than ten women. Think about it: How is her appointing him really any different than if she’d appointed Bill Cosby?

But here’s the thing: The real issue isn’t whether or not to attack Bill to indirectly attack Hillary — it’s about directly attacking Hillary for how she herself treated the women involved....

**Lowell** · January-02-16, 11:11 AM

If the opponent is Trump attacking Bill will help Hillary. "We worked it out and kept our family together. How did things work out for your and your families Mr. Trump?"

**Zacha341** · January-02-16, 11:25 AM

Makes sense to me. The Clintons clearly know they have more strength together than apart, strategically and politically. However, I'm not posting these articles solely in relationship to a Trump apposition. Though I guess one must consider the 'oppositional' factor top-of-mind when leveling a vote, considering our 'choices'?

As such, weighing in the Trump factor and hypocrisy, a vote for Elmer Fudd might be preferable for some, likewise of Hillary for others.

Beyond the appositional Clinton vs Trump etc. perspective however, assessments about who we have before us, on their own merit demand our continued attention as this eh' 'election' cycle continues. As the front runners reveal a bit more of their agenda [[inadvertently or otherwise).

**Johnnny5** · January-02-16, 12:09 PM

I won't be casting a vote for Hillary in November, but IMO her strongest feature is that Bill comes with her. I'd actually take it a step further and say that without his supporters and influence she wouldn't even be in the running.

**Zacha341** · January-02-16, 01:26 PM

^^^ Yes, and yet he brings his own 'baggage' along with hers.

Not sure that plane can fly with so much cargo.

Then again I'd be surprised by nothing!

**Pam** · January-02-16, 07:13 PM

Most take pains to say they are not rejecting Clinton, but are just excited by Sanders and his more liberal policy agenda.

I don't have a problem with saying I am rejecting Clinton because Sanders is more liberal.
I like supporting women candidates but they still need to reflect my views.

**oladub** · January-02-16, 10:38 PM

Originally Posted by Lowell

If the opponent is Trump attacking Bill will help Hillary. "We worked it out and kept our family together. How did things work out for your and your families Mr. Trump?"

That makes sense. Hillary, after all, stood by her man and helped defend him against all the rape and sexual aggression charges. Mrs. Cosby's [[enabling?) should similarly be lauded. Trump, meanwhile dumped his wives when the new model[[s) came along. In addition, Bill's wife has more domestic content than Trump's imported wives. Trump should instead stick to criticizing the SOS Hillary's disastrous foreign policy...for starters. Of course, if the Clintons want to characterize Trump as a sexist, Trump can respond in kind.

**JBMcB** · January-02-16, 11:05 PM

There is going to be some pretty major cognitive dissonance happening here.

On the one hand, Sanders is clearly the progressive's choice. Mostly, at least, and properly anti-war. Much more anti-corporate than Hillary.

On the other, can you really call yourself a feminist and NOT vote for the first woman presidential candidate with an excellent shot at the white house?

All in all I don't think it matters - Hillary is a slam dunk this time. Obama had charisma and energy to spare, both of which Sanders is hugely lacking. Hillary has the Democratic machine mobilized and in her pocket.

**Honky Tonk** · January-03-16, 12:23 AM

Originally Posted by JBMcB

There is going to be some pretty major cognitive dissonance happening here.

On the one hand, Sanders is clearly the progressive's choice. Mostly, at least, and properly anti-war. Much more anti-corporate than Hillary.

On the other, can you really call yourself a feminist and NOT vote for the first woman presidential candidate with an excellent shot at the white house?

All in all I don't think it matters - Hillary is a slam dunk this time. Obama had charisma and energy to spare, both of which Sanders is hugely lacking. Hillary has the Democratic machine mobilized and in her pocket.

The question everyone should ask themselves is whether or not it's the right person for the job, not whether or not they wear pantyhose or boxers.

**canuck** · January-03-16, 03:21 AM

How do you call the husband of a female President anyway? First Gent?

**Pam** · January-03-16, 08:28 AM

On the other, can you really call yourself a feminist and NOT vote for the first woman presidential candidate with an excellent shot at the white house?

Yes, you can.

**Zacha341** · January-03-16, 08:55 AM

Yeah, Trump best step-off on the domestic tip relative to his own busted glass house!! He can talk about Mrs. Clinton's record as Secretary of State to keep it professional.

Originally Posted by oladub

That makes sense. Hillary, after all, stood by her man and helped defend him against all the rape and sexual aggression charges. Mrs. Cosby's [[enabling?) should similarly be lauded. Trump, meanwhile dumped his wives when the new model[[s) came along. In addition, Bill's wife has more domestic content than Trump's imported wives. Trump should instead stick to criticizing the SOS Hillary's disastrous foreign policy...for starters. Of course, if the Clintons want to characterize Trump as a sexist, Trump can respond in kind.

**JBMcB** · January-03-16, 09:18 AM

Originally Posted by Pam

Yes, you can.

Perhaps, but wait until the rhetoric machine kicks in.

Remember, if you didn't vote for Obama, you were probably a racist:
http://www.motherjones.com/environme...rain-on-racism

Not voting for the only woman on the democratic ticket? Hmm....

**Zacha341** · January-03-16, 10:03 AM

Uhh, yeah.

Originally Posted by Honky Tonk

The question everyone should ask themselves is whether or not it's the right person for the job, not whether or not they wear pantyhose or boxers.

**Zacha341** · January-03-16, 12:12 PM

More women I'm talking to, as of late, are not obligatory for Hillary. We're simply not all responding to her as she assumed! Not to say the other candidates are a win-win. Nope, they ain't, IMO.

Originally Posted by Pam

I don't have a problem with saying I am rejecting Clinton because Sanders is more liberal.
I like supporting women candidates but they still need to reflect my views.

**Zacha341** · February-14-16, 09:19 PM

Let the gender games begin!

Gloria Steinem and Madeleine Albright Rebuke Young Women Backing Bernie Sanders

See video and article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/08/us/politics/gloria-steinem-madeleine-albright-hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders.html

From article:

Women were expected to help power Mrs. Clinton to the Democratic nomination, but as she struggles to overcome a tough challenge from Mr. Sanders and trails him in New Hampshire polls, her support among them has been surprisingly shaky. Young women, in particular, have been drawn to the septuagenarian socialist from Vermont, and the dynamic has disappointed feminists who dreamed of Mrs. Clinton’s election as a capstone to their long struggle for equality.

Ms. Steinem, 81, one of the most famous spokeswomen of the feminist movement, took the sentiment a step further on Friday in an interview with the talk show host Bill Maher. Explaining that women tend to become more active in politics as they become older, she suggested that younger women were backing Mr. Sanders just so they could meet young men.

“When you’re young, you’re thinking: ‘Where are the boys? The boys are with Bernie,’ ” Ms. Steinem said.

Realizing that this was potentially offensive, Mr. Maher recoiled. “Oh. Now if I said that, ‘They’re for Bernie because that’s where the boys are,’ you’d swat me.”

But Ms. Steinem laughed it off, replying, “How well do you know me?”

Ms. Albright has used a version of the line “special place in hell for women who don’t help other women” in other contexts, and it has been memorialized on Starbucks coffee cups. But in the heat of a presidential campaign, many women found it startling and offensive.

In numerous remarks on social media over the weekend, female supporters of Mr. Sanders accused both women of undermining feminism.

“Shame on Gloria Steinem and Madeleine Albright for implying that we as women should be voting for a candidate based solely on gender,” Zoe Trimboli, a 23-year-old from Vermont who supports Mr. Sanders and describes herself as a feminist, wrote on Facebook. “I can tell you that shaming me and essentially calling me misinformed and stupid is NOT the way to win my vote.”

With backlash growing, Ms. Steinem issued a retraction on Sunday morning.....

**Pam** · February-15-16, 07:04 AM

I was disappointed in Gloria Steinem. I thought she was smart enough to be able to tell the difference between a corporate sell out like Hillary vs. an actual progressive like Bernie.
If they were identical on the issues, I might go for the woman candidate but they have real differences on the issues.

**Honky Tonk** · February-15-16, 12:38 PM

I think Gloria shot herself, and Hillary, in the foot with her statement.

**Zacha341** · February-15-16, 03:23 PM

Yeah, Gloria Steinem shot a wide blast into what she perceived to be a big shoe [[the supposed motive of all young women!). Hillary's already holding a heavy 'lead' balloon assuming women would support her in a run for the white house without question. Not!

No wonder Steinem retracted her comment fast. It's all a pile of mess, full of dated rhetoric, assumption, and condescension toward the very group they desire to reach!

**Honky Tonk** · February-15-16, 03:59 PM

Originally Posted by Zacha341

Yeah, Gloria Steinem shot a wide blast into what she perceived to be a big shoe [[the supposed motive of all young women!). Hillary has already holding a 'lead' balloon assuming women would support her in a run for the white house without question. Not!

No wonder Steinem retracted her comment fast. It's all a pile of mess, full of dated rhetoric, assumption, and condescension toward the very group they desire to reach!

Agreed, I couldn't believe it when I read it. Things change, you have to change with them.