Which, apparently, is what you think the rest of us are doing here when we agree that misogyny was a factor in the election and attempt to parse out and learn from just how it was a factor.
But you know, the commentariat in general here is not a bunch of immature simps. You really oughta spend more time at bb and at bbs before condemning “us” that way, and especially before grandly waltzing in here and telling us that we really should be talking instead about Something That Matters. The fallacy of that kind of insulting condescension has already (and recently) been addressed here. It really is possible to care about multiple issues at once, and to focus on them individually, while bearing in mind that others are equally or even more significant.
Nominations aren’t a single person deciding anything. They are an accretion of thousands or even millions of different opinions. Even within individuals you can have dozens of contradictory opinions held at the same time.
I don’t think many who nominated Obama felt that Obama being black would be handing the Republicans the election because of inherent racism in American society. They could hold both “racism is endemic in society” and “racism won’t affect the overall outcome of this election” at the same time.
In this fairly difficult time, I think there’s a distinct danger of the paradigm of “the inherent sexism in society prevents superior female candidates from being elected” becoming deeply embedded in the Democrat mindset (with Canada coming along for the ride because we always do).
Just to clarify - acknowledging and fighting sexism and misogyny in society in general is very different from how one deals with sexism and misogyny at the highest rungs of society.
Honestly, that’s what I’ve noticed for a while: she says things her audience wants to hear. I thought she’d stepped in it when she trashed the Carrier deal–I think Megyn Kelly proved how quickly they’ll turn on a woman when she steps out of line–but if you look at her Facebook feed, it might as well be the Young Conservatives RSS feed, with some extra stuff about Mike Rowe (how can am Trump voter be racist if Mike hard work? Seriously, he didn’t say Trump voters weren’t racist, he just took issue with the strawman that ALL are racist), constant bagging on millennials, and a smidge of personal stuff.
Go on Google and you’ll find loads of Photoshops of Palin’s head on younger women’s bodies.
I saw some fake news sites years ago, it probably had a name like “Liberty Watchtower” or some such, that posted pictures of Palin in a more recent photo of her in a swimsuit, and the short story had a gross line in it like, “Looking great, Sarah! Palin for President!” It’s no wonder the Trump crowd tends to like her; she’s pretty and she says things the modern right approves of.
Not that it matters in the least, but how do you feel about Tina Fey?
Attractiveness is in the eye of the beholder, everyone likes what they like, and at the end of the day, the physical attractiveness of either Sarah Palin or Tina Fey doesn’t really matter.
I honestly believe Elizabeth Warren would have done far better than Clinton.
There was a laundry list of things that were working against Clinton- two or three of them had to do with her gender. I’m not going to pretend that misogyny wasn’t a factor at all, but it was only one of many.
But of course, the Democrats are going to blame literally everyone except themselves. Nobody’s going to actually learn a lesson from this. They’re going to keep fucking it up until they destroy themselves, and drag the rest of us down with them.
I still believe that barring Sanders as a candidate, a third party victory was our only way out of this mess. We’re screwed.
Clinton is one of the finest politicians of our lifetime. She played the Washington better than any man there.
And she ran in a year when people are literally sick to death of politics as usual. Trump won largely on his not being a politician. Bernie was able to draw tens of thousands of people to rallies based on the sense that he legitimately wanted to fight against that system. Hillary Clinton is pretty much the living embodiment of that system.
Her greatest asset- Her experience and excellence at playing political chess- Became her greatest liability. Her failure to recognize and adapt to that was a political blunder of legendary proportions. In the old paradigm, she is queen. In the new one which people are demanding, she fails miserably at delivering what the people want to hear.
So, yes- Excellent politician. Terrible politician.
