• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

Hillary and the gender card ...

Hillary herself is now playing not just the gender card but the whole deck.
Hillary Clinton: Women running for office bear a 'much greater burden'

It has been long established that when women behave in the same way as successful, powerful men do, that same behavior is deemed unflattering.
Her use of the example of Bernie Sanders' (and one could include Rand Paul's) messy hair that makes them "genuine" as something that would OBVIOUSLY not fly for any woman candidate is an obvious truth.

What part of this do you disagree with?

I find that Hilary Clinton uses the discussion of gender politics MUCH MUCH MUCH MUCH MUCH less that other politicians talk about what makes their messages hard to sell. Thereby making her use of it reasonable and unremarkable. Listen to Cruz whine about how hard it is to be uinderstood as a conservative wanh wanh wanh or Trump on how hard being "an outsider" is wanh wanh wanh. I realize none of these bother you in the least and you don't find their constant overuse remarkable.

But there it is... the obvious difference in how some people perceive women no matter what they do and your post making Hilary Clinton's point perfectly.
Well done, Derec! Hillary will send out your fee tomorrow!
 
...So I guess so far on here everybody supports Hillary playing the gender card. Can't say I am too surprised.

What's wrong with politicians playing the gender card, the race card, the religion card, the gun control card, the gay card...?

Isnt that what influences voters?
 
...So I guess so far on here everybody supports Hillary playing the gender card. Can't say I am too surprised.

What's wrong with politicians playing the gender card, the race card, the religion card, the gun control card, the gay card...?

Isnt that what influences voters?

For sure,

I just wish she didn't play the gender card when asked questions like "how will you be different than Obama" and on questions about whether shes part of the political establishment. There is an argument to be made for the latter, but she doesn't make the rest of the argument to where it'll make sense to someone just watching along
 
See there's the point.
Some voters will find the gender card a turn-off.
It's her gamble.
 
That's not it.

Imagine if, when asked that question, Bernie Sanders responded not with comments about splitting up the banks, nor with comments about universal healthcare and state subsidized colleges, but by saying he'd be the first Jewish president.

The problem is that her use of the gender card was nonsensical. Much as her use of 9/11 was nonsensical when people asked her about wall-street in an early debate.
 
If Hillary fails to win the presidency for the second time, I just hope I don't have to continue to hear dribble about "patriarchy" and sexism keeping women out of high office. Women are 50+% of the voting population (not to mention Hillary's male supporters). It's in your hands, ladies, if you want a woman president.
 
If I were her, (as a feminist,) I'd be just plain embarrassed to play the gender card.

Vote for me because I'm a woman

How does that type of rhetoric do anything to remedy the problem of sexist voters who won't vote for her...because she's a woman?
 
This doesn't seem to be an issue, or if it was it was a year ago. Today, it can be said with certainty that all the vaginas are not on the same team (in case anyone might be confused about that fact) as Bernie Sanders held a 6-1 margin against Hillary in Iowa for women 29 and younger.

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-clinton-millennial-women-20160203-story.html

The problem is not rejection of feminism – surveys suggest millennial women are the most staunchly feminist group of voters in America. They want to see a woman in the White House. Just not necessarily this woman.

It seems like one can support feminism and women's rights and also vote for the candidate who best represents those ideals regardless of the candidate's gender.

aa

yeah, Clinton is not doing well among young people and that includes young women. It is going to take more that "Vote for me and my lady parts" to win this election.
 
It has been long established that when women behave in the same way as successful, powerful men do, that same behavior is deemed unflattering.
Her use of the example of Bernie Sanders' (and one could include Rand Paul's) messy hair that makes them "genuine" as something that would OBVIOUSLY not fly for any woman candidate is an obvious truth.
As if Sanders wasn't mocked for his hair style. Not to mention people like John Kerry or John Edwards being mocked for their expensive hair styles. And Huckabee's and Chrstie's weight has been a subject of discussion as well.
What part of this do you disagree with?
It is simply a lie that only female candidates' appearance is scrutinized.

I find that Hilary Clinton uses the discussion of gender politics MUCH MUCH MUCH MUCH MUCH less that other politicians talk about what makes their messages hard to sell.
That is simply false. She talks about being a woman a lot. She did it in 2008 as well. Remember her line "18 million cracks in the glass ceiling" that she repeated probably about 18 million times since then.
Thereby making her use of it reasonable and unremarkable. Listen to Cruz whine about how hard it is to be uinderstood as a conservative wanh wanh wanh or Trump on how hard being "an outsider" is wanh wanh wanh. I realize none of these bother you in the least and you don't find their constant overuse remarkable.
Being a conservative is a political position. Being a woman isn't. Don't you see the difference?

But there it is... the obvious difference in how some people perceive women no matter what they do and your post making Hilary Clinton's point perfectly.
She is the one playing the gender card and having her surrogates play the gender card for her. I am merely commenting on it.
 
If I were her, (as a feminist,) I'd be just plain embarrassed to play the gender card.

Vote for me because I'm a woman

How does that type of rhetoric do anything to remedy the problem of sexist voters who won't vote for her...because she's a woman?

She's playing to her base. The far right types hate her guts and won't vote for her in any way. Even if she publically dumped on feminism et al. So, she can avoid the issue, or whole heartedly but with humor go fot it. Looks like that is what she is doing. With her recent polling, it looks like she has a very realistic chance of being president. Playing to women voters is a natural here. The trick is to pre-emp GOP attacks on her over this possible issue.
 
What's wrong with politicians playing the gender card, the race card, the religion card, the gun control card, the gay card...?
It shows those people hold no better cards to play.

Isnt that what influences voters?
If her only play is to appeal to low information voters like this, that's a turn-off for me.
 
Except of course, Hillary finished at the top of her class in law school, was a very successful attorney, was elected Senator, became Secretary of State.
Where do you get the info that she graduated "at the top of her class" in law school? I found info that she was in top 5% in her high school, but nothing about her class ranking in law school. Another Clintonian fib? But no matter, because lawyers are a dime a dozen in politics, and there are a 100 senators at any given time. Her senate career has a lot to do with being a wife of a president who carpetbaged her way into a safe seat and everybody knows it. Her senate career is rather lackluster, as was her time as Secretary of State - one major scandal and no major accomplishments (accumulating frequent flyer miles is not an accomplishment!) Note also that the last SecState to become president was James Buchanan, before the Civil War.
Seems to me she has plenty of talent, ability and accomplishments.
Compared to the hype I heard in several permutations ("most experienced/qualified/bestest candidate in our lifetimes/in a generation/ever") her accomplishments are rather meager. She is not even most qualified/experienced candidate in this race!
 
I don't believe in hell, but sheesh Derec, don't you think you should give an honest quote?
The headline wasn't mine (blame the Guardian if you will, but note that the quote part of the headline did not include the bit about supporting Clinton, so it was not a misquote) but it is clear from the context that Albright equated "women helping each other" with "women helping elect Hillary".
 
I don't believe in hell, but sheesh Derec, don't you think you should give an honest quote?
The headline wasn't mine (blame the Guardian if you will, but note that the quote part of the headline did not include the bit about supporting Clinton, so it was not a misquote) but it is clear from the context that Albright equated "women helping each other" with "women helping elect Hillary".
You are responsible for your posts and the title of your OP, not the Guardian. It is (and was) disingenuous to attribute a quote to someone when he or she did not say it.
 
All together now. Ahhhhhhhhhhh! You poor little put upon person.
It's that kind of dismissive attitude that allows her to get away with nonsense like this.
Behold the Hillarybots:


Fuck I hate those produced Jay Walking video bullshit arguments. I could go on a campus and get ten people to admit to liking Hitler, it´s a simpleton´s tactic.
 
Back
Top Bottom