AAPL stock: Click Here |
|
Tips and Deals ---- For Sale & Free Items ---- 'Friendly' Political Ranting |
"No, Hillary Clinton, the First Woman to Win a Major-Party Presidential Nomination, Does Not Need to Shut Up About It"
Posted by: $tevie
Date: September 12, 2017 10:54AM
|
[www.vogue.com]Quote
The dismissal of Clinton’s book is sadly not dissimilar from the way Senators Elizabeth Warren and Kamala Harris have recently been all but shushed in Congress. There’s something about a powerful woman using her voice—and in a way that is not gentle or measured but bold and pointed—that still doesn’t sit well with the general public. (See: Clinton openly threatened with cries of “lock her up” to this day at Trump rallies; being called a “nasty woman.”) In spite of her achievements—and likely because of them—Clinton has always been seen, as then-candidate Barack Obama quipped in 2008, as just “likable enough.” During the 2016 campaign (and long before), she was lambasted for being rehearsed and robotic—a policy wonk, lacking in natural charisma. (By the way—what we wouldn’t give for a policy wonk in the White House today . . .) But now that she’s speaking freely and frankly, the sexist little secret is being laid bare: People didn’t want Clinton to change her manner of speech; they wanted her to stop talking altogether. Consider that while people want Clinton to be quiet, noted white nationalist political mastermind Steve Bannon got the mainstream sit-down treatment on 60 Minutes last night. Or that on The Late Show with Stephen Colbert last week, Sanders all but belittled Clinton’s book as “silly,” a statement that felt like the equivalent of a husband calling his wife “hysterical.”
Re: "No, Hillary Clinton, the First Woman to Win a Major-Party Presidential Nomination, Does Not Need to Shut Up About It"
Posted by: Pam
Date: September 12, 2017 11:09AM
|
Re: "No, Hillary Clinton, the First Woman to Win a Major-Party Presidential Nomination, Does Not Need to Shut Up About It"
Posted by: vision63
Date: September 12, 2017 11:17AM
|
Re: "No, Hillary Clinton, the First Woman to Win a Major-Party Presidential Nomination, Does Not Need to Shut Up About It"
Posted by: gabester
Date: September 12, 2017 11:17AM
|
Re: "No, Hillary Clinton, the First Woman to Win a Major-Party Presidential Nomination, Does Not Need to Shut Up About It"
Posted by: rjmacs
Date: September 12, 2017 11:44AM
|
Re: "No, Hillary Clinton, the First Woman to Win a Major-Party Presidential Nomination, Does Not Need to Shut Up About It"
Posted by: $tevie
Date: September 12, 2017 11:44AM
|
Re: "No, Hillary Clinton, the First Woman to Win a Major-Party Presidential Nomination, Does Not Need to Shut Up About It"
Posted by: Kraniac
Date: September 12, 2017 12:30PM
|
Re: "No, Hillary Clinton, the First Woman to Win a Major-Party Presidential Nomination, Does Not Need to Shut Up About It"
Posted by: vision63
Date: September 12, 2017 12:33PM
|
Quote
Kraniac
I don't think it has anything to do with her being a woman.
the Dem party is in shambles, be a team player, @#$%& and do something positive to help the situation. She lost and if the Dem party wasn't screwing with the process..which they clearly were, she might not have even gotten the nomination..period.
Re: "No, Hillary Clinton, the First Woman to Win a Major-Party Presidential Nomination, Does Not Need to Shut Up About It"
Posted by: Lemon Drop
Date: September 12, 2017 12:59PM
|
Quote
$tevie
[www.vogue.com]Quote
The dismissal of Clinton’s book is sadly not dissimilar from the way Senators Elizabeth Warren and Kamala Harris have recently been all but shushed in Congress. There’s something about a powerful woman using her voice—and in a way that is not gentle or measured but bold and pointed—that still doesn’t sit well with the general public. (See: Clinton openly threatened with cries of “lock her up” to this day at Trump rallies; being called a “nasty woman.”) In spite of her achievements—and likely because of them—Clinton has always been seen, as then-candidate Barack Obama quipped in 2008, as just “likable enough.” During the 2016 campaign (and long before), she was lambasted for being rehearsed and robotic—a policy wonk, lacking in natural charisma. (By the way—what we wouldn’t give for a policy wonk in the White House today . . .) But now that she’s speaking freely and frankly, the sexist little secret is being laid bare: People didn’t want Clinton to change her manner of speech; they wanted her to stop talking altogether. Consider that while people want Clinton to be quiet, noted white nationalist political mastermind Steve Bannon got the mainstream sit-down treatment on 60 Minutes last night. Or that on The Late Show with Stephen Colbert last week, Sanders all but belittled Clinton’s book as “silly,” a statement that felt like the equivalent of a husband calling his wife “hysterical.”
Re: "No, Hillary Clinton, the First Woman to Win a Major-Party Presidential Nomination, Does Not Need to Shut Up About It"
Posted by: mattkime
Date: September 12, 2017 01:04PM
|
Quote
$tevie
[www.vogue.com]Quote
The dismissal of Clinton’s book is sadly not dissimilar from the way Senators Elizabeth Warren and Kamala Harris have recently been all but shushed in Congress. There’s something about a powerful woman using her voice—and in a way that is not gentle or measured but bold and pointed—that still doesn’t sit well with the general public. (See: Clinton openly threatened with cries of “lock her up” to this day at Trump rallies; being called a “nasty woman.”) In spite of her achievements—and likely because of them—Clinton has always been seen, as then-candidate Barack Obama quipped in 2008, as just “likable enough.” During the 2016 campaign (and long before), she was lambasted for being rehearsed and robotic—a policy wonk, lacking in natural charisma. (By the way—what we wouldn’t give for a policy wonk in the White House today . . .) But now that she’s speaking freely and frankly, the sexist little secret is being laid bare: People didn’t want Clinton to change her manner of speech; they wanted her to stop talking altogether. Consider that while people want Clinton to be quiet, noted white nationalist political mastermind Steve Bannon got the mainstream sit-down treatment on 60 Minutes last night. Or that on The Late Show with Stephen Colbert last week, Sanders all but belittled Clinton’s book as “silly,” a statement that felt like the equivalent of a husband calling his wife “hysterical.”
Re: "No, Hillary Clinton, the First Woman to Win a Major-Party Presidential Nomination, Does Not Need to Shut Up About It"
Posted by: gabester
Date: September 12, 2017 01:39PM
|
Quote
vision63
Quote
Kraniac
the Dem party is in shambles... She lost and if the Dem party wasn't screwing with the process..which they clearly were, she might not have even gotten the nomination..period.
Let's see the screwing with proof. I'll accept your non response. Your feelings aren't facts.
Re: "No, Hillary Clinton, the First Woman to Win a Major-Party Presidential Nomination, Does Not Need to Shut Up About It"
Posted by: $tevie
Date: September 12, 2017 01:52PM
|
Re: "No, Hillary Clinton, the First Woman to Win a Major-Party Presidential Nomination, Does Not Need to Shut Up About It"
Posted by: pdq
Date: September 12, 2017 01:54PM
|
Quote
gabester
Quote
vision63
Quote
Kraniac
the Dem party is in shambles... She lost and if the Dem party wasn't screwing with the process..which they clearly were, she might not have even gotten the nomination..period.
Let's see the screwing with proof. I'll accept your non response. Your feelings aren't facts.
Except the #2 Democratic Primary "Candidate" wasn't even a Democrat!
Re: "No, Hillary Clinton, the First Woman to Win a Major-Party Presidential Nomination, Does Not Need to Shut Up About It"
Posted by: mrbigstuff
Date: September 12, 2017 02:08PM
|
Re: "No, Hillary Clinton, the First Woman to Win a Major-Party Presidential Nomination, Does Not Need to Shut Up About It"
Posted by: Lemon Drop
Date: September 12, 2017 02:13PM
|
Re: "No, Hillary Clinton, the First Woman to Win a Major-Party Presidential Nomination, Does Not Need to Shut Up About It"
Posted by: vision63
Date: September 12, 2017 02:24PM
|
Quote
Lemon Drop
My God, what I wouldn't give for a "rehearsed and robotic" president over the dysfunctional random clown show we have now. Are voters that shallow? I don't think so. Apathy was the biggest problem in 2016. Maybe people are awake now. We'll see.
Re: "No, Hillary Clinton, the First Woman to Win a Major-Party Presidential Nomination, Does Not Need to Shut Up About It"
Posted by: Ca Bob
Date: September 12, 2017 02:37PM
|
Re: "No, Hillary Clinton, the First Woman to Win a Major-Party Presidential Nomination, Does Not Need to Shut Up About It"
Posted by: Ca Bob
Date: September 12, 2017 02:44PM
|
Re: "No, Hillary Clinton, the First Woman to Win a Major-Party Presidential Nomination, Does Not Need to Shut Up About It"
Posted by: Speedy
Date: September 12, 2017 02:49PM
|
Re: "No, Hillary Clinton, the First Woman to Win a Major-Party Presidential Nomination, Does Not Need to Shut Up About It"
Posted by: Lemon Drop
Date: September 12, 2017 02:56PM
|
Quote
vision63
Quote
Lemon Drop
My God, what I wouldn't give for a "rehearsed and robotic" president over the dysfunctional random clown show we have now. Are voters that shallow? I don't think so. Apathy was the biggest problem in 2016. Maybe people are awake now. We'll see.
People were so called "awake" then. We trusted that a certain constituency would vote with us but they chose to let us down. To quote Joy, "I'll bet that hurts just a wee bit more. Especially when you lose by 77,500 votes in 3 states & a lady who dined with Putin gets twice that."
That's from a good thread btw. [twitter.com]
Re: "No, Hillary Clinton, the First Woman to Win a Major-Party Presidential Nomination, Does Not Need to Shut Up About It"
Posted by: vision63
Date: September 12, 2017 02:59PM
|
Re: "No, Hillary Clinton, the First Woman to Win a Major-Party Presidential Nomination, Does Not Need to Shut Up About It"
Posted by: mattkime
Date: September 12, 2017 03:08PM
|
Re: "No, Hillary Clinton, the First Woman to Win a Major-Party Presidential Nomination, Does Not Need to Shut Up About It"
Posted by: Filliam H. Muffman
Date: September 12, 2017 04:09PM
|
Quote
Lemon Drop
My God, what I wouldn't give for a "rehearsed and robotic" president over the dysfunctional random clown show we have now. Are voters that shallow? I don't think so. Apathy was the biggest problem in 2016. Maybe people are awake now. We'll see.
Re: "No, Hillary Clinton, the First Woman to Win a Major-Party Presidential Nomination, Does Not Need to Shut Up About It"
Posted by: Speedy
Date: September 12, 2017 04:18PM
|
Re: "No, Hillary Clinton, the First Woman to Win a Major-Party Presidential Nomination, Does Not Need to Shut Up About It"
Posted by: gabester
Date: September 12, 2017 04:28PM
|
Quote
Filliam H. Muffman
It wasn't apathy. It was dislike for both candidates.
Re: "No, Hillary Clinton, the First Woman to Win a Major-Party Presidential Nomination, Does Not Need to Shut Up About It"
Posted by: mattkime
Date: September 12, 2017 04:36PM
|
Re: "No, Hillary Clinton, the First Woman to Win a Major-Party Presidential Nomination, Does Not Need to Shut Up About It"
Posted by: Filliam H. Muffman
Date: September 12, 2017 04:42PM
|
Quote
mattkime
What has Bernie accomplished?
Re: "No, Hillary Clinton, the First Woman to Win a Major-Party Presidential Nomination, Does Not Need to Shut Up About It"
Posted by: Filliam H. Muffman
Date: September 12, 2017 04:49PM
|
Quote
gabester
The other candidate had carefully and diligently prepared for this role for a lifetime, and due to her qualifications had been consistently slandered and demeaned (feminazi benghazi and don't think that alliteration ISN'T deliberate) by a vastly funded right-wing conspiracy of a handful of wealthy men (Kochs, Scaifes, Olins, et cetera whose status quo her administration's policies might upend) who leveraged the elimination of the Fairness Doctrine in broadcast and oligarchy connections to Russian trollbots to build an army of misinformed white men who would do their bidding threatening even a "second amendment solution" if things didn't go their way.
Re: "No, Hillary Clinton, the First Woman to Win a Major-Party Presidential Nomination, Does Not Need to Shut Up About It"
Posted by: mattkime
Date: September 12, 2017 05:02PM
|
Re: "No, Hillary Clinton, the First Woman to Win a Major-Party Presidential Nomination, Does Not Need to Shut Up About It"
Posted by: mattkime
Date: September 12, 2017 05:03PM
|
Quote
Filliam H. Muffman
It wasn't just misinformed white men. From the few polling statistics that were mentioned, middle aged white women was the biggest block that swung against Clinton. It's frustrating to try to back this up with real numbers, I still haven't seen a reliable breakdown of voting statistics.
Re: "No, Hillary Clinton, the First Woman to Win a Major-Party Presidential Nomination, Does Not Need to Shut Up About It"
Posted by: vision63
Date: September 12, 2017 05:08PM
|
Quote
Lemon Drop
Quote
vision63
Quote
Lemon Drop
My God, what I wouldn't give for a "rehearsed and robotic" president over the dysfunctional random clown show we have now. Are voters that shallow? I don't think so. Apathy was the biggest problem in 2016. Maybe people are awake now. We'll see.
People were so called "awake" then. We trusted that a certain constituency would vote with us but they chose to let us down. To quote Joy, "I'll bet that hurts just a wee bit more. Especially when you lose by 77,500 votes in 3 states & a lady who dined with Putin gets twice that."
That's from a good thread btw. [twitter.com]
By awake I mean showing up to vote. A lot of people didn't. Our voter turnouts are among the worst in the free world. That's how you get President Donald J Trump. The rest is noise.
Re: "No, Hillary Clinton, the First Woman to Win a Major-Party Presidential Nomination, Does Not Need to Shut Up About It"
Posted by: vision63
Date: September 12, 2017 05:08PM
|
Quote
gabester
Quote
Filliam H. Muffman
It wasn't apathy. It was dislike for both candidates.
One candidate was justifiably disliked for a lack of qualifications and a spur of the moment participation, with utterly repugnant behavior ("just locker room talk" - more like a pattern of criminal sexual predation that was only unprosecuted due to the individual's immense wealth; "because I'm smart" bankruptcies and stiffing people who were expecting fair contracts be adhered to; "saying it like it is" because the man has no filter and no judgement... except that maybe it's a negative filter to say the WORST possible thing with the least socially beneficial agenda.)
The other candidate had carefully and diligently prepared for this role for a lifetime, and due to her qualifications had been consistently slandered and demeaned (feminazi benghazi and don't think that alliteration ISN'T deliberate) by a vastly funded right-wing conspiracy of a handful of wealthy men (Kochs, Scaifes, Olins, et cetera whose status quo her administration's policies might upend) who leveraged the elimination of the Fairness Doctrine in broadcast and oligarchy connections to Russian trollbots to build an army of misinformed white men who would do their bidding threatening even a "second amendment solution" if things didn't go their way.
Somehow these wealthy few men managed to get all the dislike that should rightfully be projected onto them deflected onto perhaps the most qualified candidate in the modern era... and we're blaming her for not being likable enough?
Somehow we've got to be able to criminally prosecute brainwashing, which is clearly what is happening to the viewers and listeners of Fox News and Rush Limbaugh and other right wing sources where facts about complex situations are discarded in favor of contrite and hostile sound bites that would undermine the stability of our republic. How else do you explain dramatic changes in political opinion about the higher education and Russia in just the past two years? We need some kind of deprogramming to get these individuals back on track before it's too late, or at least to motivate the ones who didn't vote to get out and commit this next time around.
Re: "No, Hillary Clinton, the First Woman to Win a Major-Party Presidential Nomination, Does Not Need to Shut Up About It"
Posted by: $tevie
Date: September 12, 2017 05:30PM
|
Unfortunately, there was a lot of brainwashing done by Sanders & his crew as well. This belief that Clinton rigged the system (a system which has been in place since McGovern was slaughtered at the polls, although nobody eviscerated HIM for that) is all stuff that Sanders pounded into his followers. I have friends on FB who make the most incredible statements about Clinton (she wanted to start WWIII, she is a hardened criminal, she was totally in the service of the banks and lied when she said she wanted to help people) and they are not Trumpers they are Bernie supporters who refuse to stop complaining. Oddly enough, nobody from the Clinton camp is supposed to complain about anything that happened, and yet the Sanders people are apparently free to kvetch and piss and moan for the rest of eternity. I am so sorry that I voted for Sanders, and I don't know what to do with the damned t-shirt because if I wear it I will look like a dimwitted cry baby.Quote
gabester
Quote
Filliam H. Muffman
It wasn't apathy. It was dislike for both candidates.
One candidate was justifiably disliked for a lack of qualifications and a spur of the moment participation, with utterly repugnant behavior ("just locker room talk" - more like a pattern of criminal sexual predation that was only unprosecuted due to the individual's immense wealth; "because I'm smart" bankruptcies and stiffing people who were expecting fair contracts be adhered to; "saying it like it is" because the man has no filter and no judgement... except that maybe it's a negative filter to say the WORST possible thing with the least socially beneficial agenda.)
The other candidate had carefully and diligently prepared for this role for a lifetime, and due to her qualifications had been consistently slandered and demeaned (feminazi benghazi and don't think that alliteration ISN'T deliberate) by a vastly funded right-wing conspiracy of a handful of wealthy men (Kochs, Scaifes, Olins, et cetera whose status quo her administration's policies might upend) who leveraged the elimination of the Fairness Doctrine in broadcast and oligarchy connections to Russian trollbots to build an army of misinformed white men who would do their bidding threatening even a "second amendment solution" if things didn't go their way.
Somehow these wealthy few men managed to get all the dislike that should rightfully be projected onto them deflected onto perhaps the most qualified candidate in the modern era... and we're blaming her for not being likable enough?
Somehow we've got to be able to criminally prosecute brainwashing, which is clearly what is happening to the viewers and listeners of Fox News and Rush Limbaugh and other right wing sources where facts about complex situations are discarded in favor of contrite and hostile sound bites that would undermine the stability of our republic. How else do you explain dramatic changes in political opinion about the higher education and Russia in just the past two years? We need some kind of deprogramming to get these individuals back on track before it's too late, or at least to motivate the ones who didn't vote to get out and commit this next time around.
Re: "No, Hillary Clinton, the First Woman to Win a Major-Party Presidential Nomination, Does Not Need to Shut Up About It"
Posted by: sekker
Date: September 12, 2017 05:46PM
|
Re: "No, Hillary Clinton, the First Woman to Win a Major-Party Presidential Nomination, Does Not Need to Shut Up About It"
Posted by: Steve G.
Date: September 12, 2017 05:50PM
|
Re: "No, Hillary Clinton, the First Woman to Win a Major-Party Presidential Nomination, Does Not Need to Shut Up About It"
Posted by: mrbigstuff
Date: September 12, 2017 08:38PM
|
Quote
Ca Bob
I never did understand why Hillary didn't blame the economy on George W Bush, brag about what the Democratic administration had done to fix things, and argue that we needed to stick with Democratic policies to finally come out of the recession for good. The numbers on job creation and economic growth support this argument, but it has to be made with force and emotion, particularly in the places that have been hit hard for the past 3 decades.
Also, Trump's slogan about making America great again is a dangerously powerful message, and the Democrats didn't counter it early on. The Karl Rove approach would be to go after that slogan tooth and nail from the beginning, perhaps by pointing out the Bush recession and the Obama recovery, and ask snidely whether greatness equals poverty.
Re: "No, Hillary Clinton, the First Woman to Win a Major-Party Presidential Nomination, Does Not Need to Shut Up About It"
Posted by: SteveO
Date: September 13, 2017 01:55AM
|
Re: "No, Hillary Clinton, the First Woman to Win a Major-Party Presidential Nomination, Does Not Need to Shut Up About It"
Posted by: deckeda
Date: September 13, 2017 07:30AM
|
Re: "No, Hillary Clinton, the First Woman to Win a Major-Party Presidential Nomination, Does Not Need to Shut Up About It"
Posted by: Lemon Drop
Date: September 13, 2017 07:58AM
|
Re: "No, Hillary Clinton, the First Woman to Win a Major-Party Presidential Nomination, Does Not Need to Shut Up About It"
Posted by: Lizabeth
Date: September 13, 2017 08:30AM
|
Re: "No, Hillary Clinton, the First Woman to Win a Major-Party Presidential Nomination, Does Not Need to Shut Up About It"
Posted by: vision63
Date: September 13, 2017 09:48AM
|
Quote
Lizabeth
I agree that she didn't really inspire people to vote for her but I have to wonder what she'd be able to accomplish if she was in the WH with the Republicans going way overboard to oppose ANYTHING she wanted to get passed. Which in my book, would be just as bad as things stand now with 45's BS.
Also, Howard Dean was on Cape Up with Jonathan Capehart podcast (really interesting one to listen to btw) and he said something interesting: more younger voters turned out than older voters to vote for Obama BUT THEY AREN'T DEMOCRATS. They are independents and not fans of big government. While Hillary got the popular vote, she didn't really inspire the younger voters like Obama did.
Re: "No, Hillary Clinton, the First Woman to Win a Major-Party Presidential Nomination, Does Not Need to Shut Up About It"
Posted by: Lemon Drop
Date: September 13, 2017 10:12AM
|
Re: "No, Hillary Clinton, the First Woman to Win a Major-Party Presidential Nomination, Does Not Need to Shut Up About It"
Posted by: deckeda
Date: September 13, 2017 03:49PM
|
Re: "No, Hillary Clinton, the First Woman to Win a Major-Party Presidential Nomination, Does Not Need to Shut Up About It"
Posted by: $tevie
Date: September 13, 2017 04:05PM
|
Re: "No, Hillary Clinton, the First Woman to Win a Major-Party Presidential Nomination, Does Not Need to Shut Up About It"
Posted by: kj
Date: September 13, 2017 06:19PM
|
Re: "No, Hillary Clinton, the First Woman to Win a Major-Party Presidential Nomination, Does Not Need to Shut Up About It"
Posted by: sekker
Date: September 13, 2017 06:23PM
|
Quote
kj
Muffman is right. I would never have voted for Trump, but with Hillary, better than Trump wasn't good enough. So I didn't vote. So far, it's abundantly clear that it would be in both party's best interests to choose better candidates. Will they do so, or will they continue to make excuses? Probably make excuses, from what I can tell so far.
Re: "No, Hillary Clinton, the First Woman to Win a Major-Party Presidential Nomination, Does Not Need to Shut Up About It"
Posted by: kj
Date: September 13, 2017 06:33PM
|
Re: "No, Hillary Clinton, the First Woman to Win a Major-Party Presidential Nomination, Does Not Need to Shut Up About It"
Posted by: kj
Date: September 13, 2017 06:41PM
|
Quote
sekker
Quote
kj
Muffman is right. I would never have voted for Trump, but with Hillary, better than Trump wasn't good enough. So I didn't vote. So far, it's abundantly clear that it would be in both party's best interests to choose better candidates. Will they do so, or will they continue to make excuses? Probably make excuses, from what I can tell so far.
The GOP sent out 16 candidates, Trump beat them all. The electorate decided that White Rule mattered.
Re: "No, Hillary Clinton, the First Woman to Win a Major-Party Presidential Nomination, Does Not Need to Shut Up About It"
Posted by: Filliam H. Muffman
Date: September 13, 2017 06:55PM
|
Re: "No, Hillary Clinton, the First Woman to Win a Major-Party Presidential Nomination, Does Not Need to Shut Up About It"
Posted by: vision63
Date: September 13, 2017 07:10PM
|