Hillary Clinton is Done

[Skeptic Ginger]

Its not so much the current stat, as it is the trend.

"Poll: Virginia Democrats considering alternatives to Hillary Clinton"
http://www.13newsnow.com/story/news...dering-alternatives-hillary-clinton/73825080/


She's lost 40 points over the last 6 months, another 40 over the next 6 months would be just about right.

It's not the trend, it's the news media's and the GOP's narrative.

And on that note, as a female I can't help but notice, women are still judged on their clothes personality, while men are not.

Obama's memo on beating Clinton

How did the Obama team turn it around? The conventional wisdom is that he inspired voters with an uplifting message and out-organized Clinton in Iowa and elsewhere. And while it’s true that Obama had a superior organization and an optimistic message, the real beginning of the end for Hillary Clinton was when Obama attacked her greatest vulnerability: her character.

I'm sorry boys and girls but that is typical sexist based attack.

Is the news media harping on Bernie's temper? Honorable mention, maybe, but harping? No.

Why does Clinton have this supposed character flaw? Because powerful women are almost always seen as bitches.

 

[sunmaster14]

It's not the trend, it's the news media's and the GOP's narrative.

And on that note, as a female I can't help but notice, women are still judged on their clothes personality, while men are not.

Obama's memo on beating Clinton


I'm sorry boys and girls but that is typical sexist based attack.

Is the news media harping on Bernie's temper? Honorable mention, maybe, but harping? No.

Why does Clinton have this supposed character flaw? Because powerful women are almost always seen as bitches.

Although I think a lot of the criticism of Hillary was expressed in a sexist way (I'm particularly referring to Democrats in 2008), I don't think sexism actually played a meaningful role in her downfall. Contrary to Obama's insincerely expressed opinion, she simply isn't likable enough. This has nothing to do with her being a woman, specifically. It's hard to describe exactly why this is true, but she simply lacks warmth, charm, humor and, yes, sincerity. She is the diametric opposite of Joe Biden, who's an incompetent clown, but somebody whom you'd love to have over for dinner.

And for the record, lots of male politicians have been hurt by a likability deficit: Mike Dukakis, George H. W. Bush (in 1992), Bob Dole, Al Gore, Howard Dean, John Kerry, Tim Pawlenty, and Scott Walker to name just a few off the top of my head.

 

[Trakar]

It's not the trend, it's the news media's and the GOP's narrative.

So national polls and even the averages of national polls )all of which clearly delineate a downward trend in HRC's favorability over the last 9 months are all made up and the result conspiratorial campaigns against her?

And on that note, as a female I can't help but notice, women are still judged on their clothes personality, while men are not.

Support your impugning assertion, please point out the posts I have made that focus on HRC's personality and speak of it negatively,...that said, I personally think that a candidate's personality, male or female, is an important and vital aspect of their ability to deal with many aspects of the job of POTUS.

 

[The Big Dog]

It's not the trend, it's the news media's and the GOP's narrative.

And on that note, as a female I can't help but notice, women are still judged on their clothes personality, while men are not.

Obama's memo on beating Clinton


I'm sorry boys and girls but that is typical sexist based attack.

Is the news media harping on Bernie's temper? Honorable mention, maybe, but harping? No.

Why does Clinton have this supposed character flaw? Because powerful women are almost always seen as bitches.

What a joke. No one has ever attacked a man based of his glaring character flaws?

Hillary is a congenital liar, so was her husband.

No one cares the she is a woman ( except female apologists). People do care that she is an incompetent liar.

 

[Meadmaker]

And on that note, as a female I can't help but notice, women are still judged on their clothes personality, while men are not.

We all dress alike. There's no point in judging us on our clothes, but personality is a big deal.

Is the news media harping on Bernie's temper? Honorable mention, maybe, but harping? No.

They harped on McCain's.

Why does Clinton have this supposed character flaw? Because powerful women are almost always seen as bitches.

Margaret Thatcher?

And, come to think of it, Nancy Pelosi? It's not something I heard about her. I'm sure that some people used the word to describe her, but it wasn't really part of the narrative describing her.

(Hmmmm... Maybe I'll google "Nancy Pelosi bitch" and see what happens.)

 

[Trakar]

...Support your impugning assertion, please point out the posts I have made that focus on HRC's personality and speak of it negatively,...that said, I personally think that a candidate's personality, male or female, is an important and vital aspect of their ability to deal with many aspects of the job of POTUS.

My apologies, as the quote I gave indicates, I did not read much beyond this, merely enough to see that it was some reference to Obama, who is one of the few Democratic politicians that I would prefer HRC instead of, still. Speaking of Obama, the only reason I used the reference, is because I remembered how much I hated that whole deal eight years ago,...it wasn't right then, and its not right now. My apologies to you, her and the rest of you. Now that I've read the rest of your post, I see the connection I missed, and I really wasn't thinking of. But I am now, and I am ashamed of my behavior.

 

[Foolmewunz]

Grasping at straws from both sides of the aisle. Progressives and radicals are joined by conservatives and reactionaries, both cheerfully and willfully mis-reading the current state of the polls.

Virginia: If you have to look that hard to find "news" that supports your beliefs, you're in trouble. If you look at their state senate/house, it's majority (= gerrymandering) Republican. All their top officials this year are Dem. Largely due to GOP scandals and stupidity. But in recent years it's gone GOP fairly often. Formally, there are supposedly 9% more Dems than Republicans on the voter roles, but it's fairly classified as a "purple" state.
Hillary at 80% is never matched by her overall numbers, even in her post-SoS honeymoon. It's the timing of the poll. The only Dem in the picture in April was Hillary. They had no one else they could even name. "Hillary's lost half her support" sounds great but it's not real. That was never "support" except in scare quotes. NO ONE WHO'S NOT RUNNING UNCONTESTED GETS 80% SUPPORT.

Meanwhile, back in reality. Fox News' latest poll on the national trend knocks out one of the out-liers and Hillary's up to an 18 lead. (There were two out-liers... one showing Hillary at an anomalous ten points worse than all the other polls, and one showing Sanders with support in the mid 30s... which he's never achieved in any other poll. The former was knocked of of the RCP current +18 calculation. The latter will be knocked out within the next week because they're both outdated. Hillary's +18.2 will look more like +20 when the slew of polls from this week come out.

The trending graph is steady and inching up. Bernie's isn't looking so good (steady and inching down). He needed a homerun in the debates and didn't get it nor did Hillary show anything that's going to cost her anything in support.

People supporting Bernie are doing so on principle. I am. But the reality is that I want to see the party move back towards the left and I think his candidacy helps that. Reality is that we aren't going to get who we want (me, because Eugene Debs is dead), and better be pragmatists and settle for Hillary's re-discovery of progressive themes. It worked (in the opposite direction) with Romney. There's still hope that the Democratic Party can be turned around (albeit not much hope).

My battle is with the monolith the New Republican Party has become. It's dangerous. And it is a monolith. The primary system has assured this. Romney could not win as a healthcare providing moderate and had to move over to the evil monolith side. A Republican in the White House would likely have the Senate and House (coattails and just an indication of the national mindset). This is a frightening thought. I'll support Billary and their corporatist Democrats over any GOP nominee. But I'll thank Bernie and the Bernie supporters if we can show them (and that includes the Obamas) that the party needs to get back to the left. A lot of ground has been lost in the past few decades.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Although I think a lot of the criticism of Hillary was expressed in a sexist way (I'm particularly referring to Democrats in 2008), I don't think sexism actually played a meaningful role in her downfall.

In her downfall?

Contrary to Obama's insincerely expressed opinion, she simply isn't likable enough. This has nothing to do with her being a woman, specifically. It's hard to describe exactly why this is true, but she simply lacks warmth, charm, humor and, yes, sincerity. She is the diametric opposite of Joe Biden, who's an incompetent clown, but somebody whom you'd love to have over for dinner.

And for the record, lots of male politicians have been hurt by a likability deficit: Mike Dukakis, George H. W. Bush (in 1992), Bob Dole, Al Gore, Howard Dean, John Kerry, Tim Pawlenty, and Scott Walker to name just a few off the top of my head.

Isn't likeable? Yeah, because powerful women start with the handicap of being unlikeable.

Of all those men you list only Gore with his stiff speech was harped on by the media for his presentation. The rest had single gaffes the media amplified, it had nothing to do with being constantly called unlikeable for no other reason than 'impression'. And with Clinton just like the disrespect Obama has endured, that 'impression' has everything to do with being a powerful woman.

I don't expect you or your right wing compatriots on this forum to take a serious look at that undercurrent of sexism. Davefoc admits he was worried about his attitude toward women. And I doubt he's seriously asked himself how much of his reaction to Clinton is based on his underlying assumptions about women.

Fortunately the GOP doesn't have a viable candidate.

As for Sanders popular movement, it's not mainstream enough like Obama's was. His heart's in the right place, but his grassroots rebellion is not likely to happen.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

So national polls and even the averages of national polls )all of which clearly delineate a downward trend in HRC's favorability over the last 9 months are all made up and the result conspiratorial campaigns against her?

All candidates subject to the kinds of attacks Clinton has undergone are going to drop in the polls. It was a natural adjustment of approval ratings.

Take the focus group CNN had on tonight following the debate. The group was split 50:50 Clinton/Sanders on the question of who they supported. But when asked who would win the primary, overwhelmingly they said Clinton. People know Sanders has an idealistic position that isn't likely to succeed.

Support your impugning assertion, please point out the posts I have made that focus on HRC's personality and speak of it negatively,...that said, I personally think that a candidate's personality, male or female, is an important and vital aspect of their ability to deal with many aspects of the job of POTUS.

You've been an avid Sanders supporter. I don't recall your posts standing out as being anti-Clinton. Did I say the Sanders supporters reflected the sexist undercurrent? I don't think I said that.

I think you are unrealistic believing the movement Sanders is trying to grow will succeed. I hope in the end the Sanders followers will continue the momentum Sanders is building. We need that enthusiasm. But it's not strong enough and Sanders isn't the leader who can grow it strong enough.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

We all dress alike. There's no point in judging us on our clothes, but personality is a big deal.

They harped on McCain's.

Margaret Thatcher?

And, come to think of it, Nancy Pelosi? It's not something I heard about her. I'm sure that some people used the word to describe her, but it wasn't really part of the narrative describing her.

(Hmmmm... Maybe I'll google "Nancy Pelosi bitch" and see what happens.)

Because all women are not subject to the kind of sexist attacks Clinton has been subjected to doesn't mean there isn't an undercurrent of sexism going on here.

That's like saying because MLK and Mandela are admired, Obama is not being subjected to an undercurrent of racism when he's been disrespected again and again by the right wing in this country.

Nancy Pelosi isn't running for an office the GOP is attacking. There's not been a viable GOP challenge to her position that I'm aware of. And I'm going to bet you don't know if Thatcher was subjected to an undercurrent of sexism by her opponents when she ran for office in the UK.

Keep in mind I'm talking about an effect, not outright sexism. But there's no way sexism isn't playing into this nonsense she's untrustworthy, and it's been dogging her likeability since the first interview she had as the first lady of Arkansas when she was asked if her career wouldn't interfere with her husband's.

 

[Darat]

What a joke. No one has ever attacked a man based of his glaring character flaws?

Hillary is a congenital liar, so was her husband.

No one cares the she is a woman ( except female apologists). People do care that she is an incompetent liar.

And you are demonstrating the same type of sexism SG was talking about.

 

[Darat]

And anyone who doesn't think Thatcher wasn't pilloried and faced extreme sexism for simply being a woman knows nothing about her political career.

 

[Giz]

And you are demonstrating the same type of sexism SG was talking about.

Huh, where was the sexism in that post?

 

[Darat]

Huh, where was the sexism in that post?

Not surprised you missed it, it is so ubiquitous that people hardly ever think about it.

"...Hillary is a congenital liar, so was her husband...".

 

[lionking]

It will end up Clinton vs clown, and Clinton will win. I can't wait to come back to this thread when her win is confirmed. There's enough exploding heads now, it will rival Krakatoa next year.

 

[Darat]

Looks like she is pretty much done - the nomination is in the bag for her.

 

[Giz]

Not surprised you missed it, it is so ubiquitous that people hardly ever think about it.

"...Hillary is a congenital liar, so was her husband...".

You'll have to explain the sexism in "Clinton A is a liar, just like Clinton B was", as I'm not seeing it.

 

[Random]

You'll have to explain the sexism in "Clinton A is a liar, just like Clinton B was", as I'm not seeing it.

It's defining a woman in relation to her family, rather than her personal accomplishments. A lot of people get twitchy about that. It can be tough to see because it is so common that people have gotten used to it. The best example in recent years would be the New York times obituary of noted rocket scientist Yvonne Brill, which opened by complimenting her cooking skills.

 

[Giz]

It's defining a woman in relation to her family, rather than her personal accomplishments. A lot of people get twitchy about that. It can be tough to see because it is so common that people have gotten used to it. The best example in recent years would be the New York times obituary of noted rocket scientist Yvonne Brill, which opened by complimenting her cooking skills.

"Cooking skills " is definitely sexism but referencing other family members isn't necessarily so (example "all Borgia's are corrupt ").
Brothers are compared (see ed and David milliband)... it ain't necessarily sexism.

 

[BenBurch]

Looks like she is pretty much done - the nomination is in the bag for her.

I didn't get that at all. It's still Hillary in the lead with Sanders closing fast. And that isn't going to change soon.

Sanders raised 1.2 Million during the debate itself, which itself has to set Hillary's teeth on edge.