Comments on: Why Some Feminists Aren’t Supporting Hillary

By: pmorlan

pmorlan — Sat, 26 Jan 2008 15:12:25 +0000

I’m a feminist and not a Hillary supporter. My problem with Hillary has nothing to do with her personal choices in her life. I think it’s her business how she handled the Bill thing and none of my business.

My problem with Hillary concerns her strong link with corporate America. I think she will sell us out in a heartbeat for their money. I don’t think she will move the ball forward very much because her primary interest is her not the American people. If she can benefit she will support issues that help women & minorities but if it doesn’t benefit her I don’t think she will spend much political capital to fight.

This campaign really reinforced my already negative opinions about how she & Bill operate. They’ve had their supporters on TV knee capping Edwards and the race vs. gender war that I believe they started is tearing our Party apart. And both the Clinton & Obama campaigns don’t seem to care what they are doing to the Party unless it threatens their chances to win.

Another thing that bothers me about Hillary is the statement she made about seating the Michigan & Florida delegates. I think the time for supporting the voters was when it was first discussed. I think all the candidates should have pushed back against not seating the delegates but they didn’t. And now Clinton is trying to have it both ways. I think it shows a lack of integrity to try to capitalize on this now. And make no mistake, that is exactly what she is doing. She doesn’t give a hoot about those voters, she only cares that she gets the delegates. I’m actually very suspicious that this might have been the plan all along. And that’s another problem, I don’t want to be that suspicious of our nominee. I think we should all be skeptical of any nominee but not suspicious.

By: deandra

deandra — Sat, 26 Jan 2008 10:54:54 +0000

The notion that women vote in a monolithic block is ridiculous. We don’t do anything monolithically. I’ve never voted because of someone’s genitals in my life. Hillary thought she ‘had it in the bag’ with women. She doesn’t. If you look at her professional life, everything she’s ever done is BECAUSE OF Bill. He’s been her ‘leg up’. I find her false and pandering. I also find her to be a big whining baby when not given what she wants or expects. I like the baseball analogy as its applied to Hillary: she arrived on third base and spends most of her life bragging how she hit a triple. She’s had her 15 minutes in the sun. I wouldn’t vote for Hillary, if she were the only one running.

By: xargaw

xargaw — Sat, 26 Jan 2008 03:29:02 +0000

I am almost Hillary’s age and have been a firm supporter of feminism going on four decades. Marriage relationships are personal and her decision was hers alone. Personally, since she had the financial resourses to care for herself and her daughter, I can’t imagine being able to be in the same room with Bill once his affairs were known to her. He obviously does not respect her or women in general. I suspect ambition is her ddriving force behind all her decisions. I have been disgusted by her recent campaign methods and have no respect for her or Bill. I voted for him twice, but knowing what I now know would like to see both of them fade out of politics. I am a life long Democrat that has become an “anybody by Hillary” voter. I won’t vote for her under any circumstances. The fact that she is a women is unimportant to this race. Integrity and judgment are what counts.

By: dude

dude — Sat, 26 Jan 2008 02:43:34 +0000

And as to Hillary and feminists: it seems to me that many women simply do not think Hillary is much of a feminist after putting up with Bill. I know that sounds shallow, but I have met a number of women who seem to come down on her for being steadfast and not vindictive or something of a kind where Bill is concerned. When they see her plainly relying on him now, it isn’t viewed as “just desserts” or “penance”, but “necessary evil”. But he is still “necessary’, and that bugs people.

By: dude

dude — Sat, 26 Jan 2008 02:39:51 +0000

I think Feingold is suspicious, but I don’t know if even knows Edwards. Did they mix in the Senate?

Feingold has a lot of things to offer to the progressive wing, and he has made some principled stands—but I don’t exactly trust him either. He does not have the wherewithal to gather a regional or national constituency. Edwards did and so he does. Feingold airing his suspicions loudly strikes me mostly as jealousy, not good judgement.

By: dude

dude — Sat, 26 Jan 2008 02:36:36 +0000

I think the last viable woman to run for office was Libby Dole and she did not run as though she had to be a guy. And we know what happened there.

By: PetePierce

PetePierce — Sat, 26 Jan 2008 02:04:29 +0000

I’m talking about the general mam. What else would I be referring to–crossover votes? It’s pretty hard to respond when 95% of my posts are inappropritately blocked. FDL has a paranoid nerve plexus when it comes to the Clintons. They don’t want any perjorative facts up and if they know you’re not a Clinton worshipper they block you or delay you way past EPUville.

I would have thought they had more tolerance since there are so many headlines purporting to be fighting to save the constitution that’s being shredded on Monday 28th in the Seante. Guess not.

By: cinnamonape

cinnamonape — Sat, 26 Jan 2008 01:01:43 +0000

I think that Feingold simply doesn’t TRUST Edwards. I thibnk he wondered where this “progressive” version of Edwards was when he needed his support in the Senate. I think Feingold must be thinking…”this guy had all the background features to be my ally back in 2000…son of a mill-worker, a torts lawyer who took on major corporations in liability suits, etc. I think that Feingold simply wonders about what it may be that has led to Edwards reversals on so many issues.

http://mydd.com/story/2008/1/18/02424/5737

Has Edwards changed his “spots”? Has his career and his work accomplishments in substance since leaving the Senate demonstrated a sea-change in position? Certainly Edwards did great things in supporting a Foundation that provided scholarships to underprivileged Carolinans wanting to attend UNC. Since he’s left the Senate, he’s stumped about how Congress should create tuition waivers to those students who do Vista-like volunteer work.
But then again he has worked as a corporate lawyer for a major hedge fund (Fortress Investment Group), and has investments in many of their sub-prime and off-shore investment groups.

Perhaps that’s why Russ considers Edwards more than a bit of an enigma. And Russ isn’t blithely throwing his support to Hillary or Obama, either.

By: pluege

pluege — Sat, 26 Jan 2008 00:46:57 +0000

SHORTER FEMINISTS: ‘the woman candidate isn’t feminist enough for me so I’m OK if a man is elected.’

Sure would have been nice to hear: ‘I can’t support HRC because I don’t like her policies’. Not a bunch convoluted, self-absorbed gibberish most likely arising out of jealousy.

I’d love for a minority or a woman to be president, but first they need to have the best policies. Unfortunately this round, that’s neither Obama or Clinton - a couple of inside pandering corportists.
.

By: Katherine Graham Cracker

Katherine Graham Cracker — Sat, 26 Jan 2008 00:11:55 +0000

wow
according to some just because Faye Wattleton a woman with an great reputation who has accomplished great things and is well respected
is a sellout just because she doesn’t agree with you

I think based on her experiences and accomplishments I respect her choices
I guess you think Delores Huerta is sellout also

nice respect for woman and their right to make choices