As many of you know, I’m an enthusiastic Barack Obama supporter. I have never been so excited or inspired by a candidate — or, really, any leader — in my life, and I view this election as an historical opportunity — maybe even a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity — to not only save my country from the disaster wrought by Bush and Cheney, but fundamentally change how my government interacts with the rest of the world, and how it works for me and my fellow Americans.
Knowing all of that, I’m sure it will come as no surprise that over the last 10 weeks or so, I’ve gone from respecting to feeling sorry for to actively despising Hillary Clinton.
It’s over. She knows it’s over. It’s been over for almost three months, but she’s been moving the goalposts and cynically and cravenly pandering to voters in a way that’s not only insulting, but is embarrassing. John Cole frequently says that he can’t believe he ever supported Bush, and I can now join him in saying that I can’t believe I ever supported, defended and believed in the Clintons.
The thing about all of this is that, with a Clinton victory in the primary about as likely as jumping off the roof of your house and landing on the moon, it’s become clear that this whole thing isn’t about Democrats or beating McCain (who is inexplicably running for Bush’s third term) or saving our country from the catastrophic failure of the Bush years. No, it’s all about her. It’s about her ego. It’s about refusing to admit that she did her best, but voters (except those encouraged by Rush Limbaugh to cross party lines and fuck with our primary) have pretty clearly said “No thanks. You’re a good senator, but we want something different now.”
It’s been crystal clear for weeks, yet she refuses to put party and country over personal ambition and drop out of the race, forcing Barack Obama to not only run against McCain and the Media, but also against her. It’s particularly galling, because she can only win if her campaign can force Democratic superdelegates (one of the worst creations in the history of politics) to tell millions of Democratic voters — many of them first time voters who, like me, finally feel truly inspired by someone — to go fuck themselves.
It’s driving me crazy, and I hope that someone sits her down with a calculator so she’ll make this primary that is just strengthening McCain — who, I feel obligated to point out again, is running for Bush’s third term. That would be George W. Bush, the most universally hated president in American history.
At times like these, when it would be easy to despair, I find comfort in humor, like this post I saw on Reddit this morning: Hillary Clinton: The Psycho Ex-Girlfriend of the Democratic Party.
It’s 2:31 AM. The Democratic Party is sleeping peacefully when it hears
its phone buzz on the night stand. It rolls over and sees “Hillary” on
the caller ID. It pauses briefly, considering pushing “END” and not
dealing with this shit tonight. The thought is appealing but the
Democratic Party knows that if it doesn’t take this call, another one
is only minutes away.DEMS: …Hello?
Hillary: Hey baby.
DEMS: C’mon Hillary. Enough with this.
Hillary: Don’t you get it? You NEED me.
DEMS: No, I don’t. It was fun while it lasted but I’m with Barack now. I made my choice, it’s done.
Hillary: You can’t really mean that. How can you say that after all the good times we had?
DEMS: To be honest, I started hanging out with you because Bill’s pretty awesome.
Hillary: But I’m just like Bill!
DEMS: No, you’re not. Bill is charismatic, inspiring, and gets me really good weed.
Hillary: Fuck you. You’re elitist!
DEMS: I’m going back to sleep.
I hope that, after the crushing defeat in North Carolina and few thousand vote “victory” in Indiana, the undeclared superdelegates (again, the absolute worst idea in the history of politics) will respect the will of the people and commit to Obama, so we can all focus on introducing the real John McCain — not a Maverick, not a nice guy, not an honest guy, not a regular guy, not substantially different from George W. Bush in any meaningful way — to the American people.
And allow me to just head something off right now that’s already come up on Twitter: I’m not sexist. This isn’t sexist. That’s a stupid straw man, and if you try to make that claim, I will point and laugh at you.
Update: Here, let me try this one more time for the humorless and professional victims out there, who seem to have shown up in a flood today: Gender, race, sexual orientation, things that make us different that we don’t choose . . . they just don’t matter to me. At all. People are people and identity politics is stupid.
I found this post hilarious because it satirized the behavior of an ex-girlfriend/ex-boyfriend/ex-robot who just refuses to accept that it’s over. I’ve had a psycho ex-girlfriend. My friends who are women have had psycho ex-boyfriends. In all cases, the behavior has been exactly like the behavior satirized in the post I linked. Get it? Get it? I’m talking to you now, people without a sense of humor: It. Is. Not. About. The. Gender. It. Is. About. The. Behavior. The Behavior. The Behavior.
Everyone get it now? Am I spelling it out simply enough for you? Let’s all say it together. Use a puppet if it helps: It’s about the behavior. It is not about the gender.
That’s the whole point, that’s the humor, that’s what inspired me to link this post. If you’re unwilling or unable to understand this . . . well, anything I’d say now would waste even more of my time, so I’ll go back to pointing and laughing.
Final update:
Well, I’m just going to throw up my hands here. I’ve made it as abundantly clear as I possibly can that I don’t care about Clinton’s gender, and I don’t have a problem with women. What I do care about
is watching a woman I once respected degenerate into a Republicanesque Karl Rove monstrosity in a Quixotic effort to destroy a candidate I believe in. What I care about is beating John McCain in November so we can start to put our country back together.
If you want to boycott me, go nuts. As a life-long activist, I understand and totally support the concept of voting with your pocketbook and voting with your feet.
But stop telling me who I am and what I think and feel. I know what I was thinking when I wrote this, and it’s not what many of you have accused me of.
I’m not going to waste any more time on this, and I’m locking comments on this post. May I suggest that you take whatever energy you’d use to tell me what a terrible person I am and use it to put some good into the world instead.
Writing to your congresscritter and demanding an end to the war would probably be a good place to start.
Discover more from WIL WHEATON dot NET
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I just read on CNN that she infused another six mill into her campaign last month.
From a Canadian perspective, they are both the same candidate, and I’m not sure too many of us could actually list 5 reasons why the two of them are different, rather than the female/black thing.
Hillary’s experience speaks directly to her abilities as a poltician. She’s hung out with the big boys, and seems to be able to navigate those waters comfortably.
Obama is just so new. I think I read that he’s one of the few non-governors to seek the office? ( I could be wrong about that.)
I spoke with a few guys at a restaurant near my house, who are from Southern Carolina, and Rev. Wright spooked them so much that if this guy has direct access to Obama, they feel that isn’t right. On the other hand, when I explained to them that Obama is as much a Christian as Pat Robertson (who is a nut imo.)
Either way, Obama or Clinton in the Whitehouse is far greater than a McCain. Of course, if this bomb goes off and the Democratic party can’t pull it together to support a candidate, there’s always Jeb left to take a stab at La Maison de Blanc. (Canada is French and English lol)
It’s of huge interest north of your borders; y’all just do politics so fancy that we can’t help but be drawn in. That, and you are the most powerful nation on earth, and everything you do affects us in one way or another.
Just my random thoughts.
And Wil, what’s wrong with being sexy?
Oh…sexIST…
*Hint: Smell the Glove*
Kudos, Wil. Well said for the most part. I would say, though, Rev. Wright’s influence in Obama’s life for the past 20 something years has caused me some concern. Don’t get me wrong; I’m not crazy enough to believe Wright speaks for Obama or that Obama is anything close to Wright, or that they’re interchangeable. I’m just saying their is some just cause for concern. However, it’s not enough to prevent me from voting for Obama (as I already did in the Massachusetts primary). As you said, Wil, Obama is a refreshing change — a change this country desperately needs. If not now, when? If not now, can it ever be? I’m counting the days until Bush and Cheney are gone. Can’t get here fast enough. I just hope, as you say, Psycho Hillary wakes up (or someone wakes her up) and she bows out so the real campaign to reclaim our country can begin.
Let’s be honest…everyone who runs for President is motivated in large part by ego. That goes for Barack, too, even if he does espouse some laudable ideals.
I used to be a Hillary supporter, and while I still think she’d do a fine job (especially compared to the last 8 years), I do feel like Obama could be a great President. Her obvious pandering the last few weeks, and especially the support of the gas tax holiday, which is just so ridiculous I can’t even stand it, has definitely worn down some of my respect for her.
Finally, good point about the superdelegates. Can we get rid of them and the electoral college now?
Keep telling it like it is, Wil! I wanted to like Hillary, but she’s made it impossible for me. Now I’m crossing my fingers and hoping for an Obama/Edwards ticket. I’m just full of hope like that.
As for you being sexist: When people look at the world expecting to see evil (or -isms), they will find it wherever they look. Not because it’s always there, but because they frequently misinterpret the facts to support their own expectations.
Accusing people of trumped up wrong-doing does no favors to those who suffer at the hands of of real evil.
Folks who know what’s what know you’re no more a chauvinist than you’re an R.O.U.S.
(um… who put this soap box here?)
Clinton put the nails in the coffin for me when she proposed repealing the national gas tax. Talk about pandering…
You won’t be shocked by this… but I’m not an Obama fan.
I think those that support him often lose perspective. Yes, Hillary is driven by ego. As is Barack Obama.
And the Rush Limbaugh effect? Negligble at best… but more likely non-existant.
If Barack Obama could manage to win working-class white voters (those Reagan Democrats), this race would be long over.
Finally… hasn’t Barack Obama already told millions of voters in Michigan and Florida to go fuck themselves? Can’t have it both ways. Hillary wanted there to be a new election. Barack said No.
Don’t you ever ask yourself why? Does it matter to you?
Re: Gas sales tax holiday
How many times did Barack Obama vote in favor of that while in the Illinois Senate?
It doesn’t matter how good a president she would be. A key to this political system is knowing when to step away, knowing when your done, knowing when to give the gracious concession speech.
Hillary apparently can’t see that line.
I love political debate that doesn’t descend to foaming-at-the-mouth raving after two seconds. Good on ya for providing a space for that, Wil.
I visited that blog and read that post (and added the blog to my Netvibes page) based on your Twitter about it. I commented there that “Getting Wil’d” is the new “Getting Slashdotted.” I’ve been aware of SD for ages, but still don’t visit it with any regularity. You are quickly becoming my source of choice for, well, choice reading/thinking material. I guess that seals it – I’m a geek, not a nerd.
Thanks for clarifying that.
I’m considering calling you a sexist, just to say Wil Wheaton pointed me. Would feel damn special!
Is there a possibility for a Frenchie to vote Obama? I’ve been wanting to do that for months.
Great post, Wil!
Just linked to it from the brand-new FB group: “Hillary Please Quit!”
Come join us!
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=27501959736
Thanks!
If Ron Paul had anything better than a snowball’s chance in a cyclotron, I’d vote for him. Failing that, I’ll vote for Obama. Or Zippy the Pinhead. Or myself. š I’m afraid Simon & Garfunkel were right–“Laugh about it, shout about it/But when you’ve got to choose/Any way you look at it, you lose.”
Oh. In re HC: Psycho Ex of the DMC: LOL & ROFL.:@()
Is it not sexist because it’s mysogynistic instead?
Is it not sexist because it’s funny?
Is it not sexist because it’s a metaphor that speaks to you?
So. Those were all questions. Here is a statement:
“Dude. You don’t get to decide what’s sexist.”
Here’s a reason to think that it MIGHT be sexist. You can g’an and point and laugh, but I’ll take this seriously for a second just to see where it goes:
The metaphor evokes a trope in sexual politics, that of the irrational girl who cannot accept that a relationship is over. Labeling, categorizing, pigeon-holing someone in this way “he’s a geek, she’s a slut, he’s a pig, she’s cow” is at once appealing to a fragment of truth, and also making the target controllable.
If they are controllable, they are marginalizable. And they can be dismissed. The problem with controlling and dismissing Hillary using a trope from sexual politics is that it moves her from the realm of discourse and debate into the realm of sex (as in “getting it on”). And labeling her as batshit crazy in an ex-girlfriend sense means that she is not only sexualized, but her sexuality can be controlled.
And that’s the heart and soul of sexism.
But I can understand if you didn’t really want to engage anyone on this. It is a funny piece, and sometimes maybe we want to hang on to the things we like even though someone else might think they’re inappropriate.
Like insisting that Michael Jackson is innocent because “Thriller” was an awesome album.
There. I talked about Hillary, sex, and Michael Jackson in the same comment. I might just frame this one.
Hillary is crazy, in a “politician who can’t accept that the country doesn’t want her leading it” kind of way. Not in a “girl who can’t believe no one wants to screw her”. Funny as the comparison is, if someone thinks it’s sexist I’m not sure they’d be wrong.
Florida and Michigan, Florida and Michigan… please, enough already.
Mrs. Clinton had NO problem whatsoever with disqualifying her precious 2.5 million voters, back when she was the “inevitable” nominee last September. The candidates signed an agreement to support censure, and they all agreed not to campaign in either state.
Both Florida and Michigan were warned of the consequences of breaking the DNC rules. They broke them anyway. Now – “these children have the NERVE to look surprised” when the DNC does what they said they would do, and disqualifies them.
And then, in January, everything she agreed to in the cold light of inevitability gets tossed out the window when Mr. Obama mounts a serious challenge for the nomination.
Three months later, she’ll nobly accept a Michigan win (where her rival wasn’t on the ballot) and a Florida win, all in the name of “fairness” for those poor voters. Oh, and make sure to leverage those much maligned delegates to spin a higher delegate count required to clinch the nomination. By coincidence, it happens to justify staying in this lost race.
Cynical and despicable.
Mrs. Clinton, for the last three months, has been showing a striking resemblance to another politician who has a propensity for “moving the goalposts”. No names, but I’ll give you a hint – “success in Iraq.”
Your ‘sexist’ comment reminded me of something that happened a few months back. I got to be a credentialed blogger for the California Democratic Convention. It was pretty rad. Anyways, I’ve never been a Hillary supporter. I have a round-about track to Obama (Richardson -> Edwards -> Obama), and throughout that track, my mom tried to talk me over to the Hillary side. I always demurred.
Finally, during the convention, she whacked me with the idea that it was the Hillarys, the Barbara Jordans, the Debra Bowens who made it possible for me as a woman to be able to stand and shout for change… and that I shouldn’t turn my back on her.
So basically, I should vote for her BECAUSE I’m a woman.
My wonderfully smart, educated mother, said this. My mother, who raised me to be a strong, educated woman and who also raised me to be a good feminist said this.
I was completely and totally shocked and offended when I read that. I finally told her that I thought she and my father had raised me well enough to make my own decisions. I made mine, thanks, and I’m not trying to talk her out of hers, so we needed to agree to disagree.
But I’m still furious that someone should insinuate that because I’m female I should support Hillary. I will be so excited the day we elect our first female president. I will be standing on the rooftops yelling and screaming. HOWEVER. I don’t think Hillary is the right choice. I’d like to have the first female president be the first female president because she got there on her own merits… not because her husband happened to be elected President himself. and, well, she really isn’t making a good name for herself at the moment.
My dad said two years ago (!!) that the Democrats needed to decide if they wanted to win or if they wanted to run Hillary. I agreed then and I agree now. Hillary needs to get out so that we have a real chance come fall.
AND.
One of my favourite quotes from the convention back in march: “There is no such thing as MY Democrat or YOUR Democrat. They are OUR Democrats.”
Something for ALL of us to remember this fall.
I disagree with you across the board on this. Which is pretty darned rare.
I was a Hillary supporter, but (like most people who have posted) have gotten off the bandwagon as time as gone by.
Wil didn’t write about Rev. Wright, but as other commenters did…I’m a music director in a United Church of Christ (UCC) church in the Bay Area. The thing I love about the UCC is that they emphasize unity only in big theological points, and therefore, the various churches in the denomination wind up with vastly different ways of living their faith. Within a given churche, an individual’s faith is allowed to be more, well, “unique” than perhaps in other denominations that demand more in terms of strict dogma. Also, unlike other more conservative denominations (where the Pastor can sort of wind up as the undisputed mouthpiece of God), the UCC pastors don’t tend to be on that pedestal. It’s more of a “we’re all on this journey together – how can we help bolster your faith ?” rather than “BELIEVE OR PERISH.” Getting hit on the head with dogma hurts. š
I can very easily believe that Wright didn’t espouse his controversial views in the majority of sermons, and that Obama was a member of that church (and under the pastoral care of Wright) for reasons not related to those statements and views. I don’t believe or buy everything my pastor says, but I still respect her as my pastor. I believe that a similar situation developed for Obama..and anyways, it’s now a fairly moot point, as he’s cut Wright out of the picture.
/hope that wasn’t too preachy or anything
//just annoyed that what most people now know about the UCC is the bat-sh*t crazy crap
Nicely put, Wil.
I’m one of those Indiana voters that tried to make the difference. Didn’t happen, but I like that it was at least close.
I’m just amazed that all the people I know and or follow online are fully behind Obama. Not one person I know is for Hillary…. aside for my wife. My wife is supporting her for sexist reasons and accuses me of not supporting her for the same.
I honestly don’t care if a person is black, white, green, man, woman, and/or a flaming hermaphrodite. What I care about is what they do… or at least promise to do in this case.
Let’s hope Rush Limbaugh and his stupid antics don’t ruin our drive for a positive change.
I sincerely believe that if the tables were reversed, people would be whining about Obama’s pandering and lack of honesty. You do what you have to do to get elected. Nobody in politics is above that. If they are, they don’t win.
Sorry to be so blunt, but one election cannot change human nature.
And, speaking of moving the goalposts, I thought the primary season went until early June. Are we supposed to end the game early just because it looks bleak for the underdog? Can we please at least let the entire country vote first? Be patient.
Besides, we’ve got plenty of time to work on McCain. The election season is *long* and the public has a very short memory. (And, I’d argue, this race is actually making Obama a better candidate. The mud Hillary slings is *nothing* compared to what the Republicans will be throwing at him).
Funny how you are so strident in believing in a political party that came up with “the absolute worst idea in the history of politics”.
Oh, and I agree that Shrillary is doing the GOP’s job for them. Had she bowed out months ago (like after Super Tuesday), most of the American public wouldn’t even know about the complete SNAFU and political machinations of the SuperDelegate “process”. Now the Democrat power brokers are exposed as elitists and subverters of the public will.
See ya in November!
On the other hand, Hillary is keeping McCain pretty much out of the election news altogether, and garnering the Democrats a whole ton of free press on the nightly news. Maybe that’s the strategy?
-Jim
Hillary is crazy, in a “politician who can’t accept that the country doesn’t want her leading it” kind of way. Not in a “girl who can’t believe no one wants to screw her”. Funny as the comparison is, if someone thinks it’s sexist I’m not sure they’d be wrong.
It’s only sexist if you believe that the psychotic behavior in question is exclusively a female trait, rather than something that men are entirely, totally, sadly capable of as well — and if that IS what you believe, then the sexism is in your own eye, not in Wil’s post. The focus of the term is on the psycho behavior, not the sex of the person performing it.
Well, I happen to work for a feminist organization (note: not saying which one ’cause I’d really like to keep my job), and I sure as hell am not voting for Hillary in the primary.
Yes, she has faced sexist attacks for years for being a strong, smart woman in a position of power. Yes, the media coverage of her campaign has been rife with sexism. Yes, she’s getting more grief than a similarly qualified and positioned male candidate would have gotten.
That doesn’t make her the best candidate.
She’s also massively divisive, aligned with corporate interests, and clearly willing to run a dirty campaign.
Even if I could have set all of that aside, attempting to usurp the will of the voters by going over our heads with Superdelegate votes to win the nomination is enough to make her not my candidate. Haven’t our presidential elections been tampered with enough already?
Say what you will by no redneck I have ever met or known will vote for either Obama or Clinton.
Mark my words, McCain won this election two months ago when the Democratic raced narrowed down to these two.
i went to an all girls high school that is so amazing and supportive of women and feminist to the CORE.
i spoke there this past friday and was actually kinda (but pleasantly) surprised to find that the whole campus is firmly in the Obama camp.
as one bright eyed 7th grader said to me about why she liked Obama:
being a strong woman is about integrity and knowing who you are. i think there should be a woman president, just not this woman.
Disagreeing with a woman because of her politics is fine. Relating that disagreement to her suitability as a sexual partner is sexism. Point and laugh all you like. It won’t change the nature of the comment. When is the last time that you heard someone comment on what a poor boyfriend McCain would be?
Follow your own advise and stop being a dick.
BTW, I happen to support Obama, too. But I support him because I like his handling of the issue with that pasture of his, not because I’m threatened by Clinton’s vagina.
It’s only sexist if you believe that the psychotic behavior in question is exclusively a female trait, rather than something that men are entirely, totally, sadly capable of as well
It’s sexist if the person writing thinks the behavior in question is distinctively female, which is a much lower bar.
Me, I think gendered insults against female politicians are out of line. And yeah, I think “psychotic ex-girlfriend” is a gendered insult.
The psycho ex-girlfriend metaphor has nothing at all to do with sex and I really wish you guys would stop suggesting that it does.
It has everything to do with behavior and not one goddamn thing at all to do with sexuality. I am, quite honestly, surprised to see so many people reading that into it. Did you even read the entire linked post?
“Psycho ex-girlfriend” and “psycho ex-boyfriend” don’t read as equivalent terms to me, Wil. And I don’t think this piece would read the same way if the target were a male politician.
You may disagree. You may be right. But I did read the whole post, and I do think it has more than a little to do with Clinton’s gender.
By the way, Wil, the post you quoted ends with the Democratic Party calling Hillary a “crazy bitch.” Doesn’t that set off at least a little red flag for you?
I’m not trying to start a riot here, but I don’t think you’re giving McCain enough credit. The guy has taken positions opposing much of is party when it couldn’t help him, and I believe that he puts America’s interests ahead of the Republican Party’s.
I feel the same about Obama, incidentally, and think he would do a good job if elected. I just prefer McCain’s policies.
I started out this campaign in the Hillary camp. Wil, when you came out for Obama I started looking into a lot more carefully and not believing the things I was hearing from Hillary. Then when Randi Rhodes came out for Obama and I started hearing her reasons and I look into them, I switched to Obama. He’s been very honest and inspiring. Inspiring is something I haven’t seen in a politician since Bill in 1992. Hillary doesn’t have it and she won’t. She’s a DLC Democrat and that’s not always good. My parents are still in her camp and can’t believe I switched. My politically agnostic hubby is firmly in the Obama camp now, too.
The gas tax holiday? Someone has to pay that tax and to think the oil companies won’t raise the price of gas to cover the tax is a pipe dream.
To the people talking about Reverend Wright:
Read this op-ed: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/04/opinion/04rich.html?_r=1&em&ex=1210046400&en=1ab063165842695f&ei=5087_&oref=slogin
or better yet, watch this video:
http://sociologicalimages.blogspot.com/2008/03/commentary-on-obamas-speech-and-racial.html
I think they both raise important points.
While most politicians running for president have big egos, most know when to face facts.
On the Republican side, Rudy Giuliani got out of the race after he contested one primary. He saw the writing on the wall. Mitt Romney still had a shot at passing McCain when he bowed out, but he saw the writing on the wall and didn’t want to damage his own party’s chances.
Even Mike Huckabee, who stayed in the contest until McCain crossed the delegate threshold, kept his campaign relatively clean of attacks against McCain after Romney dropped out. He was offering himself as a conservative option, rather than dragging McCain through the mud.
On the Democratic side, John Edwards surprisingly dropped out less than a week before Super Tuesday. He could have easily coasted another week, but he saw the writing on the wall and decided to let all those Super Tuesday voters focus on the top two candidates.
In each case, those politicians could have listened to their egos and their yes men, and continued on. But they didn’t. At the end of the day, they remembered that there is much more at stake than their personal ambition.
Wil said, “… over the last 10 weeks or so, I’ve gone from respecting to feeling sorry for to actively despising Hillary Clinton.”
While I’ve never had much respect for her, this is the most concise (and accurate) description of the past two months of the primary I’ve seen yet.
“Psycho ex-girlfriend” ABSOLUTELY has sexist overtones; I can’t believe that anyone could say otherwise. It’s language written by men for other men. If Edwards were still in the race, can you imagine a piece describing him as a “psycho ex-boyfriend”?
You wouldn’t call George W. Bush an “evil bitch,” and you wouldn’t call Hillary Clinton a “crazy bastard.”
George W. Bush has often been called an overeager cowboy, and Hillary Clinton was recently compared to Annie Oakley. It sounds weird to reverse those labels, because of the gender.
Gender is part of our language. That doesn’t make it sexist.
errr… I obviously do not know how to post links. let me try this again
http://sociologicalimages.blogspot.com/2008/03/
commentary-on-obamas-speech-and-racial.html
And sure, it’s ridiculous when Hil supporters equate “criticism of Hillary” = sexism. But SOME criticism gets its frission from sexism (saw an anti-Hillary “Bros Before Hos” t-shirt the other day), and I think this humor piece plays on that a little too closely.
I was born and raised in Arkansas and Bill Clinton was governor most of my young life. Would it surprise anyone to find out that the general population of Arkansas greatly disliked Hillary, but they LOVED Bill so much they put up with her?
I truly believe she is not giving up because she put up with all his “extra curricular activities” to ride his coattails to this very place. I think she planned decades ago to be the first female president and will not stop until forced.
I will most likely vote Libertarian since that philosophy most closely resembles my own.
Anyone who can make our dollar stronger has my vote….however I doubt anyone can or will even really try.
Good going Wil. You are pervasive, coherent, and put forth a good argument. But I am still going to vote for McCain. Bill
You said it! I mentioned to my husband on the phone just today that I think for Hillary, it’s that she can’t bear to lose her place in history as the first female president. Nothing else matters.
Please please please let this turn out with Obama in the White House come January.
The good thing is that if this happens, everyone will know how it feels to be a Democratic voter in Florida and Michigan. Barack Obama didn’t think my vote should count, so he can’t count on my vote. Hillary thought it should count only when it was clear she’d win. Either way, go fuck yourself, Democratic presidential candidate. I’m not voting for you, and I’m willing to bet that you’ll lose the election by not winning either Florida or Michigan.
Like a psycho ex-girlfriend, she’ll sneak into the party’s closet and tear up its close, slash its tires, and burn its house down.
You could be looking at 1968 all over again. You could be looking at what should have been an easy win for the Democrats turn into a shocking Republican win because of one candidate’s lifelong ambition.
Remember, it’s clear Hillary has stacked her entire life for this chance at President. Her cadre were able to further derail Kerry late in 2004 so that she would have this chance. Obama will have another shot at President. He’s young. Hillary doesn’t have much as much time left.
@Andrew:
No, actually, the term is “psychotic ex-girlfriend”. That trope is singular, individual, and brings to mind a certain type of WOMAN, not a certain type of person. Contrast with “psychotic ex-boyfriend”, a term which does not bring to mind the sheer neediness and desperation of the term with respect to women. In the boyfriend case, being “psychotic” implies violence and aggression.
I never contended that guys can’t be psycho, and psycho in precisely the way that the joke-maker alludes to in the ex-girlfriend scenario. That’s not even the point. The point is that a term can be sexist even if it CAN be applied to the other sex. The term “stupid bitch” can be used against men as well as women, but that doesn’t make the term itself any less sexist.
No, actually, the term is “psychotic ex-girlfriend”. That trope is singular, individual, and brings to mind a certain type of WOMAN, not a certain type of person. Contrast with “psychotic ex-boyfriend”, a term which does not bring to mind the sheer neediness and desperation of the term with respect to women.
I think you just made my point for me: sexism isn’t inherent in the phrase, it’s inherent in the reader.
The sexism business makes me literally tired. And I say this as a confirmed feminist. One who chuckled at the “psycho ex-girlfriend” idea, in fact.
*Of course* sexism has been a big issue in this campaign. But rushing to label everything as sexist just trivializes the real problems we have in this country.
It is indeed dragging the party down further. I hope she stays in till Denver.
It’s supreme and delicious irony that it took this long in the process to plainly show that Hill is obviously the stronger candidate but can’t hope to win the nomination.
McCain’s got this one in the bag (provided he doesn’t drop dead).
+10 DKP for the use of “craven.” Awesome.
Hillary is a)just uninspiring and b)unelectable.
The Clinton baggage will sink her if she gets the nomination.