Support NeoGAF

[Raven117]

Exactly. Democrats and the DNC need to learn the right lessons from this. Incredible her campaign got as far as it did with that asinine strategy without someone pulling her aside for a "come to jesus" moment.

I mean, I see the logic in what they did.... Playing by the usual rules of politics, by all accounts, trump should have sunk himself a million times over. I get it.

But damn she didn't give anybody in her party a reason to Vote FOR her. Was sexism in the minds of some voters? Yeah some for sure, but those folks probably don't vote democrat all too often anyway.

I sincerly hope the left gets it together. This blaming on everyone else makes it seem like they are playing the "victim." Bull shit. Hillary was the candidate for Democrats, one of the most powerful poltici parties in the world, and been in politics for 30 years, to then say "it was sexism"!" Is beyond weak and out of touch with their own base.

 

[DragonSworne]

Agreed. She was a terrible candidate with horrible history that her opponents targeted with ease, while the establishment and her supporters either deflected or said "it's not THAT BAD! TRUMMMP BAAAD"

Put Warren in that race and watch her go hard as a mother fucker.

This is why Hillary didn't become president. The lies that were spread around because she is a strong feminist woman have convinced people she is something she is not.

All due to her being a strong independent feminist woman.

 

[OfficerRaichu15]

Sadly there still is a sexism type mindset in the United States.
I live in Tenessee and this is very apparent with men as they would say a woman couldnt do that even though thats wrong on so many levels. I think Warren would win and do a great job and hopefully she will be the nominee in 2020.

 

[Zakalwe]

On GAF, the longest threads discussing 'sexism-related' issues are usually the court cases involving rape or news involving rape. Anything lower than that is waved off as 'oversensitivity'.

I'm too tired to pull up threads, but this is nonsense.

 

[SolidSnakex]

This is why Hillary didn't become president. The lies that were spread around because she is a strong feminist woman have convinced people she is something she is not.

All due to her being a strong independent feminist woman.

What did he say that was wrong there? The email situation more than anything else is what they hit her on this election. That was her own creation. She even admitted that it was a mistake. Now of course the Republicans made it into a much bigger deal than it was, but she was responsible for creating that issue in the first place. As legacyzero mentioned, it made it very easy for Republicans to pounce on that. And it's something that clearly bothered voters. That has nothing to do with her being a feminist.

She was also a terrible candidate. Being a good politician doesn't mean that you're a good presidential candidate. Kaine is another person that seems to be a good politician. But he'd be a disaster for the Democrats as a presidential pick. Just as he was a mess for them as a VP pick as he didn't bring anything to the ticket.

 

[Boney]

That'd why cabinet positions are a thing

Well actually they are to scratch backs but you get the point

 

[Skellig Gra]

Warren would have won easily.

 

[RexNovis]

The fact that people insist on spouting this "She lost because she's a woman" crap makes me seriously doubt they're actually going to learn anything from this defeat.

Whether or not you want to admit it she didn't lose because she was a woman. She lost because she was the most unlikeable candidate in damn near a century of presidential politics. Prior to her nomination she had serious likability and trust issues with the public at large which was only invited even more by the anti establishment rhetoric that clearly resonated throughout the election campaign. She was absolutely the wrong candidate to go up against such a galvanizing, fear mongering, anti establishment candidate. The DNC ignored the tide of public opinion when they nominated her as their candidate and they paid for it.

 

[Juken]

If we want to learn for next time, we shouldn't handwaive any criticisms of charisma/personality as veiled sexism. If I saw a Hillary rally or a Jeb speech, I'd lose interest in minutes and yet a Donald Trump rally or Michelle Obama speech would keep me watching.

I think Jeb and Hillary had a lot in common and Jeb would have similar problems dealing with a hypothetical email scandal if Trump was hammering away at him for it.

Sexism is unfortunately real and pervasive, but if we put to much blame for the loss on it we'll end up with Tim Kaine in 2020.

 

[Breads]

I thought about making a topic about this but two things people quickly forgot it seems is the effect the FBI investigation into Anthony Weiner's case had on her campaign as well as the partisan bullshit from Wikileaks giving Trump a massive and profoundly unethical advantage. There was nothing fair about this.

 

[Manmademan]

The fact that people insist on spouting this "She lost because she's a woman" crap makes me seriously doubt they're actually going to learn anything from this defeat.

Whether or not you want to admit it she didn't lose because she was a woman. She lost because she was the most unlikeable candidate in damn near a century of presidential politics. Prior to her nomination she had serious likability and trust issues with the public at large which was only invited even more by the anti establishment rhetoric that clearly resonated throughout the election campaign. She was absolutely the wrong candidate to go up against such a galvanizing, fear mongering, anti establishment candidate. The DNC ignored the tide of public opinion when they nominated her as their candidate and they paid for it.

exactly. The email business would not have stuck against a candidate that wasn't widely considered unlikeable and untrustworthy in the first place.

 

[Keri]

Research: Women who run for political office are seen as "power-seeking" and invoke strong feelings of dislike and disgust, in stark contrast to the way people respond to men.

NeoGAF: Sexism didn't have anything to do with it. Hillary Clinton lost because she's so unlikeable!

 

[Nothing1016]

The degree to which sexism played is up for debate. But it was most definitely a reason.

What's really unfortunate is the fact that charasima is more important then qualifications and experience.

 

[Manmademan]

The degree to which sexism played is up for debate. But it was most definitely a reason.

What's really unfortunate is the fact that charasima is more important then qualifications and experience.

we've known this since at LEAST JFK or Reagan. this isn't really a surprise.

people aren't voting for leader of the free world, they're voting for prom king.

 

[Averon]

Reagan, Clinton, GWB, and Obama. 4 of the past 5 presidents had charm, charisma, folksiness. Whatever you want to call it. They had that going for them, which made voters like and connect with them.

This isn't some new revelation about politics or voting behavior.

 

[Azzanadra]

Reagan, Clinton, GWB, and Obama. 4 of the past 5 presidents had charm, charisma, folksiness. Whatever you want to call it. They had that going for them, which made voters like and connect with them.

This isn't some new revelation about politics or voting behavior.

I would say all 5 of the past 5 presidents had that, even HW.

 

[broncobuster]

The fact that people insist on spouting this "She lost because she's a woman" crap makes me seriously doubt they're actually going to learn anything from this defeat.

Whether or not you want to admit it she didn't lose because she was a woman. She lost because she was the most unlikeable candidate in damn near a century of presidential politics. Prior to her nomination she had serious likability and trust issues with the public at large which was only invited even more by the anti establishment rhetoric that clearly resonated throughout the election campaign. She was absolutely the wrong candidate to go up against such a galvanizing, fear mongering, anti establishment candidate. The DNC ignored the tide of public opinion when they nominated her as their candidate and they paid for it.

While you're not wrong, it's hard to ignore how her career has been plagued by sexism. If an improbable, hypothetical scenario occurred where a Hillary Rodham ran without decades of slander and baggage, I think she'd have an easier time.

 

[eyeball_kid]

What's really unfortunate is the fact that charasima is more important then qualifications and experience.

More important? I don't think so. But I think a candidate's personality and charisma affects comfortability with that person. People see the President both as a caring steward for their concerns and values, and as an aspirational role model.

- Does this person seem trustworthy?
- Does this person project confidence?
- Is this person sociable and chill, aka someone I'd have a beer with?
- Can this person relate to me?
- Does this person actually care about my problems?
- Will this person lead with a steady hand?

Qualifications and experience and policy don't matter much if a person can't pass those questions. Now they don't have to pass all those questions, sometimes policy or experience can cover some of those. But they have to pass most of them. Americans are highly skeptical of politicians and always have been throughout our history, but they do want to be proved wrong.

 

[jtb]

Maybe the reason why she had all that baggage built up over the past 30 years dragging down her candidacy is because

at least partially

she was a woman

 

[NoblesseOblige]

Dense ass peeps still pretending her loss had nothing to do with her being a woman. Nobody is saying it's the ONLY reason she lost. But her entire persona has been crafted around decades of her having to adjust to pressures placed against her for being a woman in politics. And her persona is one of the things she's most attacked for. It's the same pressures every woman candidate is going to have to combat against. I just hope to see in my lifetime one that can break through all that BS and succeed. I thought this election would be it, but now with a sexist like Trump just legitimizing the same culture that holds women back from politics I'm not super confident I'll get to see the day.

 

[broncobuster]

Maybe the reason why she had all that baggage built up over the past 30 years dragging down her candidacy is because

at least partially

she was a woman

That's what I'm saying. I mean, she took the Clinton name and changed her persona explicitly for political reasons.

 

[captainnapalm]

I think sexism probably played a part with some people but a lot of her lack of likability was on her. She comes across as calculated and insincere.

Also, I think whoever was going to be the establishment candidate in this election was going to get it. We'd reached a bit of a boiling point in that regard. Bad timing for her. Aside from her hawkishness, she is not particularly worse than other politicians of her ilk.

 

[NimbusD]

Well, look at Trump's incoming cabinet, at best we have 1 woman and 1 black man. There you have your answer. White old men are mostly in power, they don't see it as a concern to bring women or minorities onboard.

 

[LegendofDragoonLives]

Hillary's fans have taken the L about as well as little children do when they don't get something they want or like Hillary did the night she lost. She had a terrible opponent and the entire media other than Trash News on her side. She also had a ton of money to spend whenever she needed it with the corporations on deck and had her own party straight up go against her competitor in the primaries. Trump spent a ton less than her and still demolished her. Going against Trump is the easiest lay up you can have, and she somehow managed to Javale McGee it & fucked it up.

Someone like Warren would have destroyed Trump in ways you couldn't even fathom. Hillary was just a huge loser and many people rightfully don't like her. She's such an unlikable candidate, a sexist, douchey oompa loompa with small hands destroyed her spending less money and practically the entire media against him.

 

[NoblesseOblige]

I think sexism probably played a part with some people but a lot of her lack of likability was on her. She comes across as calculated and insincere.

Funny thing is if she wasn't 'calculated' then people would be calling her too 'emotional' instead. It's a lose-lose for women candidates. Extra criticism is going to be levied against their personality regardless of the route they take.

Someone like Warren would have destroyed Trump in ways you couldn't even fathom.

Keep living in your headcanon, man. You've got absolutely 0 way to actually support this statement.

 

[Merc_]

Oh boy, what a thread. *pulls up chair*

Nothing like listening to a bunch of white and non black liberals talk about how it's harder to be a white women then a black man.

Yo, fellow black posters, get a load of all of this bullshit.

It's a different type of struggle. White men for violent when blacks wanted to vote, but when women wanted to vote, those men simply laughed at their faces.

Both are bad.

Personally, I'd rather be laughed at than FUCKING MURDERED but maybe that's just me.

 

[Keri]

Oh boy, what a thread. *pulls up chair*

Nothing like listening to a bunch of white and non black liberals talk about how it's harder to be a white women then a black man.

Yo, fellow black posters, get a load of all of this bullshit.

Personally, I'd rather be laughed at than FUCKING MURDERED but maybe that's just me.

Yeah, I don't think that's what's happening here. Being laughed at is definitely better than being murdered, but having rights and being represented in the White House would be nice too, you know. I'm not sure why women lamenting that sexism and a glass ceiling still exists, is somehow insulting to the struggles that blacks have endured.

 

[dramatis]

Oh boy, what a thread. *pulls up chair*

Nothing like listening to a bunch of white and non black liberals talk about how it's harder to be a white women then a black man.

Yo, fellow black posters, get a load of all of this bullshit.

Personally, I'd rather be laughed at than FUCKING MURDERED but maybe that's just me.

Why are you playing oppression olympics?

You can talk about how hard it is to be a black woman. Did you think about that?

 

[legacyzero]

Dense ass peeps still pretending her loss had nothing to do with her being a woman. Nobody is saying it's the ONLY reason she lost. But her entire persona has been crafted around decades of her having to adjust to pressures placed against her for being a woman in politics. And her persona is one of the things she's most attacked for. It's the same pressures every woman candidate is going to have to combat against. I just hope to see in my lifetime one that can break through all that BS and succeed. I thought this election would be it, but now with a sexist like Trump just legitimizing the same culture that holds women back from politics I'm not super confident I'll get to see the day.

Dense ass peeps also failing to realize that it can't be the only reason you vote for somebody.

And not one person have I talked to said "ughh fuck having a WOMAN in office!" This is where we are, Liberals. Agenda, arrogance, and assumption lost us EVERYTHING, this election. "YAS QUEEN!!" drowned out the brutal fact that Hillary is a SHIT candidate. PERIOD.

Now it's obvious that here's some level of sexism present here. But we're playing ourselves (like we've done for this entire fucking election season) that sexism was anywhere CLOSE to the main reason why.

I'll say it again- If America was ready to elect a Black Man to the office, TWICE, they're ready for a White Woman.

If it would have been a better, more populist candidate female like Warren, this shit would have lit up, and we'd be looking at a different situation.

 

[Keri]

Now it's obvious that here's some level of sexism present here. But we're playing ourselves (like we've done for this entire fucking election season) that sexism was anywhere CLOSE to the main reason why.

If a man with Hillary Clinton's failings would have succeeded over Donald Trump, then sexism is the reason she lost. I'm feeling more and more confident (and research supports) that a man with the same history and demeanor wouldn't have been so universally disliked.

I'll say it again- If America was ready to elect a Black Man to the office, TWICE, they're ready for a White Woman.

Again, historically black men have obtained political rights and achievements well in advance of women, including: The right to vote, representation in the Senate and now representation in the White House. Racism and sexism function in fundamentally different ways and Obama's election doesn't mean that glass-ceiling has been destroyed.

 

[dramatis]

Dense ass peeps also failing to realize that it can't be the only reason you vote for somebody.

And not one person have I talked to said "ughh fuck having a WOMAN in office!" This is where we are, Liberals. Agenda, arrogance, and assumption lost us EVERYTHING, this election. "YAS QUEEN!!" drowned out the brutal fact that Hillary is a SHIT candidate. PERIOD.

Now it's obvious that here's some level of sexism present here. But we're playing ourselves (like we've done for this entire fucking election season) that sexism was anywhere CLOSE to the main reason why.

I'll say it again- If America was ready to elect a Black Man to the office, TWICE, they're ready for a White Woman.

If it would have been a better, more populist candidate female like Warren, this shit would have lit up, and we'd be looking at a different situation.

Nobody said it was the 'only' reason, we're saying that sexism is undeniably a part of many reasons. But there are a buttload of guys saying that "It has nothing to do with gender, it's about _______" (insert ethics in journalism, terrible campaign, bad candidate, etc. etc.). There is not even a tacit acknowledgement that gender is a possible factor when it comes to women in politics—that's a little crazy coming from guys who would be the first in line to say that race plays a huge part in individuals' lives.

Equating a black man's victory to a white woman's victory is sort of denying the idea that gender politics exists. Because race and gender are not the same. Your assertion is that because we have a victory for race, then a victory for gender is proven. Yet none of our presidents have ever been female. Participation of women in Congress is not close to parity with their share of the population.

If your assertion is correct, then why was America ready for black men to be able to vote, post Civil War, but America was so ready for women (or you can say white women) to vote that they didn't get the right to vote for another 52 years?

Would the logic work if you said, "If America was ready to elect a Black man to the office, TWICE, they're ready for a Black Woman"? Because gender has such little effect?

GAF being male dominated means race gets a lot of sympathy and discussion, but gender is often ignored or dismissed as an issue. That logic to me is unsound because while they are two different kinds of oppression, overall they are both oppression and deserving of some kind of remembrance when it comes to our perceptions and at the very least acknowledgement. But somehow even liberal males, regardless of race, have this aversion to acknowledging they might be sexist or that sexism is involved in some way when it comes to discussing gender problems.

 

[Keri]

GAF being male dominated means race gets a lot of sympathy and discussion, but gender is often ignored or dismissed as an issue. That logic to me is unsound because while they are two different kinds of oppression, overall they are both oppression and deserving of some kind of remembrance when it comes to our perceptions and at the very least acknowledgement. But somehow even liberal males, regardless of race, have this aversion to acknowledging they might be sexist or that sexism is involved in some way when it comes to discussing gender problems.

Watching and listening to liberals dispel the notion that sexism exists in politics or played a role in this election, is almost more depressing than the loss itself. This is how we can be certain it will be another 50 years, before we see a woman President.

 

[Merc_]

Why are you playing oppression olympics?

Because that seems to be one of the main points of the thread. If you guys want to play that game then we might as well go all in.

You can talk about how hard it is to be a black woman. Did you think about that?

We sure can! However, nobody in here in trying to claim that being a white woman is harder than being a black woman. We've have had a number of posts implying that to be the case for white women vs. black men though.

Again, historically black men have obtained political rights and achievements well in advance of women, including: The right to vote, representation in the Senate and now representation in the White House. Racism and sexism function in fundamentally different ways and Obama's election doesn't mean that glass-ceiling has been destroyed.

Ah, yes. If said black man managed to not get killed in the process of doing those things, it was quite the achievement!

 

[Keri]

We sure can! However, nobody in here in trying to claim that being a white woman is harder than being a black woman. We've have had a number of posts implying that to be the case for white women vs. black men though.

No one is saying that. What you're seeing are people responding to the suggestion that Obama's election means sexism in politics is dead. It doesn't, because sexism and racism are fundamentally different and have different effects. I mean hell, Obama's election doesn't even mean racism in politics is dead, yet multiple people have used this as an example that sexism wasn't an issue.

Also, what you're seeing is, what feels like, multiple people telling women they should just accept what they have, because others have it worse. This is true in a lot of ways, but its not true when it comes to representation in the White House. It is undeniable that black men have obtained representation in politics, well in advance of women. Women shouldn't have to prove that they have it worse in other ways, to make this a valid issue and we shouldn't have to compete in an oppression Olympics, to have this recognized.

 

[CrispyBoar]

LOL.

If you think it's easier in the US to get by as a black man than a white woman, you may want to reevaluate your position a little.

And yet a man who was black has been elected president twice while a woman who was white had not only failed to beat a black man in the primaries back in 2008, but had also failed to beat a man who's white in the race for presidential election just now.

Anything is & can be possible, not impossible. And I say this as someone who's black himself.

 

[andythinkpad]

Most qualified candidate ever? LMAO

Yeah this is on the same level of dumb as "yesss queen".

Want to know what Hillary did when she was secretary of state? Google image "russian reset button."

 

[Aristion]

A Black man is still a man.

Are you suggesting white women have have it worse than black men?

 

[CrispyBoar]

Trump similarly has a shady past, and focused a lot on his opponent's negatives. Furthermore, the changes Trump proposed were outlandishly stupid and insane compared to Clinton's. Yet, this stuff hurt Clinton more than Trump, despite Clinton weighing in a lot more qualified and transparent. When do we recognize the double standard?

Even so, Trump's reputation has already been ruined whatever he's president or not. Not only does his negative reputation affect him, it also affects his family as well.

Even when he doesn't get impeached or anything of the sort, most people aren't going to remember him fondly once he's out, not even when he dies.

 

[Audioboxer]

Why are you playing oppression olympics?

You can talk about how hard it is to be a black woman. Did you think about that?

When the left and liberals start to eat themselves in house bickering often exists to try and ascend the ladders to who is the most oppressed. It can actually be quite disgusting at times. The disbelief of someone not attributing Hillary's loss due to her being a woman has some desperate to say this is proof white women have it harder than black people because of Obama.

Its a disingenuous way to try and play an oppression card. In stead of realising the struggles of each minority, but being honest enough in this topic to admit Obama smoked Clinton not because he's a man or black but because he was one of the best candidates the Dems have put forward in such a long time. His campaign was stellar as well.

He won because he was far better than Clinton and it had nothing to do with identity politics.

 

[Cesare Borgia]

Warren would have won easily.

I seriously doubt a liberal senator/college professor from MA was going to win where he or she needed to win this year (rustbelt). Warren is not a good politician, she's not good on the stump, she's awkward in interactions with voters, etc. Nope.

 

[Morrigan Stark]

Absolutely appalling to see so much denial and dismissal of the blatant sexism Clinton faced not only during the campaign but throughout her entire fucking life. There goes any remaining notion that GAF was all that progressive, I guess.

Also impressive how people aren't even reading the article and are utterly dismissing the experience of other female leaders across the world. Actually no, nevermind; ignoring women's voices and dismissing their experience is par for the course.

If a white male ran an identical campaign, that person would be president-elect. And by a good margin.

And there's the truth bomb that everyone is going to ignore.

Best post in the thread so far.

Kerry ran the same damned campaign in 04, gained the same amount of votes and lost.

Kerry wasn't running against Donald Trump. And his platform was not as progressive and liberal as Hillary's.

Also HRC has been shat on for being a woman like her whole fucking life.

Indeed. A lot of revisionist history in this thread.

no, she didn't. she lost because she was Hillary Clinton, a candidate with abysmally low favorability ratings, a ton of baggage, and lacking the ability to connect enough with the public to combat those things.

Whether or not you want to admit it she didn't lose because she was a woman. She lost because she was the most unlikeable candidate in damn near a century of presidential politics. Prior to her nomination she had serious likability and trust issues with the public at large

....Why do you think she was considered so "unlikable" and why her baggage, which was milquetoast run-of-the-mill-politician stuff that never seriously harmed the career of any other male politician, carried so much weight for her??

Jesus fucking christ open your eyes.

The fact that people insist on spouting this "She lost because she's a woman" crap makes me seriously doubt they're actually going to learn anything from this defeat.

The fact that people keep denying the sexism she faced makes me seriously doubt we're going to ever progress in this regard.

A male candidate can have tons of flaws and still be electable and considered "likeable".

A female candidate must be 100% pristine and flawless or else she has no chance to be president.

Hell we clearly saw it. Her experience, her intellect, her platform barely mattered; her minor flaws, which paled in comparison to her opponent's, were enough to make her lose to Trump.

All things which were likely influenced by sexism. Imagine if a black man ran and the public response was: "Well, we like his policies, but we didn't vote for him, because we just don't trust him and feel comfortable about him." That's essentially what happened here with Clinton. Her policies (which were largely the same as Bernie Sanders and Obama) were liked, but the people just didn't feel good about her...for reasons.

Research: Women who run for political office are seen as "power-seeking" and invoke strong feelings of dislike and disgust, in stark contrast to the way people respond to men.

NeoGAF: Sexism didn't have anything to do with it. Hillary Clinton lost because she's so unlikeable!

Can't be repeated enough.

Oh boy, what a thread. *pulls up chair*

Nothing like listening to a bunch of white and non black liberals talk about how it's harder to be a white women then a black man.

Yo, fellow black posters, get a load of all of this bullshit.

Personally, I'd rather be laughed at than FUCKING MURDERED but maybe that's just me.

Enough with the oppression Olympics. Btw, are you saying women don't often get murdered for being women? Because, in case you were unaware, violence against women is a thing. There's a reason for the Margaret Atwood quote, "Men are afraid women will laugh at them. Women are afraid men will kill them."

 

[LegendofDragoonLives]

Keep living in your headcanon, man. You've got absolutely 0 way to actually support this statement.

The support is the number of votes in this year's election being so low. No one likes these shitty options that were given to them. Like I said, you would have to be an unlikable loser of epic proportions to have so many things in your favor and still manage to fuck it up to an old oompa loompa like Trump.

 

[Jenov]

Watching and listening to liberals dispel the notion that sexism exists in politics or played a role in this election, is almost more depressing than the loss itself. This is how we can be certain it will be another 50 years, before we see a woman President.

Welp, that's how long it took women's suffrage. History repeats itself Shame really, would have been nice to see that trend bucked.

 

[RexNovis]

....Why do you think she was considered so "unlikable" and why her baggage, which was milquetoast run-of-the-mill-politician stuff that never seriously harmed the career of any other male politician, carried so much weight for her??

Why are you acting as if her likability was solely a repercussion of "baggage" and "milquetoast run-of-the-mill-politician stuff?" The truth of the matter is she has no charisma whatsoever and comes across not only as incredibly dispassionate but also disingenuous. Your refusal to see that there are other factors at play here besides her gender is ironically more sexist than those of us trying to explain why she had major issues as a political candidate. You can make an argument that the issues that plagued her campaign were a result of a prevailing sexist mindset in contemporary culture but her general temperament, total lack of charisma, established political and commercial ties along with her insider status were major driving factors as to why she lost to the candidate to whom all these weaknesses were strengths. Stop claiming that sexism is the one and only cause of this end result. Refusal to acknowledge other factors at play will mean the nomination of similar tone deaf future candidates for the party.

I understand people are upset and disappointed to see the first female presidential candidate lose but its important to note that she did not lose because Americans are all sexists. She lost because even with those of us who aren't sexist she was a very very hard sell thanks to the current disapproval ratings for the political elite and other numerous factors.

The fact that people keep denying the sexism she faced makes me seriously doubt we're going to ever progress in this regard.

Nobody is denying she faced sexism we are saying that sexism was not the solitary driving factor behind her loss.

A male candidate can have tons of flaws and still be electable and considered "likeable".

A female candidate must be 100% pristine and flawless or else she has no chance to be president.

Hell we clearly saw it. Her experience, her intellect, her platform barely mattered; her minor flaws, which paled in comparison to her opponent's, were enough to make her lose to Trump.

Likability has less to do with being "electable" and having "flaws" and more to do with passion and charisma. One candidate exhibited those in excess whereas the other candidate failed to resonate at all on either front. Her gender has far less to do with this than her general personality and lack charisma.

Take for example Michelle Obama. She has incredible presence and charisma when giving speeches and talking to the public. As a result her favorability ratings are THROUGH THE ROOF. According to you if she ran against Trump she wouldn't have won because she is a woman and I disagree with that whole heartedly. You are acting as if Hillary Clinton's loss somehow signifies that no woman could win and me and many others are arguing that is a load of nonsense. This loss means a candidate with favor-ability, trust-ability and likability issues could not win against such a galvanizing candidate. In no way do all women currently in politics suffer from those same issues. You honestly think other female candidates would have as much difficulty with the female vote as Clinton did? I seriously doubt it. Stop focusing on a single aspect of Hillary Clinton's candidacy and open your eyes to the multitudinous other factors at play.

 

[HighResTomato]

Interesting how people are telling black people "enough with the oppression olympics".

Trump gets elected and white liberal America loses it's mind, people wan't to run to flee the country, others contemplate suicide, fear being lynched.

This is how black people have been living in America since it was born, under Republican rule and Democrat rule. White liberals now fearing for theirs rights and freaking out while they are still in a position to fight it shows how pathetic their mindset is.

Don't worry your liberal courts and judges will protect your rights. But don't tell black people to "drop the oppression olympics" because you experienced a piece of what they have endured for centuries.

 

[Averon]

Interesting how people are telling black people "enough with the oppression olympics".

Trump gets elected and white liberal America loses it's mind, people wan't to run to flee the country, others contemplate suicide, fear being lynched.

This is how black people have been living in America since it was born, under Republican rule and Democrat rule. White liberals now fearing for theirs rights and freaking out while they are still in a position to fight it shows how pathetic their mindset is.

Don't worry your liberal courts and judges will protect your rights. But don't tell black people to "drop the oppression olympics" because you experienced a piece of what they have endured for centuries.

When the left and liberals start to eat themselves in house bickering often exists to try and ascend the ladders to who is the most oppressed. It can actually be quite disgusting at times. The disbelief of someone not attributing Hillary's loss due to her being a woman has some desperate to say this is proof white women have it harder than black people because of Obama.

Its a disingenuous way to try and play an oppression card. In stead of realising the struggles of each minority, but being honest enough in this topic to admit Obama smoked Clinton not because he's a man or black but because he was one of the best candidates the Dems have put forward in such a long time. His campaign was stellar as well.

He won because he was far better than Clinton and it had nothing to do with identity politics.

Fucking signed. I'm quite frankly disappointed at some of the stuff I'm reading here.

 

[katsubento]

Tulsi for President.


And Hillary didn't lose because of her gender. We will have a female President. Probably next Election

 

[Napalm_Frank]

Considering she got the most votes and lost only because of a few winnable swing states I think being a woman hardly is some huge barrier in the elections.

She was a bad candidate, just like Trump.

 

[Gnome]

Considering she got the most votes and lost only because of a few winnable swing states I think being a woman hardly is some huge barrier in the elections.

She was a bad candidate, just like Trump.

Right. Any time you win the popular vote but lose as many swing votes as she did, something was definitely fucked on campaign strategy.


Edit: If anything, it shows that the US is definitely ready to accept a woman as president. Hillary just isn't going to be the first.

 

[jurgen]

keep denying the sexism she faced makes me seriously doubt we're going to ever progress in this regard.

A male candidate can have tons of flaws and still be electable and considered "likeable".

A female candidate must be 100% pristine and flawless or else she has no chance to be president.

Hell we clearly saw it. Her experience, her intellect, her platform barely mattered; her minor flaws, which paled in comparison to her opponent's, were enough to make her lose to Trump.

People are going to interpret those flaws in different ways and I don't think her gender has much of anything to do with this scenario.

I would agree with you in females pursuing leadership positions in other scenarios but I think this scenario is so vastly different because of Hillary Clinton. This is a candidate who has been at the top or close to the top of the public eye within the political sphere for 24 fucking years - First Lady, Senator, Sec State, Candidate, etc. Any flaws are going to be exacerbated by that. The fact that she and her party have treated her as heir apparent for the Presidency since 2007 until Obama came in and stole the spotlight has left a bit of a bad taste in people's mouths too.

People you are more familiar with are usually judged harsher. That's part of the reason that people didn't like Al Gore when he ran in 2000. In a presidential campaign when your opponent is running a bizarrely populist outsider message, all of this experience, intellect, and platform can potentially become flaws. Gender isn't all that relevant.

So yeah, never mind that she did little to refute the simplistic, angry, populist message of Trump in the campaign. Never mind that little to anything seems earnest in what she does. Never mind that her campaign and the DNC did very little to court the Sanders supporters after the primaries and motivate the base. The straw that broke the camel's back is obviously that she's a woman.

Hillary Clinton isn't most women. She appropriately got just a few more votes than Romney.

Edit: If anything, it shows that the US is definitely ready to accept a woman as president. Hillary just isn't going to be the first.

This. The Democrats need to start cultivating younger talent other than Cory Booker, especifically females. They've let the heir apparent step on the necks of everyone else for the last eight years. The GOP has wisely used all those state elections they one while Obama was in office to find some younger blood to do their deeds. I'm scratching my head as to who the dems could pick up as a "mainline" party candidate in the near future.