Feminist Rule: We Must Vote For Clinton

The Nation: A Rift Among The Sisterhood Surfaces As Many Feminists Show Support For Obama

(The Nation)  This column was written by Jessica Valenti

---

At a Washington reception last month for a well-known national women's organization, the chair of the board asked Maureen McFadden, a communications executive with the organization, which candidate she'd voted for in the recent primary. McFadden, hoping to avoid an awkward moment, answered that she'd voted by absentee ballot. The board chair pressed ahead, "Did you vote for a boy or a girl?"

"I paused for a long time," says McFadden. "Then I told her I voted for a boy - I wasn't going to lie." McFadden, who has worked on women's issues for twenty years, says the room went silent and the board chair chastised her. "It was clear that I had betrayed feminism by voting for Barack Obama. It became obvious - if you didn't vote for Hillary Clinton, you were less than a feminist and only marginally a woman."

It's no secret that Clinton's candidacy has caused waves in feminist circles. Media outlets from the Wall Street Journal to the Washington Post have reported on the rift between feminists voting for Clinton and those supporting Obama. Blogs have weighed in, and feminist listservs are aflame. As a feminist blogger and writer, I've been watching the tension unfold -- but with no great surprise. This election "rift," far from being a new wrinkle in a feminist utopia, is a fairly predictable response from a movement already disunited. The Clinton-Obama divide has shone a spotlight on feminism's dirty little not-so secret: the movement's longstanding power imbalance, in which a few organizations and leaders decide what counts as an acceptable platform. Indeed, feminist support for Clinton - coming from the usual suspects like the National Organization for Women (NOW), EMILY's List, Gloria Steinem and former Ms. magazine editor Robin Morgan - has been organized, strong and far-reaching. What's been less than savvy, however, is the reaction some feminist Clinton supporters have expressed toward their Obama-endorsing cohorts. I've seen Obama supporters called everything from naïve to traitors to the cause, and the majority of this ire has come from mainstream professional feminists.

For example, in a widely disseminated article that inspired responses ranging from effusive to horrified, Morgan diagnosed young women who support Obama as "eager to win male approval by showing they're not feminists (at least not the kind who actually threaten the status quo), who can't identify with a woman candidate because she is unafraid of eeueweeeu yucky power..." Gloria Feldt, former president of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, penned a piece for The Huffington Post in which she warned women they would be missing out on a historic moment if they didn't vote for Clinton. "Will women give this Moment away freely once again?" she pondered.

The intensity of feminist infighting has even prompted a call for reconciliation. "Morning in America: A letter from feminists on the election" in last week's Nation, written by feminist heavyweights, called on women to "refocus on the bigger picture." But the letter - written after a breakfast of blueberry muffins served on "the good china" at Steinem's house, with nary a woman under 40 in sight - represents the exact problem it purports to seek an end to: the narrowing of feminist viewpoints. Moreover, feminists make a mistake in prematurely calling for unity. Instead of glossing over the problem with the rhetoric of sisterhood or having an elite group declare the dispute settled, let's own the conflict and use it to make real progress.

Rebecca Walker, a founder of the Third Wave Foundation, says, "There are no new issues on the table. What we see in this election is the zenith of the decades-old struggle between women of different sensibilities." Walker believes today's election friction is simply a consequence of mainstream feminist leaders and organizations not listening to critiques from younger women, women of color and grassroots activists about the exclusivity of thought within the movement. "The issue at hand has to do with [institutional] feminism's inability to respond adequately to the claims brought against it," Walker says.

One of these claims is that mainstream feminists have ignored an "intersectional" approach to feminism - one that takes class, race and sexuality into account - in favor of one that focuses on sexism above all else. NOW executives, for example, campaign for Clinton in Ohio told women voters that sexism is "the worst of the isms."

In a segment on Democracy Now! with Steinem, Melissa Harris-Lacewell, an associate professor of politics and African-American studies at Princeton, took this single-issue mind-set to task: "Part of what, again, has been sort of an anxiety for African-American women feminists like myself is that we're often asked to join up with white women's feminism, but only on their own terms, as long as we sort of remain silent about the ways in which our gender, our class, our sexual identity doesn't intersect, as long as we can be quiet about those things and join onto a single agenda."

Amanda Marcotte, a former John Edwards campaign blogger and now an Obama supporter, says there's "been some pressure from feminist Clinton supporters who feel that no reason to vote for Obama outweighs the possibility of the first female President." Marcotte, however, is quick to point out that "plenty of female Clinton supporters report being bullied by liberal men who support Obama."

Herein lies the reason so many of us are loath to discuss intrafeminist problems publicly. We know that Clinton supporters are taking heat from sexists - whether at home, at work or from pundits who relish talking about Clinton's "shrill" voice or whatever thinly veiled misogyny of the day is on cable news. We don't want to provide the backlash more fodder. We also know how hard our feminist foremothers fought to be here and how important the moment is - and we want to be a part of it. I certainly do. But not at the expense of what I believe is best for women, and not just because a movement that assumes it knows what's best for me tells me to.

No matter what Clinton's fate, feminist election tensions will start to fade - but we shouldn't let them, no matter how many calls for solidarity are issued by movement leaders. Instead of the group hug approach, let's focus on tangible goals: fostering youth leadership, working from the margins in and using intersectionality as our lens - instead of just a talking point. Let's use this moment, when our politics and emotions are raw, to push for a better, more forward-looking feminism.

[hillaryin08]

Obamma is leading in Elected Pledged Delegates

Obamma is leading in the Popular Vote

Obamma has won the most States

The Clintons will steal the Nomination away from Obamma and the Libs will give them a pass.

[staycalm]

Ms. Valenti, it is no mysogeny to say that Hillary has a shrill voice. I am a woman and I can verify that she has a shrill voice and that voice of hers would still be shrill if it were on a man, a child or a parrot. If you like her so much, get her a voice coach because her voice is irritating. Secondly, something as important as who our President will be during in an age of Terrorism should not be reduced to voting for a candidate based on ***, color or what breakfast cereal they prefer. Please get over this feminism issue...it has little to do with the greater problems we are facing at this time in history.

[bgddy58]

There have been several feminist proponents supporting Mrs. Clinton that have been been posting on CBSnews.com lately; some of them quite vocal and aggressive in their pro-CLinton responses.

What I can''t understand is, what is Hillary''s attraction for women, and for feminists in particular? The rote answer of "because she''s a woman" is simply not good enough. It seems to me (as a man, I guess) that as a woman supporting Mrs. Clinton you are sending a mixed message to other women. Wouldn''t you prefer (and be better off) by supporting a female candidate who can run on her own solid list of accmoplishments, who is not beholden to her husband for political support, and can and will be her own voice in the White House. By supporting a concenus-building woman who does not alienate 50+% of her own party, not to mention the Republicans?

I would love to vote for a woman candidate for President of the United States - just not THIS woman. I can think of several women who come to mind. Govenor Granholm of Michigan is just one example of a woman whom I would enthusiastically support. I think that women, and Democrats in general, can do better.

[blondelar7]

In Hillary Rodham Clinton we have not only an intelligent, articulate woman but a candidate superior to any of the men in either the Democrat or Republican contest. The sniping, sexist comments toward Hillary are posted everyday on practically every website. I am so disgusted by the sexism; if the man in the empty suit(Obama) becomes the nominee I will definitely leave the Democratic Party. I have had it with the anti woman chorus; especially from the knows nothing under 30 crowd!

[basswomen]

I think this is a ridiculous article. If your going to interview NOW, the National Organization for Women, a feminist group, well yes it is obvious you will get feminists. I think this is ridiculous because it implies that only feminist would vote for Hillary and well educated, writers would vote for Obama. I know far to many people with degrees voting for Obama, its just part of the lies created to make educated people feel like they should vote for obama, Why? He doesn''t have experience, he has questionable alliances, and not much of a tract record, so its obvious this is just bull. I hate this, mostly because people are sheep and want to follow whoever their friend or neighbor is voting for, because they do not have their own brain. Are we voting for him because he is black? Change? What can he change without experience in the white House? This election should be about who has experience, not what gender or race the candiates are.

[crater7]

FEMINIST RULE: WE MUST VITE FOR CLINTON.

HMMMMM;

BLACK RULE: WE MUST VOTE FOR BARRY.

[basswomen]

Ladies, your talking about her voice being shrill. What Should she should have a manly voice? I cannot believe a women who has spent her life working for a better America, when she could have just had fun with her money, should be deserving of this kind of trash talk. Now your saying if you vote for her your what???? If you support her on this article you are called a feminists.. so if we vote for Obama that is more normal? You guys are sickos....We don''t have to worry about Obama becoming president, because McCain can even beat him.

[bgddy58]

Basswoman wrote: "This election should be about who has experience, not what gender or race the candiates are."

What, precisely, constitutes Mrs Clinton''s so-called experience? I keep asking, but no one has specifically answered the question. How does being First Lady and hosting dinner state parties, organizing the White House easter egg hunt, and shopping while on visits to foreign countries consitute experience???

As I have asked before: how many policy decisions did Mrs. CLinton make while hew husband was President? How many times did SHE speak with the crisis center in the middle of the night while hew husband was President? How many troops did she commit to combat while her husband was President?

With all due respect, Mrs. Clinton''s is less than most of the staff that worked for her husband during his two terms. I am not saying that that makes her unqualified to be President. I am suggesting that her self-professed and so-called "experience gap" is basically fluff. Hillary is probably as experienced than Obama. If she just weren''t so damned unlikeble...

[basswomen]

Blacks apparently are voting for Obama because he is black. So....you all think we should vote for Hillary because she is women?...not... I am voting for her because she has the experience..the end. If Obama was a white women I would not vote for him..If Obama was a black women I would not vote for Obama. If Hillary was a black male with experience I would always vote for the experience because we will lose once more to the republicans..,. if we do not go with experience..I guess everyone loved Bush''s voice or was it his pronunciation? Oh gosh maybe his beady eyes...oh he is a man so we are not suppose to notice that.. Only in women...

Only SOME women and blacks DO put gender or race above everything else. If you offended by this article, you should also be offended by statements like "oh Obama will win Mississipi because its 37% black"

[lawyertom1]

While there is no question that gender solidarity is playing a role in the votes for Clinton, most of the women with whom I have discussed the election point to their personal experiences with discrimination re pay and advancement, hostile work environment, etc. as the reason that they are voting for a capable and intelligent woman. The Democrats are blessed with two capable and intelligent candidates. However, as always, simplifications (like feminist solidarity) to explain complex voting patterns are just that, ludicrous stereotypes often having little or nothing to do with reality.

[vastr-wcon]

.
The voters have spoken and it is now time for Hussein to withdraw and end his divisive campaign. It has been fun watching the antics of his frat-boy and girls-gone-wild supporters, but it is now time to take the presidential contest seriously.

Responsible Dems must focus on the fact that Tony''s Rezko''s partner-in-crime cannot win the presidency by winning in small states with insignificant Electoral College votes, like Vermont, Iowa, Idaho, Wyoming and North Dakota. To win the presidency, it will take winning the Hillary states of California, Ohio, New York, Michigan, Texas and Florida.

The Hope-Change, Change-Hope, Hope-able Change and Change-able Hope BS and assorted plagiarisms of Hussein (along with his theft of most of John Edwards'' ideas) has been a delightful distraction from reality. The last thing the Dems need is another gas bag loser like Kerry that can only spout hollow platitudes. Intellectually mature Democrats must get serious and work to nominate and elect a capable president.

/

[luvcomments]

Bravo to McFadden !!! Voting for a woman just because she is a woman is the height of ignorance and an embarrassment to any feminist movement. Even women are supposed to have a brain to play with and you don''t vote for somebody because of their gender. It''s disgusting to me that people place such a low value on their vote. Maybe they shouldn''t have been allowd to vote, after all :) P.S. I''m a woman, one of those older white ones that the "experts" assert are all pro-Hillary. I''d love to vote for a woman that I trusted, one who didn''t mislead people, twist facts, try to find something negative about her opponent because she couldn''t find enough positive about herself, and generally behave like the same-old, same-old WA DC rats. I''m voting for Obama.

[gkc99]

Yes, but who will the masculinists vote for? Whom is the National Organization for Men recommending?

Oh wait, we can''t have one, that would be SEXIST!

[magnetrack]

What I see is many people voting for a weak, inexperienced,talk-and-no-action (Afghan committee) no-resume, con-artist (Iraq vote), man over a strong, experienced, tough, likable, capable, dedicated woman. The reasons for this backwards vote are chauvinism, GOP brainwashing and the typical Democratic tendency toward eloquent dreamers.

[bgddy58]

Wow - let''s see if it works both ways:

What I see is many people voting for a weak, inexperienced,talk-and-no-action (Armed Services committee) no-resume, con-artist (Iraq vote), woman over a strong, experienced, tough, likable, capable, dedicated man. The reasons for this backwards vote are chauvinism, GOP brainwashing and the typical Democratic tendency toward eloquent liars.

Gee - works for me!

[jacqueliner3]

The first goal of feminism ought to be to educate today''s youth about the battles that women like Senator Clinton fought against institutionalized sexism and misogyny. You can''t know where you''re going until you know where you''ve been. It saddens me that young women are so anxious to turn their backs on the movement that made so many opportunities available to them and made this country a less hostile and safer place for all women. We have to educate our children about what the world used to be like for women to ensure that it does not become that way again. Those who don''t know history are doomed to repeat it.

[hdinsight]

Clinton is the most qualified. Gender/Race/Religion did not sway my vote. Those voting based on "likeabilty" sound like high school students electing a prom queen. Ms. Clinton will not be riding of the back of a convertible waving at a stadium filled with onlookers. She will turn around the economy, end the war in Iraq and increase access to affordable health care. Isn''t that enough of a reason to vote for this candidate?

[dsmi2726]

You should vote for who you think is best qualified. I wonder why I can''t find one story that isn''t putting Hillary down and building Obama up.

[jamurphy4]

You don''t have to be a Fem. to vote for Hillary.. I''m a 70 year old man, and she''ll get my vote.. I want someone that''s smart, tough, experienced, and willing to pull that trigger if it comes to that.. Hillary fills that bill just fine.. It''s time to give a Women a chance.. The turkey we have in the White House right now, isn''t worth a warm dump.

[tibu987]

Wow! That women will vote for Hillary because she is a woman and more "qualified" in their minds leaves me wondering.
Have the women checked on all the scandals that have followed Slick willie and Hillary all the way from Arkansas?
Where all the qualifications and experience comes from that is attributed to Hillary also escapes me.
Here, you have two really sleazy lawyers from Arkansas, the second most backward State in the U.S. who make their way to the White House, one of the great faux pas'' of all time.
Please ladies, a woman will, one day, be elected to the presidency of the U.S., Hillary, however, does not deserve to be the one.

[paris1969]

I would rather CBS not use information from "The Nation" ... it is always so useless and elitist.

[worldcomment]

I am a feminist who is voting for John McCain because he will spend the 85 cents per male dollar that I''ve earned in the most appropriate manner. If Senator Clinton would stop trying to turn the United States into a socialist country I might consider voting for her, but I can rest comfortably knowing that day will never arrive.

[nell1200]

Does Jessica represent "third wave" feminism? No. It''s not standing on the shoulders of the past, it''s grinding her heel on their forehead. She writes this campaign "shone a spotlight%u2026 the movement''s longstanding power imbalance, in which a few organizations and leaders decide what counts as an acceptable platform." First, did I miss a club meeting, and um, as opposed to Jessica and her buds telling people what is acceptable?

Ah it becomes clear. Her essay is no call for unity, she%u2019s negative on Clinton - but her real target is "mainstream feminists." Clinton is just a happy accident along the path of selling her core product: blame. She has a beef with feminists, even when they offer a letter of reconciliation. "But the letter - written after a breakfast of blueberry muffins served on "the good china" at Steinem''s house..%u201D A blogger noted, %u201Cwhat does Gloria''s china have to do with anything, Jessica? %u201C Bear in mind, she is creating a product. So, don''t look to her to define unity. She writes: "feminist election tensions will start to fade - but we shouldn''t let them" She refuses any olive branch. Of course the tensions shouldn''t fade. It''s good for her career. Look, the older feminists are very inclusive. Let''s call these writers on their ***. Even Gloria S is now making the rounds in speeches with a pro-Obama feminist. She has always been inclusive in her engagements. The third wave feminists I know applaud her, even when they disagree.

[quatrops]

Voting FOR Clinton because of her gender is no different than voting AGAINST her for the same reason. Either does a disservice to the feminist movement.

Although there are a few misogynist neanderthals still out there [and always will be], there is a sufficient percentage of the voting public to whom the gender issue is irrelevent that we can safely vote for candidates based on their qualifications.

Our country deserves the BEST candidate, male or female. Sadly, there are too many "Hillary-haters" out there who will never vote for her, not because of her *** but because they see in her more of the same Washington insider machine politics.

The country wants a change from that, and if Clinton is the Democratic candidate, far too many voters will simply be uninspired to vote, giving McCain an even chance.

[lorinkundert]

Don''t let the feminists think for you, vote for who makes you most comfortable, anything else is short sighted.

[rational_1]

Sadly, there are too many "Hillary-haters" out there who will never vote for her, not because of her *** but because they see in her more of the same Washington insider machine politics.
Posted by quatrops at 08:49 PM : Mar 10, 2008

What''s so sad about that? You''ve stated a perfectly legitimate reason not to vote for a person for President. And that is exactly why I would never vote for Clinton (I don''t trust her - especially at 3AM). I have no problem with a woman becoming President, just not THAT woman. So not every Hillary-hater is necessarily a misogynist and anyone who says so is a stupid beeetch(kidding).

[whimsy1]

As a 60-something independent, self-supporting woman, I do resent any so-called feminist requiring that Hillary get my vote because she is a woman.
Hillary simply does not have the experience she touts, nor any integrity. I have followed her career for years and she does not walk the talk. Women should vote for someone who can unite this country, not further polarize it. She is definitely not the role model I want for my daughters and granddaughters.

[quatrops]

Sorry about that, rational_1. My comment was poorly stated. What I was trying to say was that it was sad because it was true. It certainly IS a valid reason not to vote for her.

She has the persona and intelligence to be a good leader, but for her alliance with Washington insider machine politics. Like far too many on the national scene, she has sold her soul to the Washington establishment.

How long Obama can steer clear of that temptation remains to be seen. We can only hope. And vote!

I meant "sad" in the same way as how sad it is that a promising politician like NYs governor couldn''t stay away from $1000/hr. prostitutes. What a sad waste of a promising political career. Although I think Americans pay far too much attention to the sexual proclivities of politicians, the reality is that they do, and such revalations can bring a quick end to a career.

[torch2008]

My God(dess), this is such claptrap. You know what? It''s okay to be a feminist. And you know what else? It''s okay to vote for Hillary because she''s a woman if that''s what your conviction is. Plenty of African Americans are voting for Obama simply because he is black. Woe befall anyone who dares tell them otherwise! Many African Americans are voting for Hillary because they think she''d be a better commander in chief!

But I really do get sick of ''people'' trying to shame us out of our feminist pride and power.
It really shocks me how many seem to have forgotten that women couldn''t vote in the U.S. until 1920; that women were largely denied access to universities until just recently; that women in the U.S. still make only .56-.78 to a man''s dollar for the same job.
That women all over the world are still regarded as second class citizens without rights and subject to the basest abuses.

I''m a Feminist Damnit, and I''m proud of it! BUT I''m voting for hillary because she''s smart, experienced, and her vision for the future kicks *** so hard it makes Obama look like a babbling idiot. But by all means, vote for whoever you want to.

[torch2008]

But before you check that box for Obama, ladies, consider his voting record. He talks a good talk - makes you swoon, but his voting record shows his real allegiance. He has been missing in action for us when it has come to pro-choice related votes, missing in action for children when it came to funding and passing children''s health initiatives, missing in action for the soldiers in Iraq consistently voting since 2003 not to withdraw troops and voting in favor of funding, missing in action for the tenants of Rezko''s unheated and delapitated slums in the South Chicago district under his jurisdiction, missing in action for Katrina victims when he voted to import cheap labor from other countries instead of hiring the people of New Orleans for rebuilding jobs, missing in action for hundreds of thousands of black voters in Ohio, and I could go on and on...

Hillary has been there. And Hillary has vowed to write full equality into law - meaning finally equal pay for equal work. Universal health care is a gift well give our children and the men and women we love, a shift to green energy jobs is a gift to the economy and to the environment (Obama is a nuke industry lobbyists'' pet). Hillary is a wonderful choice for all in 2008, men, women, children - plants, fish, animals.... :)

[bluestardad]

THE FEMINIST MOVEMENT IS A BUNCH OF HOT AIR!

WHEN REAL WOMEN STAND UP AND REGISTER FOR THE MILITARY DRAFT LIKE ALL MEN HAVE TO THEN THEY CAN TALK ABOUT A FEMINIST MOVEMENT!

AMERICA STAND UP OR SHUT UP!

[mswolfestock]

I don''t see how any woman can call herself a feminist if she lets ANYBODY tell her what to do. I don''t let men tell me what to do, so why should I do any differently when a woman is trying to tell me what to do? Feminists telling other women what to do is as bad as Jessie Jackson telling other black people what to do. It''s all about everybody having the freedom to make their own well-informed choice.

[mswolfestock]

Yeah, bluestar dad, you have a great point. I myself am a military veteran (US Army). I think a lot of women would benefit from the experience of basic training, including weapons training and all the rest. My three years of active duty allowed me to get a college education, and that has been priceless to me and my life.

[notopennshut]

I am a woman and am highly offended by the rhetoric of these women who are actually helping to hold women back. Yes, hold them back by encouraging exactly the same old mantra of "women never getting a good deal" and therefore, they need assistance to get ahead, and not just because of their own merits or qualifications. Woman, you''re tarring all of us with the same brush. WE are just as qualified, if not more and want to be judged on our own ability, and NOT because I am a woman!! This is what makes us equal and great. WE are ahead because of us ourselves, and not because of gender. That''s why it pains me to see all these women foolishly supporting Hillary because she is a woman and therefore we must support her. These women will forever lag behind because they will always feel inferior and will not advance themselves because they must depend on someone else pushing them ahead. Wake up all you women and do better for yourselves rather than following the "flock" blindly.

[lvdragonlady-2009]

This is nothing but a crock. Why in God''s name would I vote for someone just because they are female and I am a female. I can not see the logic in a statement like that. A statement like this suggests that Catholics would only vote for a Catholic or a black person would only vote for another black person and both of these statements are not true.
Why would I vote for someone I (1) do not trust (2) don''t believe (3)is not a good fit for the position she is running for (4) has a husband that will more then likely cause more problem then a herd of elephants.
No, I am not a sit at home mom(never was), but I am a woman who has seen enough, in my lifetime, to be able to decide if a candidate is capable of doing the job or not, without all the feminist b.s.
Give me a female candidate that I can believe in and I will vote for her.

[deq54]

How is supporting a woman for president simply because she is a woman any different than the current glass ceiling that promotes a man simply because he is a man? My grandmother wasn''t political, but she had great common sense..."two wrongs don''t make a right." Although Senator Clinton looks like me, Senator Obama thinks like me. Let''s talk issues, let''s promote what is best about America--our optimism, our drive to be the best and do the right thing. He''s not a woman, but he said it best, "the times they are a changing."

[deq54]

Not plagerizing Bob Dylan--just thought everyone would recognize the lyrics--

[karutam]

True, true. We women cannot and must not support Hillary just because of her gender. We must look for the best person for the cause. And today, Hillary is the worst person we should look to because of all her flaws, now prominently displayed by her kitchen-sink tactics. If only she would show such resolve when Bill played her out with Monica and show us that she can be a strong person on her own right. Claiming all her experience being the spouse of an ex-president is not a qualification. Claiming that all women should support her is a bunch of crock. We cannot live in this world and be on a one-track trajectory. Does that mean that we must only support a person based on gender, color etc ... etc? Don''t ever forget that Hitler also based his philosophy on one factor - to keep one race only as superior one. If we were to base our decisions based on any ONE consideration, like being a woman, and not seek out the best qualities, then we are forever doomed. As a woman, I say, let us be the best and select the best. Hillary is only the SECOND best.

[bkfooman]

I thought we were supposed to vote for the person we wanted to represent us. My wife registered to vote for the first time in years, just so she could vote against Hillary Clinton. Being the wife of a draft dodging, womanizing, pejurer is hardly credentials for becomeing president. I have found nothing positive about Hillary. She is a senator from a state she didn;t even live in. Wouldn''t Arkansas let her run there? I am no pro-Obama, but I am certainly anti-Clinton.

[pam1sadge]

I am a woman, however, I make up my own mind, and in this presidential nomination I am voting for who I think would do the best job, starting on Day One, that is HILLARY. GO HILLARY.

[texanforlogi]

I am a woman. For a woman to vote for Clinton just because of gender is as offensive as a white man voting for McCain because he is a white man. I do not support Clinton because I do not want a continuation of the same-old in Washington. I''d love to see a woman President, but not this woman. My vote goes to Obama. I don''t want Clinton answering that 3 a.m. phone call.

[jimmyc1955]

Jacqueliner3- What battles did Hillary fight?? She got into politics the old fashioned way - she married in. She never ran for one elected office until AFTER Bill left the White house, found a state with the lowest possible residencey requirements and got elected when they guy running against her got cancer and dropped out of the race.

She used her husbands coat tails to get into office so what exactly - other than being a woman - has she done for other women? Stood by a lying, cheating, womanizing of *** teens? Or was that because Hillary needed Bill''s coat tails and to drop him like the trailer trash he is would have meant an end to her political ambitions??

Hmmmm - not thats experience you can''t get just anywhere.

[dmgenet]

Goes to show that voting blocs are not always a given. Women, Men, Whites, Blacks, Hispanics, ***, whatever, do not align with political conventional wisdom. Like any social or political problem there are variables and not all the political pundits do not recognize the variable or demean a variable. Humans. Go figure. Just as flawed as voting (computer) machines.

[amaliazarranz]

okay. so, let''s take this moment and make us the better for it. however, i''ll still, if given the chance, vote for a woman.

unfortunately, it is one''s individual responsibility to make room for oneself at the table. that''s the way of the world. i''ve never viewed any wave of the feminist movement as exclusive. was it started by middle/upper class white women? absolutely. but to assert them to be an "exclusive" group? nope. feminisim is in-clusive. that''s at its theoretical core. the rest is anecdotal; and, THAT part, is our responsibility. so, yes, let''s take this anger and put it to use for us. but, don''t use this as an opportunity to bash those who''s shoulders you stand on.

[amaliazarranz]

okay. so, let''s take this moment and make us, feminists, the better for it. however, i''ll still, if given the chance, vote for a woman.

unfortunately, it is one''s individual responsibility to make room for oneself at the table. that''s the way of the world. i''ve never viewed any wave of the feminist movement as exclusive. was it started by middle/upper class white women? absolutely. but to assert them to be an "exclusive" group? nope. feminisim is in-clusive. that''s at its theoretical core. the rest is anecdotal; and, THAT part, is our responsibility. so, yes, let''s take this anger and put it to use for us. but, don''t use this as an opportunity to bash those who''s shoulders you stand on.

[amaliazarranz]

okay. so, let''s take this moment and make us, feminists, the better for it. however, i''ll still, if given the chance, vote for a woman.

unfortunately, it is one''s individual responsibility to make room for oneself at the table. that''s the way of the world. i''ve never viewed any wave of the feminist movement as exclusive. was it started by middle/upper class white women? absolutely. but to assert them to be an "exclusive" group? nope. feminisim is in-clusive. that''s at its theoretical core. the rest is anecdotal; and, THAT part, is our responsibility. so, yes, let''s take this anger and put it to use for us. but, don''t use this as an opportunity to bash those who''s shoulders you stand on.

[amaliazarranz]

okay. so, let''s take this moment and make us, feminists, the better for it. however, i''ll still, if given the chance, vote for a woman.

unfortunately, it is one''s individual responsibility to make room for oneself at the table. that''s the way of the world. i''ve never viewed any wave of the feminist movement as exclusive. was it started by middle/upper class white women? absolutely. but to assert them to be an "exclusive" group? nope. feminisim is in-clusive. that''s at its theoretical core. the rest is anecdotal; and, THAT part, is our responsibility. so, yes, let''s take this anger and put it to use for us. but, don''t use this as an opportunity to bash those who''s shoulders you stand on.

[amaliazarranz]

okay. so, let''s take this moment and make us, feminists, the better for it. however, i''ll still, if given the chance, vote for a woman.

unfortunately, it is one''s individual responsibility to make room for oneself at the table. that''s the way of the world. i''ve never viewed any wave of the feminist movement as exclusive. was it started by middle/upper class white women? absolutely. but to assert them to be an "exclusive" group? nope. feminisim is in-clusive. that''s at its theoretical core. the rest is anecdotal; and, THAT part, is our responsibility. so, yes, let''s take this anger and put it to use for us. but, don''t use this as an opportunity to discipline those who''s shoulders you stand on.

[kansas1946]

Many of these so-called "feminists" are pseudo-feminists. I come from a long line of real feminists, who believe that men and women are equal and deserve equal pay, equal treatment under the law, equal consideration, and equal civility. Not only do we think that, we demand it.
What a real feminist is not, is a woman that wants to put down men, get preferrential treatment, whine about every imagined slight, and take a woman''s side in any dispute, even if the woman is wrong. Those type of women are a true feminists worst nightmare. They cause more damage to equality for women than any other factor.
I would love to vote a woman into the Whitehouse. It is about time we had a woman, and we will. This, in my humble opinion, is just the wrong woman.