U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-14-2018, 05:09 PM
 
6,573 posts, read 1,936,902 times
Reputation: 6170

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by dashrendar4454 View Post
hmmm, thinking that women should think the same way because they are women. That seems pretty sexist to me. I thought libs were against sexism?
No. But she is thinking, correctly, that something is very bizarre when they vote for a man who has a history of being predatory toward women, and is against all the issues that normally women favor.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-14-2018, 08:21 PM
 
Location: Seattle, WA
621 posts, read 214,246 times
Reputation: 394
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clarallel View Post
No. But she is thinking, correctly, that something is very bizarre when they vote for a man who has a history of being predatory toward women, and is against all the issues that normally women favor.
But voting for a woman who stayed with her cheating husband and got a man who raped a 12 year old girl out of jail and laughed about it is acceptable to vote for, correct?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-14-2018, 08:59 PM
 
Location: WY
5,206 posts, read 3,739,262 times
Reputation: 5876
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clarallel View Post
No. But she is thinking, correctly, that something is very bizarre when they vote for a man who has a history of being predatory toward women, and is against all the issues that normally women favor.
OK - I'm a woman. Random thoughts on your sentence above (in no particular order):

1. Many women favor a strong economy, job creation, border security, the 2A, the makeup of the SC (presidents come and go but the SC justices live on long after a president is out of office), a strong military, a secure nation, orderly immigration. For many women THOSE are also womens issues.

2. "She is thinking, correctly, that........." Says who? Michelle Obama? You? I think she is thinking INcorrectly. And my opinion has just as much merit as yours (and hers) does. You didn't vote for Trump? Fine. I don't agree with your vote but it is a free country, we are free Americans, and we are allowed to vote for whoever we want to. I am a free American and can vote for Trump. You are a free American and can vote for whoever you want to. I don't agree with your vote. But I won't trash you for making that choice.

3. Trump haters (including Michelle Obama) have transitioned along the spectrum, from demonizing Trump and everything he stands for, to demonizing all those who put him in office. Some of you guys are so eat up with hate that you don't even see how eat up with hate you actually are. I can see it. I can feel it. I can smell it. Rather than influencing and shaming women in an attempt to change their vote and their support come the 2018 midterms (which is the goal) you are all shaming yourselves. You are not furthering your agenda. You are not changing minds or hearts. You are just reinforcing the decision we made back in 2016. I cannot tell you in strong enough terms how glad I am that Hillary Clinton is not the president of the United States.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-14-2018, 11:42 PM
 
Location: Springfield, Ohio
12,193 posts, read 10,380,682 times
Reputation: 11206
Just a general observation which goes beyond the Hillary/Trump election...

Women do not support each other in any capacity, despite being the largest "minority" (minority in the sociological sense). Women are the lowest on the totem pole in every society, and even social & civil rights groups advocating for other "minority" groups are or were very sexist. Whether it's Donald Trump, R Kelly, Bill Cosby, Bill Clinton or whoever, many womens' natural reaction over rape accusations is to immediately question or blame the accuser, and make excuses for the man accused. For example, with Bill Cosby black women were some of the most vocal supporters/apologists for him, claiming there was a conspiracy against Cosby etc. The same can be said for Donald Trump and Bill Clinton, because those men were favorable to their female supporters on the issues, despite their assaulting behavior in private.
Women are quick to tear each other down and slow to support each other, unlike other groups, and I doubt that will change any time soon.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-21-2018, 07:14 PM
Status: "The heat is hot now." (set 2 days ago)
 
Location: Suburban Dallas
46,652 posts, read 36,893,162 times
Reputation: 28231
Quote:
Originally Posted by dashrendar4454 View Post
https://www.dailywire.com/news/30332...-emily-zanotti

Hmmm, thinking that women should think the same way because they are women. That seems pretty sexist to me. I thought libs were against sexism?
You would think so, Dash. But lefties never follow their own advice. Moochelle is no different.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-22-2018, 03:46 PM
 
18,069 posts, read 11,073,059 times
Reputation: 9419
Quote:
Originally Posted by Natural510 View Post
Just a general observation which goes beyond the Hillary/Trump election...

Women do not support each other in any capacity, despite being the largest "minority" (minority in the sociological sense). Women are the lowest on the totem pole in every society, and even social & civil rights groups advocating for other "minority" groups are or were very sexist. Whether it's Donald Trump, R Kelly, Bill Cosby, Bill Clinton or whoever, many womens' natural reaction over rape accusations is to immediately question or blame the accuser, and make excuses for the man accused. For example, with Bill Cosby black women were some of the most vocal supporters/apologists for him, claiming there was a conspiracy against Cosby etc. The same can be said for Donald Trump and Bill Clinton, because those men were favorable to their female supporters on the issues, despite their assaulting behavior in private.

Women are quick to tear each other down and slow to support each other, unlike other groups, and I doubt that will change any time soon.
I completely agree. I do not want Democrats to nominate another woman for 2020. Blacks turned out for Obama but women, especially older women, tend to be patriarchal. We're well past 200 years and it will probably reach 300 before we see a woman president.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-22-2018, 11:54 PM
 
Location: Jacksonville, FL
6,976 posts, read 7,754,620 times
Reputation: 5670
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seacove View Post
I completely agree. I do not want Democrats to nominate another woman for 2020. Blacks turned out for Obama but women, especially older women, tend to be patriarchal. We're well past 200 years and it will probably reach 300 before we see a woman president.
I actually think that we could have seen a woman president in 2016 if it had been a woman other than Hillary running. Unfortunately for the more sane crowd on the left, Hillary has too much baggage and is just too unlikeable to be a good candidate. Face it: She lost to Donald Trump. Against all expectations, and contrary to most predictions, she lost to one of the least electable people that ever ran for the office. True, she won the popular vote by a very slim margin, but she lost the vote that matters. Had a woman with less baggage, fewer skeletons in the closet, and more decency been in her shoes that woman may very well have won the electoral vote. Very few conservatives that I know voted for Trump. They voted against Hillary, some because she was a Democrat, but many because she promised more of the same "hope and change" that Obama forced down their throats.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2018, 12:40 AM
 
371 posts, read 181,747 times
Reputation: 636
Quote:
Originally Posted by dashrendar4454 View Post
https://www.dailywire.com/news/30332...-emily-zanotti

hmmm, thinking that women should think the same way because they are women. That seems pretty sexist to me. I thought libs were against sexism?
Michelle shamed no one.. She included herself as part of the group you are targeting with this thread

She's very humble, at least compared to some....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2018, 04:54 PM
 
7,272 posts, read 3,753,065 times
Reputation: 3759
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimRom View Post
I actually think that we could have seen a woman president in 2016 if it had been a woman other than Hillary running. Unfortunately for the more sane crowd on the left, Hillary has too much baggage and is just too unlikeable to be a good candidate. Face it: She lost to Donald Trump. Against all expectations, and contrary to most predictions, she lost to one of the least electable people that ever ran for the office. True, she won the popular vote by a very slim margin, but she lost the vote that matters. Had a woman with less baggage, fewer skeletons in the closet, and more decency been in her shoes that woman may very well have won the electoral vote. Very few conservatives that I know voted for Trump. They voted against Hillary, some because she was a Democrat, but many because she promised more of the same "hope and change" that Obama forced down their throats.
Hope and change was a good thing to have "forced down their throats". Most people thought that losing 745,000 jobs a month was leading us in a bad direction. Hillary had no "baggage" other than the fantasies created by FOX news. No charges and of course no convictions and none of her people are under indictment and none of them have taken guilty pleas. See the difference?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-23-2018, 06:15 PM
 
Location: Jacksonville, FL
6,976 posts, read 7,754,620 times
Reputation: 5670
Quote:
Originally Posted by gmagoo View Post
Hope and change was a good thing to have "forced down their throats". Most people thought that losing 745,000 jobs a month was leading us in a bad direction. Hillary had no "baggage" other than the fantasies created by FOX news. No charges and of course no convictions and none of her people are under indictment and none of them have taken guilty pleas. See the difference?
In your opinion, the "hope and change" was positive. In the opinion of many in the working class it wasn't. I fall in the middle. Some things that Obama pushed were good, but some were not. As a libertarian, I intensely disliked the idea of being forced into a business relations with businesses that I feel were not looking out for our best interests.

Saying that Hillary doesn't have baggage is like saying that Donald Trump's skin color looks normal. Either you aren't paying attention or you are so partisan that you refuse to see reality.

1. Benghazi: No matter whether you agree with the public perception of Benghazi or not, it's baggage that hangs around her neck like an albatross.

2. Deplorables: Again, it's public perception that matters and the perception is that she called half the country deplorables because they didn't agree with her. It's very similar to how Trump called MS-13 a bunch of animals but leftists equate that statement with calling all immigrants animals.

3. Her biggest piece of baggage is Bill. The man is a sexual predator, and she not only enabled his behavior but condoned it by shouting down and disparaging any woman who came forward against him.

Charges and convictions are not required in order for someone to have baggage. Otherwise, the left wouldn't be doing everything in their power to invalidate Trump's election win. It is simply a matter of perception, and the perception of most people who aren't far left is that Hillary was at best the better of two evils. The closer to ideological center that people get, the less "better" Hillary seemed. For myself, I refuse to choose between two evils and therefore voted third party. Neither Trump nor Hillary should have even been in the primaries, and the fact that they were the candidates for the two major parties is concrete evidence that our political system is broken beyond any imaginable repair.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:42 PM.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top