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.
Could you please elaborate on what that means? I am getting very tired of reading posts on this forum by people who are apparently men making misogynistic or ignorant comments about women.
How, indeed, does the fact that "she has gotten so far in a political career play to the fact she is a woman?"
Other than the fact that she has worked her butt off, is extremely smart and educated, and is good at what she does--how has being a woman helped in that? Is it that easy to win an election? I don't remember her having the massive meltdowns Trump has had, and her credentials are much more impressive than Trump's.
While we are on that subject, do you think Trump would have gotten this far if he were not a man? Could a woman who had serial affairs, three husbands, one child out of wedlock, four bankruptcies, have gotten through the primaries without a goon like Trump bringing all that up? Could a woman that stands on a stage, yells, personally insults every one of her opponents, tweets out idiocies, and has no experience in government whatsoever, knows little about the issues have gotten this far?
This times A THOUSAND.
A man who publicly cheats on his wife, has three wives, three families, doesn't pay hundreds of contractors and buries them with lawyers if they try to get paid ultimately putting them out of business (sure he loves small business), a guy that says he wants to bring American jobs back while manufacturing in China and Mexico, a guy being sued by several states for a fake University, a guy that attacks a judge as Mexican when the judge is as American as he is, a guy will multiple bankruptcies that refuses to reveal his tax returns even though every other candidate has for the past 40 years, a guy that apparently bribed the Florida AG and who knows about the Texas AG, he's considered great.
But they attack a woman because they don't deem her Native American enough?
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnywhereElse
I don't know, let's just put her on a reservation and let her do the time since she took advantage away from a Native American by cheating the system.
Her parents raised her telling her stories of her Native American heritage. How did she cheat the system? What did she do to cheat the system? Can you prove it? What did she get for it? She worked extremely hard, received multiple degrees, did groundbreaking research on debt leading to bankruptcy legislation, wrote several books, taught as a professor in several universities and was elected Senator of Massachusetts. You overlook the MULTITUDE of things Donald Trump has done and attack her for not being Native American enough for you?
This is what I see as women being anti-women. If the women of a hundred years ago or even the women of the 60s and 70s were like these women, women would be nothing more than maids and secretaries. It's absolutely sickening. What a poor example these women set for their daughters who will likely grow up also hating other women and overlooking every flaw of men because they are men.
227 years, 44 presidents, all men even though there are more women in this country. Yet you attack a woman for nothing more than being raised with the understanding she was Native American. That's it. With all her accomplishments, she is somehow worse than Trump with his truly terrible record.
A man who publicly cheats on his wife, has three wives, three families, doesn't pay hundreds of contractors and buries them with lawyers if they try to get paid ultimately putting them out of business (sure he loves small business), a guy that says he wants to bring American jobs back while manufacturing in China and Mexico, a guy being sued by several states for a fake University, a guy that attacks a judge as Mexican when the judge is as American as he is, a guy will multiple bankruptcies that refuses to reveal his tax returns even though every other candidate has for the past 40 years, a guy that apparently bribed the Florida AG and who knows about the Texas AG, he's considered great.
But they then turn around and attack a woman because they don't deem her Native American enough?
Yep. They ignore all of those travesties as if they don't exist. They put their hands over their ears and say, nope, not gonna listen. Gonna pretend that never happened.
Worse is when women then turn around and attack other women because their husbands cheated, as if that is somehow their fault. It's misogyny at its finest.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seacove
This is what I see as women being anti-women. If the women of a hundred years ago or even the women of the 60s and 70s were like these women, women would be nothing more than maids and secretaries. It's absolutely sickening. What a poor example these women set for their daughters who will likely grow up also hating other women and overlooking every flaw of men because they are men.
Amen. There are a few female posters on this forum who I sincerely hope never have children, especially daughters.
Yep. They ignore all of those travesties as if they don't exist. They put their hands over their ears and say, nope, not gonna listen. Gonna pretend that never happened.
Worse is when women then turn around and attack other women because their husbands cheated. It's misogyny at its finest.
Amen. There are a few female posters on this forum who I sincerely hope never have children, especially daughters.
Given Hillary's past scandals, her lies, her mannerisms and how unpopular she really is it is no wonder that anyone would be hesitant to hitch their name to hers. She is popular by default and the fact her name is Clinton.
You can ask any Hillary supporter why what has she ever done to warrant your vote for President and you will mostly get a blank stare and a AHHHH because we should have a woman President or I hate Trump. She is the nominee by default.
Trump is everyones favorite target and by attacking him it makes others look intelligent. Warren attacked Trump on his admittance that he looked forward to a housing bubble burst. What business man wouldn't want to buy low and sell high yet Warren herself flipped houses during that time and made money, no where on the scale of Trump but she did it buying foreclosed homes.
Warren is a real moonbat who can deliver a good speech off notes or a teleprompter but unaided and asked a question she will rattle on like an unintelligible idiot. How she has gotten so far in her political career plays to the fact she is a woman.
If you've ever been a law student (I have but flunked out as I'm pretty dumb and unintelligent), you'd know that's how most law professors declaim their views as they give lectures ...and it seems they drone on and on. Elizabeth Warren was an esteemed and respected Harvard law professor and is intelligent as they come. I'm sure she doesn't need a teleprompter to express her point.
~amanda
The Republicans are deeply divided and soon to fall apart.
You know - EXACTLY. Regardless of what one thinks of Hillary or Warren - both are very accomplished, educated, hard working women. And NO - people are NOT voting for them because 'they are women". IF that were the only criteria - Sarah Palin would have been a LOT more popular.
The fact is - misogyny is alive and well and that was brought home to me this election season. Just like Obama brought forward many closet racists - Hillary's rise to the nominee of the party has also brought forth many that still have completely backward attitudes about women.
See, but nobody got called a misogynist for disliking Sarah Palin. You know why? Because Republicans can at least differentiate between people that dislike a person based on policy rather than jumping to the race/sex discrimination conclusion.
People don't like Clinton, Obama, and Warren mostly because of their policies, but most on the left love to USE the opportunity to try and paint the other side as sexist/racist. Sure there ARE racist and sexist people on BOTH sides, but whats even worse is those that try to use it to drive wedges when they know for a fact that its not the honest argument. Its shameful and old. Not everyone that disagrees is racist/sexist/antisemitic or whatever disparaging term you want to apply.
See, but nobody got called a misogynist for disliking Sarah Palin. You know why? Because Republicans can at least differentiate between people that dislike a person based on policy rather than jumping to the race/sex discrimination conclusion.
People don't like Clinton, Obama, and Warren mostly because of their policies, but most on the left love to USE the opportunity to try and paint the other side as sexist/racist. Sure there ARE racist and sexist people on BOTH sides, but whats even worse is those that try to use it to drive wedges when they know for a fact that its not the honest argument. Its shameful and old. Not everyone that disagrees is racist/sexist/antisemitic or whatever disparaging term you want to apply.
Nice try. Sarah Palin was nominated because she was a woman. Republicans admit they didn't even vet her, which was why it got awkward when they found out her and her husband were secessionists. She apparently almost bankrupted her town of Wasilla due to some land issue resulting in debt of $20 million.
During her term in office, Palin cut property taxes and other small taxes on business. But as the Anchorage Daily News points out, “She wasn’t doing this by shrinking government.” During her tenure, the budget of Wasilla (population 5,469 in 2000) “apart from capital projects and debt, rose from $3.9 million in fiscal 1996 to $5.8 million.”
Palin also successfully pushed through a sales tax increase in Wasilla, which went to fund a $15 million sports complex. However, a land dispute over the sight of the complex led to “years of legal wrangling” and cost Wasilla almost $1.7 million, “a lot more than the roughly $125,000 the city would have paid in 1998 if it had closed a deal to buy the property outright.” Wasilla is still facing budget shortfalls from the case today.
When Palin left office in 2002, Wasilla had “racked up nearly $20 million in long-term debt,” or roughly $3,000 of debt per resident.
McCain's team knew none of this until later. Because they just wanted a woman to combat Democrats nominating President Obama.
Hopefully that would be any woman who would attempt to put up Hillary Clinton as a role model. Horrible example to give.
Off topic, but in all honesty, I am willing to bet more women would prefer that Hillary Clinton and Elizabeth Warren be their daughter's role models than Melania Trump, and I don't mean this as an insult to Ms. Trump, but would you prefer your daughter aspire to be a high achieving Wellesley or Harvard grad with stellar grades, attorney, First Lady, Senator, Secretary of State, Presidential nominee, or do you hope she'll aspire to be a model who marries a rich guy?
I realize some aspire to the latter, but frankly, I just can't see a lot of women telling their daughters--just diet and watch your weight, fix your nose and hope you are beautiful when you grow up, so a man with a lot of money will take care of you.
I know you hate Clinton, but you cannot deny she and Warren are tough, strong women who have worked incredibly hard and sacrificed a lot to get where they are. And this country is one of the only modern (and not so modern) countries that has not had a woman leader. I think that is odd.
Last edited by Enigma777; 06-10-2016 at 06:26 PM..
Nice try. Sarah Palin was nominated because she was a woman. Republicans admit they didn't even vet her, which was why it got awkward when they found out her and her husband were secessionists. She apparently almost bankrupted her town of Wasilla due to some land issue resulting in debt of $20 million.
During her term in office, Palin cut property taxes and other small taxes on business. But as the Anchorage Daily News points out, “She wasn’t doing this by shrinking government.” During her tenure, the budget of Wasilla (population 5,469 in 2000) “apart from capital projects and debt, rose from $3.9 million in fiscal 1996 to $5.8 million.”
Palin also successfully pushed through a sales tax increase in Wasilla, which went to fund a $15 million sports complex. However, a land dispute over the sight of the complex led to “years of legal wrangling” and cost Wasilla almost $1.7 million, “a lot more than the roughly $125,000 the city would have paid in 1998 if it had closed a deal to buy the property outright.” Wasilla is still facing budget shortfalls from the case today.
When Palin left office in 2002, Wasilla had “racked up nearly $20 million in long-term debt,” or roughly $3,000 of debt per resident.
McCain's team knew none of this until later. Because they just wanted a woman to combat Democrats nominating President Obama.
Don't give me that "nice try" BS. Bottom line is that nobody was calling out people for being sexist for all of the absolute hate and slander tossed her way. I don't disagree that she had somewhat of a questionable background, but there was no excuse for how she was (still is) treated by the media. I'm not particularly a fan of hers, but the abuse she took was pretty bad and nobody got called out for being sexist over it. Its a very glaring double standard.
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.
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.
