General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhy I Love the Dogpile on Clinton
How many people at DU remember when the Hillary 2008 campaign really got going? No, it wasn't in early 2006 when the press declared that she and Obama were in a "Two Man Race" with Edwards deliberately ignored by the corporate media. It was in the New Hampshire debates, when Obama and Edwards joined together for a really quite amusing display of Let's Pick on the Female Candidate Who Cried Today.
The two man dogpile on candidate Clintin pissed off women. The current everybody and their (progressive) cat dogpile on candidate Clinton is infuriating women. Clinton's supporters are storing up amazing stockpiles of angry energy. We are going to see it explode to life once the primaries get underway.
Watch out. Hell hath no fury and all of that. Meanwhile, keep up the dogpiling. Every attack on Clinton makes her supporters enthusiam that much stronger. The effect is especially powerful if you jump into every thread that posts something positive about the candidate and insist that every word that comes from her mouth is just political posturing but every other Democratic candidate who speaks out is telling the gospel truth. There is nothing like a double standard to get women riled up. Oh yeah, and more of the "She's good on womens and childrens and minority issues but what about the economy?" That's the same as saying "But what about my bank account?!"
snooper2
(30,151 posts)okay...
anyway...
New video
Greatness LOL
Guys Curl Their Eyelashes For The First Time
The Velveteen Ocelot
(115,836 posts)I wasn't then and I'm not now. I'll vote for her if she gets the nomination, of course, but don't assume women are a monolithic bloc who will vote for Clinton or any other candidate because of her gender or because of a perception that the male candidates are picking on her because she's female. I don't think she or any candidate should be "dogpiled" on for any reason, but it won't change my support.
haikugal
(6,476 posts)Thanks for expressing my thinking on this so well!
Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)Oh, and thanks - time to set my watch.
ChairmanAgnostic
(28,017 posts)Scuba
(53,475 posts)... and take actual policy positions and historical record into account. At least all the ones I know do.
HappyMe
(20,277 posts)Not all women are Clinton supporters.
I find your mindless characterization of women kind of shitty.
misterhighwasted
(9,148 posts)B.s. that our current leadership in DC & States have dumped in the laps of females.
Hillary's support on women's rights will undo the RW in 2016.
Because She "Gets It". And She "Got It" A Long Time Ago.
Women & their daughters & their daughters.
Women's Rights are Human Rights
HappyMe
(20,277 posts)The OP chooses to play the Hillary as victim card, and women as mindless entities that vote cuz woman. That is not the case.
You can't have it both ways. She's either a tough woman or she isn't.
I would suggest people rail against the republicans with this. Any Democratic candidate is good as far as women go.
I don't vote based on gender or race. I am also not a one issue voter.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)convince Hillary supporters to support Bernie.
HappyMe
(20,277 posts)do nothing to convince me in regards to Hillary. I think the OP is sexist horseshit.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)HappyMe
(20,277 posts)I found the OP ridiculous and kind of offensive.
misterhighwasted
(9,148 posts)A completely opposite direction from where I started with him.
He's appears to be just another pandering speaker, and the bullying & mocking from his base is not who I want as President, Not where women's rights are concerned.
Good man, yes. But enough of the bullying boys club in DC.
Fed up & supporting no man.
HRC 2016 because she "gets it".
Women's Rights are Human Rights
monmouth4
(9,709 posts)closeupready
(29,503 posts)that women were paid less than men doing the same job. It settled, but proof positive she was either incompetent or unwilling to actually DO anything about it when she COULD have done something.
Not voting for her. Total fake.
Beacool
(30,251 posts)Yeah, the sole woman in the board of directors was going to overcome the will of the majority of the middle aged all white board members, including Sam Walton. She should have waved her magic wand and presto, Wal-Mart would have become a model company just by the sheer force of her personality.
She did as much as she could to influence them when it came to hiring more women to management positions and to "green" the company.
closeupready
(29,503 posts)?
Beacool
(30,251 posts)than banging on the door to be allowed in.
closeupready
(29,503 posts)Go ahead and vote for a puppet. I'm not doing it.
Beacool
(30,251 posts)Continue on believing whatever suits you.
closeupready
(29,503 posts)dsc
(52,166 posts)after the Senate passed the Iraq War resolution, after the House passed the Patriot Act, after the Senate cut taxes? The answer is it would have been idiotic for him to resign. Just like it would have been idiotic for her to do so, simply because she lost on important votes.
closeupready
(29,503 posts)Be very interested to hear that, though Walmart has, to date, refused to release minutes of meetings when Hillary was on the Board.
Hillary could probably ask Walmart to release those minutes.
Wal-Mart has little to say about Hillary Clinton's board service, and will not release minutes of the company's board meetings during her tenure.
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/0312-01.htm
The topic here is Hillary, not Bernie. If you want to talk about Bernie's integrity as a member of a predominantly right-wing legislative body's opposition, start a thread about that.
NightWatcher
(39,343 posts)You think there's a dogpile from the left?
Wait till the rw gets hold of her, should she win the nomination.
Every post about Bernie or his supporters from a Hillary supporter immediately does two things. One: they say stop attacking, as though Hillary is some fragile flower and online discussions will make her cry. Two: it then goes on to attack or threaten us with a loss.
SaranchaIsWaiting
(247 posts)And she had/has a whole lot to explain that was Her doing and saying. She should know that and so should her supporters. It weakens her to blame everything on sexism and mean boys.
How ridiculous. But I am glad you brought this up, it's been lurking all over the place, this accusation of unfairness because Hillary woman, yah.
misterhighwasted
(9,148 posts)YA. I will support a women President, Hillary Clinton, because the boys club just doesn't give a crap.
It needs to stop.
Response to misterhighwasted (Reply #35)
Name removed Message auto-removed
SaranchaIsWaiting
(247 posts)that do that to divide people. It's the oldest political trick in the book and I remain forever disappointed in people not seeing that for what it is. I am not going to vote for someone who takes such careless responsibility by voting for wars that that dumbfuck George and his crew wanted. Lives, real flesh and blood and lives of women, children and men, were stripped away from this earth. Please. Vote how you like, but don't assume you can fool me out of the truths I know.
Iliyah
(25,111 posts)a major part. I'm pretty sure HRC's campaign is aware of what's to come, hence it has begun.
SaranchaIsWaiting
(247 posts)There are all sorts of people with all sorts of ideas of what a candidate should be to them.
Sexism certainly exists and flourishes, but so does racism and anti-semitism and homophobia and all the other categories of hate.
Suggesting people who don't support and vote for Hillary might be sexist is not going to go over well. It was tried in '08 very heartily and didn't work then, and that cheap kind of whistle is not going to work this time around either. People can read, they can decide by her record and history whether she is deserving of their support. Crying out sexism to cover up her record will not work.
redstateblues
(10,565 posts)Prism
(5,815 posts)Reminds me of this clip:
Strong leader or picked upon victim? She cannot be both.
whatchamacallit
(15,558 posts)closeupready
(29,503 posts)That was some of the funniest nine seconds EVER.
Rex
(65,616 posts)and connections to other powerful people in D.C. and Wall Street as the reason she is more than qualified to be POTUS. Their reason does not need to go further then that and I agree with them.
Robbins
(5,066 posts)that there are women for bernie groups on facebook and twitter. Hate to tell you this but not all women love hillary.
My mother who soured on obama In 2010 and voted romney while i voted obama has said she will never vote hillary,and after i sent her stuff on bernie says she would vote for him.
cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)LWolf
(46,179 posts)I don't remember the dogpile you refer to. Not that it didn't happen, but since, before there was no other choice, Clinton and Obama were tied for last place at the bottom of my primary rankings, I wasn't in the middle of that fight. Neither was I in the middle when they were the only two left standing. I didn't really have much to fight about, since I didn't support either one of them. I didn't bother to pay attention to the convention that summer, or the ge campaign. I had no "dog" in that hunt.
In the later primaries, I did lean HRC, simply because the constant mantra of Obama being "not dlc" was so aggravating, as his neo-liberal positions were on open display for all to witness.
Frankly, I found the devolution of the Democratic Party during the '08 primaries to be a public humiliation. Here was the party that was supposed to stand for the underdogs dividing along the lines of race and gender. THAT NEVER SHOULD HAVE HAPPENED. Supporting one candidate over another? Fine. Trying to postulate that issues of race were more important than issues of gender, or vice versa? Discpicable hypocricy, imo, reducing the issues to campaign talking points instead of real world problems.
When my primary rolled around in late May, it was all over but the shouting, so I cast a protest vote for HRC.
I haven't seen a dogpile at this point, either. But then, I don't read most threads about HRC. Again, she's at the bottom of my list, and I have a better candidate to focus my attention on. I HAVE seen legitimate criticism from her own party, and I expect Republicans to spew all kinds of shit, which, even though she's not getting my vote, I'll defend. Most of that shit, though, would come in the GE should she be nominated.
I'm a woman. I'm not angry when HRC is called on her neo-liberal policies. I won't be rising to defend her from those. I won't be supporting her. I save my angry energy for neo-liberals, neo-conservatives, and all those who support the erosion of social and economic justice.
misterhighwasted
(9,148 posts)Go ask Emily's List.
I know RW women that love Hillary and they are sending their RW cash to get her elected.
Fed up women voters can smell a dogpile a hundred miles away.
Trust me, Team Hillary is not worried. Their methodical approach to 2016 is just..well..exactly how a woman would get from point A to point B.
Hillary's got this.
^H^R^C
2016
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)I'm yet entertained by the charlatans who prophecize winners 18 months out based on hunches, guesses, a recent poll, or a cool ad (not specific to any one candidate of course-- snake oil is a non-partisan product).
Their faith in the supernatural is inspiring.
whatchamacallit
(15,558 posts)beyond the false attribution of misogyny?
Ino
(3,366 posts)Because of course we all get riled up about the exact same thing. We all have vaginas, which are joined inextricably with Hilary's into one massive hysterical, angry, energy ball the likes of which hell has never seen!
How could I, a woman, have broken away from such a powerful collective force? Oh yeah... the issues and all that.
I guess we shouldn't worry our fluffly little heads over the issues and just vote for the uterus!
Ino
(3,366 posts)HappyMe
(20,277 posts)and it's just as insulting now when the Clintonistas do it.
I almost laughed my vagina right off with that one!
demmiblue
(36,885 posts)Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)What, exactly, do you see, this year, as "dogpiling"? Is it "dogpiling" simply because some people here don't think she deserves special deference?
HRC gets the exact same treatment Bernie gets from HRC people(Bernie's treated far worse, in fact)and it's only conservatives that malign her.
HRC has nothing to offer that any other candidate can't offer, and gets no votes any other Dem can't get.
misterhighwasted
(9,148 posts)But I have indeed seen the Rw links from the "other side".
That's why they get Trashed asap.
Thanks anyway.
tularetom
(23,664 posts)If she thinks honest criticism is a "dogpile" she should drop out right now because she's too delicate a flower to run in a general election where all sorts of crap will be flung at her.
I thought she was "tough", and a "fighter". If she is, she will resent your post because it makes her seem like a whiny pseudo victim.
colsohlibgal
(5,275 posts)That rich - she brought it on herself. She very well might be president now if she hadn't caved, bought the lies of Dubya and his crew, and cast a cowardly vote in favor of the (Insane) Iraq war. That was a profile of no courage.
She's still making speeches to and cozying up to the Banksters.
As a female I want a female president ASAP, but not just any woman.
Elizabeth Warren would be awesome but I don't think she wants it now or ever.
I think Marianne Williamson would make a great leader once she gets more experience.
So the "dog pile" hasn't bothered this gal either, HRC has brought in on herself.
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)"...when you are in politics you are in a wasp's nest with a short shirt-tail..." Mark Twain
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)Every room is now a kitchen.
Grilled Charlie
(57 posts)Updated for the 21st century
AtomicKitten
(46,585 posts)Orrex
(63,224 posts)If only...