Democratic Primaries

TwilightZone

(28,836 posts)

9. I don't really see the situations as comparable.

Fri Mar 6, 2020, 02:26 PM

Mar 2020

Warren's supporters weren't supporting her just because she's a woman. They were supporting her because they felt that she was the best candidate. I think it's pretty difficult to argue that sexism isn't inherent in the process to some degree, particularly in the media. Warren and Sanders were both for M4A, but Warren clearly got more criticism for that stance than Sanders. Some of that is because she provided details he's been hesitant to offer, but I'm not sure that's the only factor.

I don't see Gabbard as comparable. She was never seriously running and few have taken her campaign seriously. I can't imagine too many people - particularly Warren supporters - would hop on the Tulsi bandwagon just because she's a woman.

If I were to vote in a presidential
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

87 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

If you believe that Warren lost because of sexism and misogyny... [View all] brooklynite Mar 2020 OP

Ummm, try her platform, or lack there of. pazzyanne Mar 2020 #1

+++ still_one Mar 2020 #4

I might switch to Gabbard because she is the only remaining woman,,nt at140 Mar 2020 #2

Don't be a dick. WhiskeyGrinder Mar 2020 #3

. DURHAM D Mar 2020 #7

Thank you. NurseJackie Mar 2020 #10

Agreed! HarlanPepper Mar 2020 #12

.... KPN Mar 2020 #16

Well said mcar Mar 2020 #17

That's a sexist term! zackymilly Mar 2020 #19

Thank you for saying this. Squinch Mar 2020 #39

Snort BeyondGeography Mar 2020 #42

thank you KT2000 Mar 2020 #49

Somebody had to say it StarfishSaver Mar 2020 #56

This. nt PunkinPi Mar 2020 #65

To the point! we can do it Mar 2020 #67

!!!! sheshe2 Mar 2020 #77

. Sparkly Mar 2020 #79

Oh, please. This is ridiculous. Please don't turn societal problems that influence perception of hlthe2b Mar 2020 #5

Sorry you're offended, but plenty of voices here say she lost ONLY because of sexism brooklynite Mar 2020 #24

And you seem to be asserting that it wasn't a factor at all. TwilightZone Mar 2020 #35

I haven't seen anyone here, or elsewhere, say that Warren lost ONLY because of sexism mcar Mar 2020 #66

I never read that anyone claimed it was the sole reason she lost. sheshe2 Mar 2020 #80

+1000 MLAA Mar 2020 #33

If you believe that Warren lost b/c of sexism/misogny, that doesn't say much for the left wing of highplainsdem Mar 2020 #6

Can you elaborate on that? KPN Mar 2020 #22

Because that's their lane. highplainsdem Mar 2020 #29

Young women actually make up a greater share of Sanders' base than men. KPN Mar 2020 #43

That's true only for voters under 30, according to the Economist article usually cited. highplainsdem Mar 2020 #45

Oh, so the fact that Biden has 900,000 more votes than Sanders doesan't count, nor do all the KPN Mar 2020 #46

I'm just saying that IF sexism/misogyny was a factor in Warren not doing better than Sanders, it highplainsdem Mar 2020 #47

It's not. I just happen to disagree. I think it's likely more of a problem in the rest of the KPN Mar 2020 #59

I don't think it's a major factor, either. But I definitely don't think it's more of a factor in highplainsdem Mar 2020 #60

The rest of the party nominated Hillary Clinton in 2016. TwilightZone Mar 2020 #62

No it doesn't. Support for Sanders does not KPN Mar 2020 #74

I think it's a factor... TwilightZone Mar 2020 #26

Because Fox Noise and Vladimir Puting like her leftieNanner Mar 2020 #8

I don't really see the situations as comparable. TwilightZone Mar 2020 #9

Say what? More criticism than Sanders? KPN Mar 2020 #27

One is an agent of Russia and the other isn't nycbos Mar 2020 #11

Wow. Intellectually dishonest or just boneheaded? Maven Mar 2020 #13

politics of victimizatiom tires me out, the black guy didn't win becasue we are racist, women didn't beachbumbob Mar 2020 #14

Heaven forfend that I should tire you further, but the only reason she Squinch Mar 2020 #52

Poor you StarfishSaver Mar 2020 #58

The job of president is viewed as a job for a white man, radius777 Mar 2020 #61

I don't think this is helpful FreeState Mar 2020 #15

What a dumb ass statement. Please quit trying to stir up a fight. groundloop Mar 2020 #18

This dude's got money. Be nice to the rich. n/t zackymilly Mar 2020 #23

Indeed; and a fair chunk has gone to Warren's Senate campaigns... brooklynite Mar 2020 #30

Major Fail. William769 Mar 2020 #20

So I guess if Nikki Haley decided to jump into the dem primaries CincyDem Mar 2020 #21

Because she isn't qualified to be president any more than -45... 2naSalit Mar 2020 #25

Most Ds are women. Black women voted overwhelmingly for Biden on Tuesday. stopbush Mar 2020 #28

BECAUSE WOMEN ARE NOT INTERCHANGEABLE!!! nolabear Mar 2020 #31

Some men will never understand that. And some of THEM are here. Squinch Mar 2020 #55

thank you janterry Mar 2020 #73

Well said. sheshe2 Mar 2020 #81

Stupid thread womanofthehills Mar 2020 #32

Don't doubt sexism/misogyny had something to do with it. Warren is a better version of Sanders, but Hoyt Mar 2020 #34

I don't vote based on my ovaries morillon Mar 2020 #36

Well, it's probably because I don't like her position on the issues. patphil Mar 2020 #37

not misogyny this time... handmade34 Mar 2020 #38

I am supporting Gabbard on DU Moderateguy Mar 2020 #40

It can simultaniously be true that Warren was a victim of sexism and Gabbard is a bad candidate dsc Mar 2020 #41

I'm sorry, I wasn't listening. Act_of_Reparation Mar 2020 #44

Ouch. sheshe2 Mar 2020 #83

I don't think that she lost just because of that. But anyone who thinks that sexism and misogyny are totodeinhere Mar 2020 #48

Because we have brains? You should be ashamed of this post. MrsCoffee Mar 2020 #50

Just wow - I can't believe I'm reading this on DU. Politicub Mar 2020 #51

I'm, sadly, not surprised at all. Squinch Mar 2020 #54

Wow. This post says a whole lot about you. Thanks for schooling me, man. LizBeth Mar 2020 #53

It says I don't fall back on easy stereotypes... brooklynite Mar 2020 #63

Yes, you obviously have it all figured out. Act_of_Reparation Mar 2020 #64

And your inability to recognize the dozens of hurtles put in front of her to attain the 3 million LizBeth Mar 2020 #68

I was referring to Warren. brooklynite Mar 2020 #69

You brought up HRC LizBeth Mar 2020 #70

As an example of Democrats (and voters in general) voting for a female candidate brooklynite Mar 2020 #71

A hypothetical Ranvir Gabbard would probably be polling much higher than 0.01% (nt) Recursion Mar 2020 #57

Uhmmm...at the risk of this post being hidden, because she is clearly insane? pecosbob Mar 2020 #72

Gabbard doesn't take her campaign seriously, so why should we? Efilroft Sul Mar 2020 #75

Spoken like a Hickenlooper man. LaurenOlimina Mar 2020 #76

I started with Kamala. RandySF Mar 2020 #78

Because Gabbard is a weirdo alarimer Mar 2020 #82

Warren was qualified and capable Lulu KC Mar 2020 #84

I don't think there's any doubt she wasn't considered viable because of it. BlueTsunami2018 Mar 2020 #85

I have many reasons for not supporting Liz Under The Radar Mar 2020 #86

Affirming the consequent. It's a logical fallacy. On which you predicate your entire sentiment. LanternWaste Mar 2020 #87