Dear Hillary, I wish you did not say this

[question everything]

She also insinuated that women who voted for Trump were motivated by “ongoing pressure to vote the way that your husband, your boss, your son, whoever, believes you should.”

http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/378259-dems-are-angry-over-hillary-clintons-latest-comments

This is from The Hill which, I don't think, is a RW publication.

Honestly, at first I thought it was fake news..

More from the same source:

In interviews with The Hill on Tuesday, even the staunchest Clinton allies as well as longtime advisers say the comments were cringeworthy and ultimately detrimental to Democrats.

“She put herself in a position where [Democrats] from states that Trump won will have to distance themselves from her even more,” said one former senior Clinton aide. “That’s a lot of states.”

Another Clinton surrogate questioned the decisionmaking behind Clinton’s remarks. For months, some Democrats have been arguing that Clinton’s sentiments have been counterproductive to the party’s rebuilding efforts. And some have told her she should emulate former President Obama’s model to only make statements when it’s essential.

[HipChick]

1. She's correct...I often Rethug say they voted that way because of

Father,husband, brother {fill in the blank}

[question everything]

3. Even if true, nothing can be gained from brining it to the front

If Democrats like Lamb have to distance themselves from Hillary and from Pelosi to win, then so be it.

We need to win in Trump districts.

[TheSmarterDog]

34. Nothing can be gained from the truth?!?!

EVERYTHING can be gained from the truth.

[pandr32]

74. Of course we should be honest about this

...and we should keep trying to make inroads into communities where women are oppressed. The women's movement does not appear to be packing it in anytime soon.

[ollie10]

201. It is an issue of winning vs losing elections

Need I remind you that calling voters "deplorables" may have been true in a technical sense but stating this helped Trump win?

You don't get many people to vote for you by calling them an idiot.

Hillary is a great woman. She would have been a great president. She should have been elected. But she was a TERRIBLE campaigner. Trump would have lost in 2016 if we had a more skilled candidate.

Last week's statements give more evidence of this fact. Please, Hillary, stay away from the elections in 2018. Far, far away!

[TheSmarterDog]

203. Stop pushing RW spin. It excuses their crimes.

HRC was not a "terrible campaigner" and she got 3.5 million more votes than the Cheeto-faced Shitgibbon.

[ollie10]

208. wow....just wow!

If we can't look at what went wrong.....and be objective about it.....then we are likely to simply rinse and repeat.

I am not RW. Actually that is why i am concerned. The RW would love it very much if we rinse and repeat our mistakes.

Hillary has run for president twice. Each time she was the odds on overwhelming favorite going in. Each time she lost. The results speak for themselves.

The point is not to make this personal. Hillary is a wonderful person, and she would have made a wonderful president. The point is she has not been effective in either of her national campaigns. So it would behoove us to analyze why, rather than take this personally.

What is at stake is the 2018 midterms and the 2020 election.

[TheSmarterDog]

210. Yet "everything wrong" always & only ever seems to be a new attack on Clinton.

She even gets attacked when she criticizes Nazis.

Just ignore that America was attacked. Just ignore that the opposition to Clinton (from the Left & the Right) is based exclusively on RW lies. Just ignore that the GOP has made an art of lying about the Clintons, Democrats, the Democratic Party & everything Democrats do for decades.

I don't believe that Democrats supporting successful, intelligent Democratic candidates who promote Democratic values IS EVER A MISTAKE.

[ollie10]

214. who said "everything wrong"?

if you are gonna quote someone, get it right

[TheSmarterDog]

217. And you wonder why the minority party - the Republicans - win?

[ollie10]

218. you didn't answer the question? any particular reason?

[TheSmarterDog]

220. GET OVER YOURSELF! YOU"RE NOT MY FUCKING INTERROGATOR!

The real problem here is when Democrats are attacked from the supposed Left for telling the truth - like the attacks on Clinton for criticizing GOP support for Nazis - IT ONLY HELPS THE RW & THE FASCISTS & THE GOP!

Attacking Democrats does not help enact liberal/progressive policies. It never has.

[ollie10]

234. Does SHOUTING help?

Last edited Fri Mar 16, 2018, 10:21 AM - Edit history (1)

For one thing, you are SHOUTING at a Democrat.

Secondly, you misquoted a Democrat and as such were misrepresenting what a Democrat said.

I have made it clear I admire Hillary, think she would have been a great president. My issue is with political skill. It is very painful to think that we are only a little over a year into Trump's reign and the thought of about 3 more years is almost unbearable. The thought of 7 more years is unbearable. So my point is if we don't act smart the alternative is 7 more years of shit. Hillary basically said everyone who voted for Trump is a racist, misogynist, etc. This is not only not true (some voted for other reasons) but calling people names is not going to help Democrats get elected. We need a more skillful method. That's my point. Calling them deplorables during the campaign cost her votes. Rinsing and repeating the same mistake might give us 7 years of unbearable shit.

[emulatorloo]

231. No one owes you anything n/t

[TheSmarterDog]

239. Methinks the poster doth protest ... too much.

[Orsino]

206. Not this truth, and not now.

Clinton says so much of the right stuff that it's painful when she feeds the Right a new talking point. This would be the "deplorable" of 2018, except that it's not quite a tidy little sound bit.

But I don't disagree.

[TheSmarterDog]

209. If not now, when?

The GOP has made an art of lying about Democrats, the Democratic Party & everything Democrats do for decades. The truth is the only weapon we have to counter that.

Should Clinton not be urging women to think & vote for themselves? Should she not have acknowledged the GOP was (and is) courting the most extreme RW elements in our society, including Nazis and racists? Should she have not appealed to Americans' Better Angels of Our Nature? Should Democrats not continue to do this?

And you wonder why the minority party - the Republicans - win?

[Orsino]

211. Everything you just said is helpful in ways the Clinton quote isn't.

I don't expect a politician to be on guard 24 hours a day, and it could be said that Clinton is no longer a politician--but she didn't handle this moment well.

[TheSmarterDog]

212. Seems that for some people, nothing Clinton can or may ever say will ever be helpful, uh?

[Orsino]

219. Most of what she says is more than helpful. Vital, even.

This was a misstep.

[TheSmarterDog]

221. No, this is the type of thing that needs to be heard. From all Democrats.

Finally put to rest the lie that both parties are the same.

[Orsino]

227. She should have rephrased her thoughts, just as you did, without sacrifing truth.

Whether or not this (IMO) misstep is significant will probably never be clear.

[TheSmarterDog]

228. You're contradicting yourself. Should HRC & other Dems be able to speak on these issues or not?

Speaking the truth is not a misstep. Articulating the differences between Democrats and Republicans is not a misstep. Highlighting how disastrous Republican policies are is not a misstep. But the Clinton-hating Left keeps trying to make it seem like it is.

[unc70]

48. The Hill is not our friend

They are always doing stories that slightly misquote or take statements out of context in order to stir up dissension. Every day there is at least one story trying to tarnish Bernie, Clinton, or some other Dem. The Bernie ones are good for 50+ outraged posts per thread.

The Hill is really bad about this. Politico is only a little better.

[ms liberty]

90. I have noticed that as well. And a number of people here

fall for it, every single time.

Chuck Todd started at The Hill. I remember him being on CSPAN a good bit when he was with them.

[Hortensis]

108. They don't fall," these messages resonate

with more than just the religious right and misogynistic conservatives, have to or people wouldn't get satisfaction from posting them here.

I don't understand what could cause some Democrats,.especially women, to find commonality with the rabid war-on-women right against Hillary. No woman on the planet is better known for fighting for the rights and wellbeing of women, children, and families.

Bizarre.

[Hortensis]

104. Same negativism as Fox and RT, just subtled down a bit,

but with the same motive.

[Hugin]

194. The Hill went on my BS list when their Editor-in-Chief repeatedly appeared on...

Faux and Frauds.

It is almost at click bait status with me. A step above the "let's you and them fight" we get daily from the Kremlin Bot Army.

[Hortensis]

58. Need to DISTANCE ourselves from Hillary?!!!

From Hillary and her lifetime of speaking out for women? Ridiculous idea, and very much to the contrary.

I'd also suggest that a woman who's been fighting for women's rights her entire life, and is greatly admired in 150 other nations, deserves to be listened to when she speaks on this subject.

Frankly, I don't understand why you think there's nothing to be gained by talking about these women's issues if SHE does. If not her, and apparently not you, who? May the rest of us?



Btw, just so you know and don't get blindsided, this kind of stuff is all over the right. I don't take my lead or my standard from them, even when it's not meant as an attack on the Democratic Party during the primaries.

Fox News Insider: Gutfeld on Hillary's Speech in India:: 'So Bitter You Could Make an Old-Fashioned With Her Tears' Gutfeld pointed out Clinton also made reference to white women voting for Trump because their husbands or other people told them to. "How profoundly sexist is that?" he asked. Gutfeld said Clinton still lives in a world where "you don't see actual people, just the group they belong to."
http://insider.foxnews.com/2018/03/13/greg-gutfeld-hillary-clinton-india-speech-bitter-losing-donald-trump

[mcar]

78. I stand with Hillary

The MSM is trying to make a thing out of this - golly gee, Hillary spoken the truth! How dare she? Why isn't she home knitting?

Screw that! She speaks truth, she won the popular vote. I'm with her!

Oh, and I must say I find it...odd...that the day after a great D victory, we have multiple OPs slamming our female leaders.

[sheshe2]

89. She is not even running again.

They still feel the need to attack her...that tells me all I need to know, they STILL fear her.

[mcar]

97. She is a respected stateswoman with a long history/experience

Her viewpoint SHOULD be sought out!

[Baconator]

150. Not to the detriment of the party...

... and candidates who still have a chance to win.

[Hortensis]

199. It's a "detriment" to the Republican Party and

its attempt to return women to 1950s roles. THAT's where this criticism is coming from, Baconator. From hostility to women's equality.

We can't fix ourselves until we recognize what we're doing wrong. And, of course, speaking of that is going to generate resentment among some, BUT insight and empowerment among others.

By trying to twist Hillary's statements as something bad, the right is actually giving them a lot of exposure. But then, these sorts who are resentfully fighting social progress, kicking and screaming angrily as they're dragged forward willy-nilly, aren't exactly the brightest bulbs, are they? Just hot burning.

[Hortensis]

101. Yes. They still fear her. Hillary nastiness is also

an extremely useful tool for motivating the right wing rabble to get out and vote against Hillary's party. Of course. Expect to see a lot more of it.

[question everything]

141. Please define "they"

I would have thought that you may remember me as a strong supporter of Hillary. Yes, in 2008 when many of you went for Obama and of course, in 2016. I was barred from the Sanders group here on DU, and I tried to convince Skinner to let the hosts of the Hillary page to reverse decisions by jury to hide posts from that page.

Fear her? Yes, if such talks will cost us seats in Trump county.

Why hide the head in the sand? The voters of Lamb do not trust Hillary. Why go to PA? Go back to 2008 and to 2016 to see how the majority on DU did not trust Hillary. Or is it better to pretend this never happened?

I, and many, who do not hide our heads in the sand, know of many professional successful women who would not vote for Hillary. They certainly did not need any "husbands" to tell them what to do. In many cases are they are the decision makers in the household.

But for the ones who do listen to their husbands, if we can, we need to reach them, and we don't do this by mocking them.

As others posted here: we agreed that they were deploarbles, we agreed with Obama in 2008 about them worshiping their guns, but we still want to reach them. At least, I hope we will be trying to reach them. I hope that we have Democratic candidates who will try to reach them.

And to claim that she is now a private citizen? Please! Hasn't she found "Onward?" I know I got emails asking for contributions. So, yes, she is still in the public life. She is still the face of the Democratic party. DUers cannot have it both ways.

These are the times when I am glad that DU is not a representative of the Democratic party. Because with this approach we may as well kiss any political change good bye. Let Trump turn the whole court system to a his own image. Let him fill the whole Supreme Court with his nominees. And we can thank that "purists" among us, and the "say no evil, hear no evil, see no evil" of Democrats.

[sheshe2]

148. Aaaaah.

I was speaking about the GOP. And, no I do not care to waste my time on trump supporters.

[Hermit-The-Prog]

154. vote totals

Hillary won more votes than Twitler in spite of the multitude of dirty tricks. Her message must resonate with more voters than Twitler's message.

Nobody can reach the deplorables. However, Alabama, Virginia and Pennsylvania are an indication that TrumPutin voters who are not deplorables have awakened.

Hillary does not need to hide.

[Hortensis]

200. Exactly. And it's not as if the Hillary deranged

in red districts would be the ones drawn to the decency and good sense of Democratic candidates. We are appealing to the decency and good sense of their better people.

Question Everything, this is something else meant to inspire you once again and remember why we're proud of Hillary -- and ourselves -- and that we need to stand strong on women's issues.

As president, Hillary will:

Work to close the pay gap. Women earn less than men across our economy—and women of color often lose out the most. We should promote pay transparency across the economy and work to pass the Paycheck Fairness Act—a bill Hillary introduced as senator—to give women the tools they need to fight discrimination in the workforce.

Fight for paid leave. No one should have to choose between keeping their job and taking care of a sick family member, and no parent should have to go back to work right after they welcome a newborn baby.

Make quality, affordable child care a reality for families.

Increase the minimum wage. Women represent nearly two-thirds of all minimum-wage workers in America. A higher minimum wage will help close the gender pay gap, lift millions of women out of poverty, and have a ripple effect across our economy. Hillary will also work to end the so-called “tipped minimum wage.”

Defend and enhance Social Security. We need to defend Social Security from Republican attacks and enhance it to meet new realities—especially for women.

Protect and expand on the Affordable Care Act, which has helped address discrimination in our health care system and brought health coverage to millions more women.

Confront violence against women. One in five women in America is sexually assaulted while in college. Twenty-two percent of women experience severe physical violence by an intimate partner at some point in their lifetime. American women are 11 times more likely to be murdered with guns than women in other high-income countries. It’s time to address violence against women—and Hillary will put forward bold plans to do that.

Proudly stand with Planned Parenthood. Hillary is proud to have earned the endorsement of the Planned Parenthood Action Fund. She will always defend the essential health and reproductive care that Planned Parenthood provides for women.

Protect women’s health and reproductive rights. Women’s personal health decisions should be made by a woman, her family, and her faith, with the counsel of her doctor. Hillary will fight back against Republican attempts to restrict access to quality, affordable reproductive health care. She will defend access to affordable contraception, preventive care, and safe and legal abortion—not just in principle, but in practice.

Promote women’s rights around the globe. In far too many parts of the world, women are still held back by social, economic, and legal barriers. Hillary will promote gender equality around the world.

Hillary has a record of fighting for women and girls:
After graduating from Yale Law School, Hillary became an advocate for kids and families at the Children’s Defense Fund.
As first lady of Arkansas, she helped start Arkansas Advocates for Children and Families.
As first lady of the United States, Hillary led the U.S. delegation to the U.N. Fourth World Conference on Women in Beijing, where she proclaimed that “women’s rights are human rights.” She also advocated for the Family and Medical Leave Act, worked to increase funding for child care, and helped start the National Campaign to End Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy.
As senator from New York, Hillary championed access to emergency contraception and voted in favor of strengthening a woman’s right to make her own health decisions. She also championed the Paycheck Fairness Act and co-sponsored the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. She fought for legislation to guarantee paid sick leave and paid parental leave for all federal employees.
As secretary of state, Hillary made women’s rights a cornerstone of U.S. foreign policy.

The Office of
Hillary Rodham Clinton

Nothing's changed as far as our goals go, except that thanks to our own weak sisters we will have to climb out of the hole the Republicans are digging us into in order to move forward as planned.

[radius777]

166. We don't need Trump country

to win, especially if it means becoming Dixiecrats to do it.

They hate Hillary just as they hate Obama because they resent the modern Dem party, of women's rights and diversity - plain and simple - no other reason.

Hillary won 3 million more votes than Trump, and without Comey/Rudy meddling with 11 days to go - she wins going away - even with the Russian meddling.

It's good Lamb won, and he did what he had to to win in a red district, but lets not pretend that is typical of the Dem electorate.

The rust belt is gone, IMO, as it is too old, white and culturally conservative. We can probably still get the more moderate rustbelt/midwest states but the more conservative ones are gone.

The future of the Dem party are states like AZ, TX, GA, NC that have become more metropolitan, diverse and younger over the past decade... likely to go the way of NV, VA and CO which were once deep red but are now light blue.

[EffieBlack]

170. Totally this.

[GWC58]

140. FUCK OFF Greg GUTfeld!

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

180. Seriously!

[Ninsianna]

63. It is true and quite frankly, you're not listening to what Dems are saying,

we WANT this brought to the front, though Hillary limited her criticism to Trump's campaign. The sad truth is that the GOP and their helpers are all about going backwards, they are regressives, and people who want the votes of Democrats will not distance themselves from the simple truth about what's going.

Distance yourself from Hillary and Nancy and you fall right in line with the Trump party line. Democrats who wish to toe the Republican line, who cater to that sort of idiocy, won't be winning.

We are winning Trump districts, and we're doing so by being Democrats and not relying on forces outside the party to dictate what we say and what we do.

[question everything]

142. I agree with everything that she said, except the comment about women voting as told

by the men in their lives.

We all know that this is not true. There are many suburban white women, professional, intelligent who just could not bring themselves to vote for Hillary. They did not need any man to tell them this. Haven't we seen many on DU disliking her, vowing not to vote for her? Certainly was true in 2008 and in 2016.

We certainly should not distance ourselves from Hillary nor Nancy nor any other Democrat. But the reality is that Lamb won by doing just that, perhaps Doug Jones, too. Do we, then, reject them? We will have to accept the possibility that for Democratic candidates to win in Trump country, they may have to do this. They may have to oppose abortion and gun control. But as I've said before, these are crucial times. The future and the survival of this country is in jeopardy unless we wrestle control of Congress, or at least, reduced their majority so they cannot do what comes out of Trump's ass. So we will have to put the purity aside and accept anyone with a D.

[Demsrule86]

165. I did GOTV...and often the husband would announce in a rude way that they were voting for

McCain in 08 and Romney in 12...the woman shook her head if she was behind him or 'saw me out ' and said " don't listen I am voting for Obama" There are plenty of women under their husband's thumb...but when they vote they do as they please...some husbands fill out their wives absentee ballots and make them sign them...you would be surprised.

[radius777]

169. "Running against leadership" is nothing new

Both parties allow/encourage their candidates in swing/difficult districts to moderate their positions and even run against their own leadership when it makes sense to do so.

[stevenleser]

225. You are mistaken re: We all know this is not true

Because it definitely does happen. The only question is how much. That I can’t answer.

[EffieBlack]

71. Damned if she does, damned if she doesn't

If she didn't tell the truth, she'd be accused of all manner of phoniness and mendacity. When she tells the truth, she's told that she shouldn't have said it.

In other words, more with the "be quiet Hillary."

She's more than earned her right to say whatever she damned well pleases, whenever, wherever and however she wants to say it.

[HipChick]

87. Exactly...

I am tired of all this goody-two Dem BS - sometimes you need to fight fire with fire..

[question everything]

143. Everthing that she said was the truth, about the economic strenght of the districts

except the comment about women listening to their husbands on how to vote. We know this is not true. We know - those of us with no blinders - that many professional women did not vote for her. They did not need any man's approval. Have you been here in 2008? The majority of DU did not want to vote for her and, I think, many were women who did not need any man's guidance.

[Baconator]

151. That's not really true...

If she retired to private life and that was that... Who could complain? and how?

Also, true or not, that's a juicy sound bite for every opponent to Claire Mccaskill in Missouri. What's the point?

[EffieBlack]

159. If someone's going to switch their vote from Claire McCaskill to her opponent in November because

Hillary Clinton said something truthful in March, Claire McCaskill, the DNC and the DSCC have completely screwed up the campaign - and the Democratic Party has much bigger problems than a former presidential candidate speaking her mind.

[Hortensis]

204. I think you made the point you responded to.

Who could complain if she just disappeared from public life... Me and the rest of the majority of those who chose her to be our president.

The meme being pushed on this thread, not just all across right-wing media, that she can't even make a simple statement on women's rights without threatening the party is highly questionable.

[JI7]

98. Conor Lamb Campaigned with Joe Biden. White men get a pass that others do not

Joe Biden has said many stupid things and there was the anita hill case but that didn't hurt white men soo....

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

193. Very true.

[EffieBlack]

197. When Biden says stupid things, people think he's adorable

When Hillary says things that aren't stupid but just make them uncomfortable, they tell her to shut up and go away.

[brush]

133. She's her own woman who's not running anymore. She can say what she wants and it doesn't...

reflect on the whole party.

And she's not entirely wrong.

[question everything]

144. What about "Onward?"

Hillary Clinton launches political group to fund activism

Hillary Clinton launches Onward Together to fund activist groups
Clinton says she is now part of "the resistance" to President Donald Trump's agenda

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/05/15/hillary-clinton-launches-political-group-to-fund-activism.html

[brush]

145. What about it? We should all be part of the resistance.

[Demsrule86]

167. sure it will be much better at supporting Democrats than Our Revolution...who will guarantee

multiple losses...(go away Nina Turner). We will never support and organization that endorsed Republicans and Greens.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

185. Of course Hillary is more free to speak her mind, now that she's out of the running.

But, her words still have consequences.

[dawg day]

183. How did that happen in Alabama and PA-18?

Not by winning over Trump voters, but by energizing people who are already open to voting Democratic.

And in Alabama, never forget that Black women (and men) made up much of the difference. We should be thanking the Democratic voters, not flattering Trump voters.

[pandr32]

69. Agreed

While some are hitting the fainting couches because she said this we need to remember she is telling us the truth AND she won the popular vote handily.
The women's movement will hopefully make inroads into communities where women are under the strong influences of patriarchy. We must not let up.

[politicaljunkie41910]

84. Besides, Lamb just ran for Congress in a Red district and WON and didn't feel compelled to have

to answer for anything Hillary Clinton said, so why are we even entertaining this bullshit. We need to stop letting the GOP set the damn agenda, and decide what we as women can and cannot say. Hillary is not a candidate for any office. She doesn't have to answer for anything she says these days, an neither does the Democratic Party. That should be the response anytime anyone raises her name during any campaign. The candidate should simply say when asked anything about Hillary Clinton, "Hillary Clinton is not on the ballot. I'm Mary Smith or John Doe, and I'm running for Congress." It worked for Conor Lamb in Red State Pennyslvania and it will work for other Dems as well. Chances are the people who raise the question would not be voting for a Democrat anyway, so why waste time getting into a foolish debate on something someone else said.

[trof]

93. Yes, I think she is.

But maybe she shouldn't have said it?

[braddy]

95. White women are voting the same as they have since they got the vote a 100 years ago, repubican.

[Motley13]

2. I also wish she hadn't called the deplorables, deplorable

true, but it didn't help

[librechik]

46. Shoulda said "Basket o Bad Eggs!"

cuz it's wrong to mix metaphors. And anyway, what she said made NO SENSE!

But Boy o Boy do I hate anti-Hillary threads that spotlight her failures with little insight to what happens next. And what she said about women Trump voters is well documented. So what's wrong with saying it?

[radius777]

67. "Basket of Deplorables" was a well crafted meme

that makes perfect sense.

Hillary stood up against the Trump base in a way that nobody else had the guts to do.

The mistake was in allowing the media to force her to back down. She should've doubled down instead, because it rallied the Dem base while attracting moderates put-off by the deplorables' behavior.

[AncientGeezer]

163. Double down??

"...because it rallied the Dem base while attracting moderates put-off by the deplorables' behavior...."
To what end? A loss?

[redstateblues]

83. The "deplorables" comment move pushed my sister over the edge

She has since realized the error of her ways. I'm sure she was not alone.

[Ninsianna]

116. Has she figured out what she actually said? I'm sure she wasn't alone as well,

since so many chose to simply accept the Republican framing as reality, rather than actually figure out what she said.

It's a habit with a lot of people, like that superpredator thing, people just accept that the clip they saw (that Trump tweeted out) said what people kept telling them it did. Very few actually bothered to listen to the whole 40 minute speech, or the handy transcript CSPAN provided to notice that she never mentioned race.

People need to stop believing the soundbytes and the clips and start looking for context and nuance and understanding words.

It's sad that the GOP wins so often by lying outright and counting on the bias of the media and the laziness of its viewers who not only refuse to do their homework, but cling to the lie even after the proof of it is presented to them.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

181. Yup, there lies the problem.

[LisaM]

103. She didn't. That was taken out of context, too.

It was part of a much larger statement and, among other things, did not address all Trump voters.

[JustAnotherGen]

4. I heard all of her remarks

I pretty much agreed with everything she said, she's not running again, is a private citizen, and can do what she wants.

I mean - I'm not the best responder because I agree with every word she said.

Every single one.


Those women need a 'big strong daddy' - well I'm not fighting for them. I'm fighting for my own interests in 2018 and thank GOD a strong woman who has a platform can speak for a lot of women.

She said just enough to let those women know what other women think of them. If they don't like - they can go cry to 45/150 that they want their you know what grabbed. They ran around with tshirts saying that much during the election - so eh?

Fuck em. We don't need em. We've pulled enough from non voting women in the NJ 7th - and Indies -

That we don't need those fucking trump girls.

[JI7]

12. Yup, fuck them. Make them admit what and why they vote the way they do

Instead of hiding behind some bs reasons like god values etc.

Maybe we wouldn't have trump if these people weren't always coddled and excused for their bigotry and other fucked up views.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

77. Of course, Hillary can do and say whateva she wants, especially now that she's out of politics...

But, it's still fair to point out that it's rather sexist to single out any group of women and suggest they can't think for themselves. To the contrary, I'm sure these women who voted for the Nazi-in-Chief, after giving it due thought, did so GLADLY, regardless of anyone else's opinion, based on their own views. They should be held responsible for their horrible choices like everyone else.

Besides, how would a husband, father, brother, son even know which lever these women pulled in voting for their preferred candidate? To suggest they're subject to some kind of mind control let's them "off the hook" WAY too easily.

[Atticus]

120. And I thought I was the only one who not only agreed with her, but applauded

her truth-telling. I recall seeing the "lady" in the tee-shirt you spoke of and don't know who represents these Trumpford wives more: the woman in the tee or "Mother" Pence.

[JustAnotherGen]

235. Can't be mother

They have three children - so she's probably only enjoyed 'relations' three times in her life.

She wouldn't know that if it was happening to her 'in the moment'.

[Atticus]

236. "enjoyed"? nt

[JustAnotherGen]

238. Oh my!

Dear Atticus - you are oh so right!

[Egnever]

5. it was not the brightest thing to say to be sure

And absolutely forces dems from those states to run away from her.

[Wwcd]

38. Run away from what? She's not in any race. She's a free citizen again.

Last edited Wed Mar 14, 2018, 07:22 PM - Edit history (1)

And she is dead right about women who won't stand for themselves nor their children in the face of a p**** grabber and his pals like Roy Moore.

She is correct when she watches as some women so easily hand over their bodies & reproductive rights to a bunch of patriarical mysoginstic men.

Its sickening to all of us who watch them cheer on the very men who will & already have begun to strip every female right from them.

Again, Sec Clinton is saying what many "Me Too-ers" & women's marchers are shouting & what we fear.

[karynnj]

66. Many do not see "reproductive rights" as you do

I suspect that one factor not given enough weight in 2016 (like in 2004) is that a CONSERVATIVE Supreme Court Justice was being replaced. For many who genuinely believe that abortion is wrong, their vote was to prevent a more moderate replacement. Most Democratic politicians, no matter what their personal believe, agree that it is not their right to enforce others to accept their beliefs. For many on the right, this is their litmus test issue.

Clinton is NOT speaking like the women's marchers or the me toos, she is ASSUMING that ALL women would be on her side - or they are influenced by the men in their lives. It insults the woman voter.

[EffieBlack]

75. She didn't even come close to saying or even implying that

[karynnj]

136. Her words were:

[Democrats] do not do well with white men, and we don’t do well with married, white women. And part of that is an identification with the Republican Party, and a sort of ongoing pressure to vote the way that your husband, your boss, your son, whoever, believes you should,” she said.

Had she stopped at an identification with the Republican party, I would agree with you, but she went on to speak of pressure to vote like their male relatives.

[EffieBlack]

146. Whats not true about that?

Are you saying that some white women aren’t pressured to vote like their husbands?

I certainly don’t get from her comments that she was saying this applies to all married while women, so what’s the problem? If you think this isn’t a factor in the votes of a lot of white women, ypu’re Just not paying attention.

Far too many white women have been lining up with their husbands against other people for a couple of centuries. This has wreaked havoc particularly on black folk - especially black men - to a tragic degree. I for one appreciate Hillary calling this out and am finding it somewhat amusing to watch the pearl clutching by white progressives who seem so driven by knee jerk tribalism - likely unconscious but still prevalent, nonetheless - that they assume any criticism of white female Trump voters is a personal attack on them.

[karynnj]

157. I am a white woman

My experience is most people date and marry people compatible with them. My friends and I were liberals and we married liberals. There is also the fact that areas of the country have become more homogeneous. If you selected a person at random in Oklahoma, it is far more likely the person will be a conservative. If you randomly pick a person in Vermont they will be progressive.

I admit that I will never experience what life is as a person of color. This, however, is about white women. I disagree that most of them simply take on the political beliefs of their spouses.

[EffieBlack]

161. She didn't say all or most white women. She was clearly referring to a specific segment

of white women. And she was right.

Have you stopped to think about why you are so offended by someone referring to "white women" and assume that they're talking about you and feel the need to step up and defend the women she was actually talking about? In my experience, black and brown folk are used to be constantly identified by our race, but many white people get really touchy about being identified by their race. This, in my view, is based on a certain privilege that white folk have of being able to assume that they're just "people," not "white people," based upon their experience of usually being so treated - while everyone else is identified as belonging to certain categories.

This is in no way a criticism of you or a suggestion that you are biased in any way. White privilege is not your doing or your fault. But I hope you'll consider if it's playing a part in your reaction to Hillary's comment.

[mythology]

171. Please point out where she used the word some in describing which women are pressured by men

Oh that's right she didn't. You are interpreting what she said in the direction you want to believe she meant it. That's what Republicans will do with the same sentence. You complain about other people not stepping out of their world view, while doing the exact same thing.

Why is it so hard to admit she said something stupid, shrug your shoulders and move on? Shit happens. Pretending like it's some great moral cause to defend a poorly worded comment is a really odd hill to die on.

[EffieBlack]

188. She didn't use the word "some" - because it wasn't necessary

Since there are other words that communicate you're talking about a portion of a group and not the entire group, like "part of that":

"{Democrats} do not do well with white men, and we don't do well with married, white women. And part of that is an identification with the Republican Party, and a sort of ongoing pressure to vote the way that your husband, your boss, your son, whoever, believes you should," she said.

It's clear that she was not talking about all white women or all white married women or all Republican white married women. Only someone looking to play victim or score political points would read this to mean she was talking about all white women.

The real question is why you and some other people here are pushing the Fox News, Hannity, Washington Examiner spin on her remarks?

[Wwcd]

102. Omg. You can save the Hillary discrediting. She isn't ASSUMING ANYTHING

And when the Women's March Organizers display Hillary Clinton's iconic quote as their headline & yet fail to give her an iota of credit, don't tell me or her who is assuming anything.

Sorry but your post is a really big damed insult to me, to women who have walked the damn walk for years & trust me, HRC doesn't assume anything.
She doesn't Have to ASSUME ANYTHING.
She has been there, done that for years.

She damned well knows who she was referring to. She's dealt with them her entire life.

They are deplorable & as far as ME Too, she is far more in touch with their mission & thinking than you apparently know of her.

Women who casually give theirs & the rights of others away to a bunch of asshole men like Trump to decide their fate damed well should be called out.
Women's March for Women's right's & the ME TOO movement is identical to what HRC and her generation fought for.
They walked that walk before.

Don't you or anyone ever sell their work or progress out.
That goes for the very disappointing Tamika Mallory & Linda Sarsour, & their dear friend Mr Farrankahn.

That whole reveal tells us all we need to know as to the legitimacy of the organizers & calls to question what their purpose really is.

That also tells us everything as to why they refused to give credit to the One Woman who has consistantly advocated for REAL women's rights in the US and around the world.

Instead they grace women on stage with the likes of like Michael Moore. Ya that icon of women's rights , and host the headline speaker at their Convention, that other icon of woman's rights, the author ofb"Rape Fantasy", Mr Bernie Sanders..!! Whoo hoo!

Its not a stretch at all to see where this all is going & why.

So I would ask that you & others NEVER EVER ASSUME TO KNOW WHAT HRC KNOWS.
You are dead wrong & I'd be absolutely embarassed to align myself with those that want to strip HRC of her lifetime of hard fought accomplishments.

That would be the biggest disservice to the women's movement that began a long long time ago.
We know who we are & what it took to get women this far.
So does Hillary Clinton.

[karynnj]

123. I commented on what HRC said -- live with it

You are the one assuming things .. about me .. who you know absolutely nothing about. I actually am in Hillary's generation and worked in a research field where there were far more men than women. I was part of that time when women demanded the opportunities that men had .. and got it.

Your rant is crazy - there was absolutely nothing I said that challenged the very real accomplishments that Clinton had. I have no idea why you even bring up that the women's march had some people carrying signs with Clinton's words (I assume you me that "women's rights are human rights&quot without crediting it. Then you go on ... with Bernie, the organizers of the Women's march etc.

It is clear that you are upset, but I really do not get how you go from what I wrote to things far afield.

[Wwcd]

126. Its not as crazy as the bullshit posts in reply to the OP.

SHE ASSUMED?
How do you know anything about what Hillary Clinton assumes.

STOP IT.

[karynnj]

129. So, I am responsible for every post in the thread you dislike?

As to assume, there is an implicit assumption in what she said because it postulates that white women who voted against her were influenced by the men around them.

[Wwcd]

135. Bye. How can anyone defend this article.

Wtf ever.

[EffieBlack]

172. Damn!

[Ninsianna]

109. Um, women are not stupid. She's not assuming anything, anyone who bothers to view all

of her comments and not just what the GOP and the biased media choose to report, they'll see that she's speaking the truth. She's not insulting women voters, she's literally saying what the actual women who were marching, not the appointed faces of the trademarked march that excluded people, she's speaking to the #meToo movement who is well aware that she's very much correct about what women actually go through.

It insults the woman voter to imply that we don't know what she's saying and the frightening and unfortunate reality that has so many hiding in secret facebook groups during the last election. Gaslighting what women actually go through, telling us that people who speak the truth are somehow insulting us, well that's what insults as voters and as women. This is the crap that the GOP and sneering biased media keep doing. Let's not have that here.

[karynnj]

117. You are making things up - the specific comments that I and others disagreed with

was her explanation that many women voted the way men around them wanted them too. It was HILLARY who belittled women who voted against her.

Obviously, I was NOT speaking of the women marching, Democratic women etc I was speaking about a comment that HRC actually did make.

[Ninsianna]

118. No, I'm not. Hillary didn't belittle women, she acknowledged the reality that many

women have been telling you about for several years now. Where they literally did not feel safe expressing their own feelings.

So, you've decided to belittle women on Hillary's behalf for stating what women have been telling people for some time?

That's not HILLARY who is belittling women, that's the interesting interpretation of her words, while deliberately ignoring what women have been saying for quite some time now about the fear that women had faced in actually voicing their support. That extended to the voting both and towards the mailed in ballots that women in certain situations don't exactly have privacy regarding.

It's sad how much deliberate distortion of her words is being done, and how much deliberate silencing of what women have been saying, in secret facebook accounts etc.

Belittling women, not paying attention to their words and deeds seems to be a virus that people have caught from all that gaslighting that's been going on, and the fun game the GOP and the media play with deliberate distortions.

[karynnj]

134. There was no distortion of her words

The difference is that you are arguing that what she said was what actually happened -- and your proof consists of secret facebook groups and things that were suppressed.

Do you seriously think the majority of white women who voted for Trump were pressured to do so?

[Ninsianna]

186. Not understanding words and their meanings is a distortion, there was definitely a distortion.

The difference is that I'm arguing that her words (and mine) were not understood, nor was context apparently grokked.

Um, the "secret facebook pages" were things that millions of women participated in, and which produced books, quite a lot of the resister groups and where the women's march actually came from. So, the difference seems to be actually understanding what was said, and understanding what went on, failing that, one tends to distort things by putting women down and misunderstanding what was said.

I seriously think that women are quite capable of misogyny, quite capable of being manipulated, and have actually stated that they did indeed feel pressured to vote the way the men around them wanted.

So, being a woman wasn't defense against misogyny, nor was it a defense against misunderstanding simple words based on the distortion of bias and ignorance of what was actually going on.

Secret facebook pages, meant that the rest of the facebook feed of an individual participant were not notified of what people were saying there, it doesn't mean they were "suppressed" or hidden from the general public.

It might be time to start listening to women, and seriously figuring out why that's so hard for people to do.

[karynnj]

207. I have no problem understanding the standard English meaning of words

I also am absolutely not putting down women. You might notice that I referred to the specific words Clinton said. In a response to dispute what I said, you attacked Bernie, the people who organized the women's march, and even Farrakahn - all completely unrelated to Clinton's comment.

What I said in various posts is that there are right wing women. They predominantly live in areas Republicans usually win and they are mostly married to men whose political views they share.

I reject that most women who voted for Trump or previous Republican nominees are doing so because they are pressured to do so.

Many of these Republican women were interviewed during the election. They spoke of things like abortion, or imigration, economics issues, etc as why they would vote for Trump.

In 2016, the Clinton campaign expected they could win a significant percent of white, college educated, Republican women. While they did win some, as did earlier male candidates, there was not as big a shift as many pundits at various times predicted.

What I am saying is that, for the most part, many voted their political party, not their gender.

[Ninsianna]

232. Um, I noticed that you chose to ignore what was said and decided to go off on a tangent.

I didn't attack Bernie, I stated facts about the women appointed to be the face of the Women's March, and the racist misogynist they applauded.

You don't actually know what their politics are, the fact that they live in areas where Republicans are, doesn't tell you anything about them, and the fact that literally so many, many women were speaking out about how threatened they were, in their workplaces, in their homes and in their neighborhoods, which is what I actually referenced and which Hillary was also referencing makes one wonder if English is not the issue that if there is some sort of selective blindness which edits out entire sentences.

I reject that women's experiences where they literally said they did feel pressure are somehow not true, because, well blindness, language issues, or just not being aware that women were saying things.

Many of these women were also speaking out when their names and faces were not on TV, they spoke of things like pressure and what they were dealing with at home, and those who wanted to vote for Hillary, who may not have agreed with her on everything but saw what was being done to her, from all sides.

2016, the campaign expected that their voters would be allowed to vote, not purged and that those votes would be counted. They were actually doing quite well with women, until the media bias, the Comey crap and the constant drone about emails and the rigging nonsense. I'd suggest that these "pundits" were busy whining about emails and failing to actually pay attention to what was going on, their bias blinded them and they were helping push the propaganda.

What I'm saying is that when women are telling you something, you might want to listen, as Hillary did, to the massive number of women who were sharing what they were going through instead of just dismissing the experiences she referenced.

[Ninsianna]

121. Also, telling women they're "making things up" when they say things that are uncomfortable

and contrary to one's point, is the literal definition of gaslighting. Women have literally been speaking about how they feared the reaction of men around them with regard to their support of Hillary. That was from all sides. Women were speaking about it in those secret facebook groups, were all of them making things up too, or did the poor dears just not know what they were talking about, just like Hillary, and belittling everyone by daring to whisper about what they faced in their homes, offices, and even at the polls?

[karynnj]

128. As you might guess, like most Karyn's I am female

Your comments absolutely have nothing to do with what I wrote --- and throwing around buzz words like "gaslighting" does not make it so. PS If there were secret facebook groups -- I can assure you that I did not know of the them .. maybe because they were secret. Not to mention, if these women go to secret facebook groups, couldn't they in the privacy of the voteing booth voted for Clinton? They were more likely to be caught by their husband writing in their secret facebook group?

I did not rule out that there are some people in abusive relationships, I simply pointed out that just as I married a liberal, highly educated man -- and really did not date any men who did not fit that description, I would assume that many right wing men marry right wing women. There is significant self selection.

[Ninsianna]

162. As you might have guessed after the past several years, being female is not

an inoculation against really bad, misogynistic takes.

My comments literally address precisely what you wrote, and responded to the tone deafness exhibited. I guess when one decides that words are simply "buzz words", it gives one license to completely ignore definitions, context and meaning. I'm guessing this how the ridiculously bad takes and all that ill informed scolding is coming from, after all why bother pretending women might have something to say, when you can just dismiss their words.

There were indeed secret facebook groups, these were actually talked about quite a bit, but I guess being utterly ignorant about their existence, what millions of women were saying in them and why they had to be so secret, is why you didn't understand the words and context of what Hillary was saying. She, like so many other Karyns and so many females who were paying attention, knew what was going on. Women were inviting their friends, there was discussion, there were thousands of people sharing their experiences, in an arena where their husbands and other men were not invited, because of the atmosphere that women were dealing with.

Um, she actually mentioned, and so did I, that women didn't feel safe even in the voting booth and if they were doing absentee, they didn't have a private voting booth.

It's not just about domestic abuse, there were so many stories of women being attacked, silenced, abused and harassed by people on all sides of the spectrum. Lots of "highly educated" supposedly "liberal" men were cited as people who were engaging in this abuse. And a lot of highly educated, liberal women faced these men not merely as dating partners, spouses, etc. but in their workplace, in other public places.

That's a whole lot of assumptions, none of which actually address what I said. That's the problem with dismissing things one admits one knows nothing about, and putting down "buzz words", and actually engaging in gas lighting and that smug superiority about dating practices, as if women in actual abusive relationships were just stupid and dating idiots.

This is kind of why putting down women is not a gender specific activity, there are plenty of women and self proclaimed liberals who engage in the exact same behavior as the CONs, they also like to denigrate women, ignore what they say, and assert their false sense of superiority. It's kind of why it's important to listen to each other respectfully and thoughtfully, and not arrogantly dismiss other women.

Sorta what that whole #MeToo movement was about.

[Wwcd]

119. Thank you. Sounds like Our fking revolutuon of dividing the Party in time for the next election

Pisses me off that women fell for their bullsh.

Learn from those who have walked before you.
And never take for granted the rights they fought hard to get you won't be slyly stripped clean by a party of usurpers with a whole different agenda.

Only when they recognize those who spent lifetimes bringing the blessed freedom women have today, should they ever be taken as serious advocates of women & girls.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

187. It's a bit sexist if you ask me and fails to hold those women who voted tRump

responsible for committing that vile act. On that point, Hillary completely missed the mark... her other comments were pretty much right on target.

[emulatorloo]

233. No offense, but you are simply too biased against Clinton to accurately summarize her words.

She said nothing like that. You are creating a straw man Hillary

[Ninsianna]

62. I think all the criticism of what she actually said is not the brightest, it's pretty

par for the course however, instead of actually listening to what she said, people chose to basically condemn, abuse and then lie about what she said.

Any dem running from what she said, isn't much of a Dem, not much of independent thinker, and is someone who doesn't bother to question the bias they're fed.

No one with functional brain cells, which Democrats usually possess, will be running from her. At some point those who are newly arrived to the party or who have just woken up from a 3 decade long nap/coma should figure out that when the Republicans and the lovely people in the media who have demonstrated they cannot shed their bias, say something about Hillary, her voice, her tone, her words etc. they should double check what she said in context.

It's like all the people mindlessly snarling about that one speech back in 1996, who insisted race was mentioned. The video, the transcript etc of the speech they like to howl about contained no such thing, and in this day and age, instead of relying on Republican edited clips, they have access to the whole speech in context.

Simply opening the ears and the mind will correct the notions these dems might have. Is that too much to expect from Dems? I think not, we're not Republicans, we're not fox viewers, and the majority of us understand how misogyny, bias and the anti-Clinton, anti-Hillary media and party actually work.

The truth may hurt, but bright people aren't fooled about what she said, and they won't be running anywhere.

[EffieBlack]

76. Thank you.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

81. Exactly right! Simply doesn't help going forward.

[Ninsianna]

112. What does help going forward? Ignoring what happeend? Letting the Republican

talking points, the editing and outright propaganda go on with out challenge? How about repeating the crap they're saying and using that to silence, and force out effective women leaders? Is that what's considered "helpful going forward"?

I mean, we could perhaps address the great wrongs done by the GOP, address their habit of lying their butts off, calling out the obvious and blatant lies, perhaps we could try that going forward. Assuming our goal is to make progress for Democrats and progressives that is.

If the goal is to allow the GOP to continue to lie, to choose our leaders, and to tell us what to do, to help them regress, then simply continue to attack whom they helpfully target, and use those talking points they so nicely present.

That's not our goal as Dems, so thanks, but we simply don't need that sort of "help" going forward, it's what got us here in the first place.

[EffieBlack]

174. No - instead of addressing the wrongs and lies of the GOP, apparently, we're supposed to

duck and cover and make sure that we downgrade and downplay and dilute ourselves to the point that we're not longer a threat to them so that they'll stop lying about us.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

177. The two are not mutually exclusive... progressives have shown that.

[pnwmom]

195. What did she say that was not true? nt

[MuseRider]

6. If you have ever

done a ton of phone banking or door to door in an area that is not entirely blue you will know this is the truth. (you have been here a long time, I am sure you have done your share but I don't know where) I have had husbands overhear their wife talking to me, rip the phone out of her hand and give me hell for trying to warp her mind. She will vote how he tells her to vote. It is even worse door to door when you see him yank her from the door, get in front and say the same. It happens more than I would like to know. I was stunned. I am still stunned at how often you hear it but you have to do days and days and hours and hours for the amount to begin to stun you. I tried not to notice for a while it was so disturbing to me. You add them up and it is sad. Very sad.

[question everything]

11. Not necessarily. Many white woman in the subrubs just did not like Hillary

heck, many here did not like Hillary. Many because... she stayed with Bill which, of course, is no one's business.

So they did not vote for her because they did not like her. And amazingly, once these districts have other Democratic candidates, they do vote for them.

Still, we know that we need to, first keep the Democrats in districts that Trump won, second, to flip many of these districts the way we have done in Virginia and yesterday in PA and in other places. And saying this will not help.

I'd hate to have a close race and the Republican candidate tell many women: they loath you, they say that you do what your husband tell you to do. Even if true, and especially if true, no one likes to hear this things in public.

[Eliot Rosewater]

23. People dont like Hillary because they believed 25 yrs of lies about her.

Cant believe I have to say that HERE

[Baconator]

53. It's not realistic to assume that everyone who didn't like her...

... only did so because of a false media narrative.

She had lots of skills and experience but no one ever really thought of her as a "people person" like her husband was.

[EffieBlack]

79. Sigh ...

[happy feet]

160. +1

[bettyellen]

29. They like the serial cheater who admits he molests women and hate Hillary becasue she stayed w bill

So they’re pro divorce or something? LOL. Nope. They use whatever rationalizations the media hands them.

[JI7]

35. They voted for a pussy grabber, bigoted filth. Fuck them and those who defend them

[sheshe2]

100. Yup.

And this one was a real gem. Look how proud she is.



I stand with everything that Hillary said. She is correct.

[Wwcd]

124. Pretty much just screams, that Hillary damn well knows what she's talking about

Wtf.

Thank you for driving the point home with this one photo of a very stupid woman. I pity her future female generations.

Really.

[sheshe2]

131. That a woman would be proud of that shirt.

I can't even.

[EffieBlack]

176. If only I could have three minutes with this woman

to point out to her that Trump wouldn't ever think of grabbing anything of hers because, although notwithstanding her stupid shirt, she's not an unattractive woman, she is just the kind of woman that Trump would call a "fat pig," a "loser," and "definitely not a 10."

Yet she proudly debased herself for man who wouldn't give her the time of day - unless it was to laugh at her.

[sheshe2]

205. So true,Effie.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

192. Would hate that too... good point.

[Wellstone ruled]

13. So agree,heard it thousands of time.

And if one doubts this response,get involved and do Lit Drops door to door,or,do Phone Banking. It gets real in one hell of a hurry.

[hlthe2b]

7. A bit like Obama's "they are clinging to God and Bible" comment

( "They get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.&quot

Both his and Clinton's comment have considerable truth behind them, but the are not particularly helpful... On the women pro-Trump comment, I can assure you that I know well educated women who fit that profile.... There are STILL women who meld into their spouse or male partner to that extent. Add the influence of highly patriarchal religion and HRC is surely not wrong.

Still, we do have to try to reach that small proportion who may still be "reachable" and this bluntness does not help.

[Squinch]

27. One of those statements was made by a Presidential candidate. The other by a private citizen.

She has no responsibility to hedge or lie to reach those who can't take the truth.

[hlthe2b]

44. I never said she did.

I said it is not helpful and it is not. That doesn't make it untrue either.

[Squinch]

80. I know you didn't, but I have no problem with the fact that we have a well-listened-to

private citizen telling the truth.

There seems to be an assumption that we will lose votes over this. I doubt that is true. Who is to say that we won't GAIN votes from, say, nonvoters who are sick of the lies of republicans and the tepid responses to those lies by Democrats? Or perhaps we will gain from women who examine their reasons and find that they ARE letting their husband decide their vote.

We've been polite long enough. Now I'd like to see the truth, early and often, sometimes brutal, and without apology.

[radius777]

86. Obama was correct - we need to slap some truth into these people,

and define what we stand for instead of letting them define us.

That's the reason the country is so backward, because both parties like to appease these socially conservative dumbasses who need to step into the 21st century.

[hlthe2b]

99. Attitude Change is slow. It is sped by political change. Political change requires votes.

Bottom line. Appease? NO. Not go out of your way to be disrespectful... yes

Neither is wrong... Obama backtracked because he realized it was not the "strategic " thing to say and unfortunately when trying to win elections, that matters.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

189. Great points.

[unblock]

8. how dare she encourage people to think for themselves!

oh, wait, are we thinking we should be all delicate and sensitive and respectful in talking about some people's decision to vote for the horrible monster raging recklessly in the oval office?

well sign me up for more of what hillary's dishing out, and let's tell her to turn it up to eleven!

as far as i'm concerned, people should be ruthlessly ridiculed for standing by donnie.

we need to laugh in their faces.

shame them into paying attention and voting for someone intelligent, reasonable, and capable, instead of whatever damn fool the republican party puts up.

[question everything]

17. Shaming someone will not bring more Democrats to the House and to the senate

and this should be our major goal. Yes, even if we end up with a Doug Jones and a Conor Lamb who distanced themselves from Hillary and from Nancy Pelosi to win.

As I posted some days ago: do we want to gain control over Congress or do we want to promote our "purity" and stay forever in the minority while Trump and the Republicans change the country for generations? How long, do you think, will the elder Supreme Court justices be able to hold on?

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100210330804

[unblock]

21. i'm not a purist, i'm a pragmatist. i want more democrats in congress and to win the white house.

grew up in ohio and lived long enough in texas (seven years) to know that acknowledging that voting for donnie is even remotely plausible is a huge mistake.

we're not going to win anyone over by making donnie out as anyone worth considering.

the people who are still for donnie are going to stay with donnie until he's made a laughingstock, until they see that they should be *embarrassed* to even think of voting for another republican.



the gentle persuasion tactic is easily foiled by republicans simply presenting candidates that are merely slightly more human than donnie. sorry, i'm not a fan of that tactic. we have to reset the frame. we have to make it clear that donnie and the republican party have gone off the deep end, and no one in their right mind should be following them.

[EffieBlack]

82. If at this stage, with what they've seen of Trump, these women will refuse to vote against him

because they think Hillary Clinton "shamed" them, we'll, guess what? They're not going to vote for a Democrat anyway.

[Ninsianna]

106. So why waste the breath to shame a woman who called it like it is?

Our major goal is to suit up and fight these Republicans and the lies they and their allies spread. Doug and Connor didn't do what you keep insisting they did. Although this is the Trump party line today, it's not an accurate one.

I don't understand how or why adopting Republican talking points and attacking our progressive leaders for speaking truths the Republicans find hard to deal with, to be a smart strategy. The "purity" folks are the ones who seem to have the same targets as the Republicans, they're the ones attacking Hillary (still), and Nancy Pelosi and pretty much any woman who is effectively organizing the party against the Republicans. Why attack the women doing the damned work against the Republicans?

If only people who are busy doing the Republicans bidding, to remove, and silence effective women, cared one whit about Supreme Court justices, or any of the rest of the judiciary.

[seaglass]

9. Aimee Parnes? Wouldn't waste my time. n/t

[Hekate]

10. How dare she have an opinion based in provable fact? Smelling salts, please!

[hatrack]

14. She's. Not. Running. Again.

[question everything]

18. But she is still part of the image of the Democratic party

She even said this, after the elections, that she wanted to still play a part. Even established some kind of organization.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

191. That certainly gives Hillary more leeway to say what's really on her mind...

just don't see how certain comments, like those about mind-controlled women, are helpful.

[vi5]

15. Oh brother.....

..can we stop with this. I'm not Hillary's biggest fan by any stretch of the imagination, but everything she said was 100% right.

And nothing she said was even in the same stratosphere of offensiveness as even the most innocuous thing that Republicans say without apologizing and without having Republicans and their allies dab their foreheads with their hankies and fall on the fainting couch.

Clinton has made some bad decisions and said some cringeworthy things. This was not even close to one of them.

[Aristus]

16. Don't give a shit. More Hillary-bashing.

*Yawn*

[Lil Missy]

19. They are deplorables and she has nothing to lose by telling the truth.

I'm sure she knows, more than anyone on DU knows since she was up front and familiar with the trends within demographics.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

184. At this point, you're right, Hillary has nothing to lose, unlike active Democratic politicians.

[Guilded Lilly]

20. She can say whatever she wants. Whenever she wants.

Democrats are better to stand on their own legs and quit using Clinton for whatever reason they find to have any weakness of spine.

[BlueTsunami2018]

22. Women are perfectly capable of racism on their own.

Not that Secretary Clinton is wrong, I’m sure there was some Stepfordism involved but lots of women were absolutely moved by the blatant racism and bigotry being spouted by Тяцмр. And many of them also denounce feminism and couldn’t care less about his blatant sexism.

It was many things that made it close enough to steal.

[noel1237]

54. Totally agree..last time I checked no one walks into the voting booth with women..

...

[LanternWaste]

24. And now we're being told accuracy is bad for imagine too.

And now we're being told accuracy is bad for imagine too. You're prioritizing simplistic commercial branding and image over substance, over accuracy and over reality.

You could of course, support your premise by telling us how many votes the Democrats will lose due to this-- and please, show your work and evidence to support your allegation.



But bang your head some more... it's good for your image if nothing else.

Good Christ. Yours may be the most absurd premise I've read today.

[Squinch]

25. A) What she said is true. B) She's a private citizen and gets to say whatever the hell she wants.

Will this bullshit bashing never end?

Oh yeah, don't miss the part where she's the head of all the witches in the world. That one came out today too.

Honestly. What right does anyone have to tell her what she can and can't say?

In case you were going to answer, don't. It was a rhetorical question. The obvious answer is "none."

[displacedtexan]

43. Thank you!

Walking on pins and needles when repubs are scorching the earth beneath us gets us absolutely nowhere. I'm glad Clinton isn't behaving like one of those "Please don't hurt us even more" dems. Besides, voters have no respect whatsoever for cowards.

[Squinch]

72. This is a big point that I think we don't yet understand. If we treated all this

republican bullshit like what it is - the stupidest garbage we have ever heard - I think it would make it a lot less acceptable.

[dalton99a]

222. Exactly.

[SFnomad]

26. I'm so tired of hearing "progressives" having as many problems with her as RWNJs do

Far too many people who call themselves progressives or liberals have been taken in by decades of RWNJ demonization of Hillary Rodham Clinton.

It really doesn't matter what she says because for these people it will be one of the following:
• She shouldn’t have said it
• She should have said it sooner
• She doesn’t believe what she said because she used to say this …
• She’s only saying it because it’s what you want to hear
• I can’t stand listen to her voice …
Or something along those lines.

[Wwcd]

42. Nothing more "progressive" than telling the Icon of the "Women's Rights are Human Rights" Speech

..to be quiet on women's rights in the face of Pres pu**y grabber!

Man that's some progressivism ain't it!!

Who the f are these people anyway? Cuz this is NOT progressive thinking.

Let me know when the true progressives speak up.

[radius777]

28. Hillary stands up for the true Dem base,

which is heavily metropolitan and diverse - not the populist Dixiecrat image that some want to go back to.

She spoke specifically about how she won all of the high-gdp/productive areas across the country, that basically are the reason for American power/wealth (even though some would have us think it is heartland areas).

She spoke about how deplorable types are angry that blacks and women etc are getting ahead now.

IOW, she spoke the truth.

I disagree with her about why white women voted for Trump; some did as she said and just followed their husbands - but many others were driven by the same deplorable worldview that his white male voters were.

[bettyellen]

31. Yes, she spoke some important truths about voters.

[melman]

39. " not the populist Dixiecrat image that some want to go back to"

What absolute garbage.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

179. Think you have it exactly right.

[Awsi Dooger]

30. Absolutely true

Countless studies indicate women are more prone to absorb their spouse's partisanship.

It's the reason Democrats benefit from the trend of people marrying later in life, or not at all.

[NCTraveler]

32. Thats my girl.

Watch the asshats that try to turn it into the end of times.

It’s going to change how people campaign!

[mythology]

33. I wish Obama hadn't said clinging to their guns and religion and

that Joe Biden didn't call Obama articulate.

People misspeak. It happens. But look at the totality of what she's said and done and judge her on that. Non-story.

[Justice]

36. Trump insults Hillary and others every chance he gets. Where is the outcry for him to stop?

[ecstatic]

37. My twitter observation: All the deplorables are super defensive and denying

that their SOs affected their votes. However, now that the seed has been planted, they will probably experience a lot of cognitive dissonance during the next few elections. They might start to suspect that Hillary was right, and they might not want her to be right... So they might, for the first time, vote their own interests. I think that is a good thing.

[EffieBlack]

178. That's all well and good. But why are progressives piling on with them?

[left-of-center2012]

40. The GOP will use her words against her this fall.

That's a given.

[Wwcd]

50. Shes not running for anything this fall or ever.

It appears some are STILL threatened by Her.
So just in case she starts telling the straight up truth again, looks like some are getting an early start at silencing a private citizen.

Hmmm..
Who is this author stumping for again?

[left-of-center2012]

88. "Shes not running for anything ..."

Oh well then, that will stop the Republicans.

[Sparkly]

114. They'll be super nice to whoever speaks up next.

[mcar]

85. If she hadn't said this, they'd pull up something else

Or make something up.

Can we please stop playing by GOP rules?

[sheshe2]

110. Since she is not running let them have at it.

She is a big girl and can stand up to the worst of them...fact is they can't handle the truth and she tells it like no other.

[panader0]

41. I don't like the Hillary bashing---I don't like the Bernie bashing.

Neither is helpful moving forward. We need to move on from the contentious
primary and the general in '16. Focus on the future--not fracturing the party.
Too much is at stake.

[Baconator]

47. Could we stop shooting ourselves in the foot at least?

In the exact same way... Every single time...

I don't think that's too much to ask...

[Baconator]

45. Campaign commercial makers all let out a collective sigh of relief...

[sheshe2]

111. What campaign?

She is not running.

[Baconator]

149. Guess...

[sheshe2]

152. No clue.

[Baconator]

153. I'm debating which one is worse...

Faking not knowing or really not knowing...

[sheshe2]

155. Wow.

Insulting as well.

This is a message board not a game of charades. Not interested in your games.

[Hekate]

49. Just stop it

[kentuck]

51. That is very common in the South.

Perhaps that was her frame of reference?

[Tipperary]

229. Not with any southern women I know.

What a stupid comment.

[nini]

52. Looks like Hillary and pelosi are the targets

AGAIN


Damn this shit gets old

[dchill]

55. Not exactly on topic, but are we to believe...

that these women don't know that every ballot is SECRET, and that their husbands, father's, misbegotten brothers, etc. never need know how they voted? What a lame-ass excuse!

[marybourg]

56. tRump's most egregious blurtings

have not cost him the loyalty of his cult. why is a private citizen held to a higher standard? Because she's a Dem? A woman?

[karynnj]

57. I agree - in the first place, it is very likely that married couples are likely to agree

I suspect that there are far fewer couples like Carville and his wife than like the Obamas etc.

I suspect that part of this comes from the fact that the Clinton campaign had a strategy assuming that as a woman, she would get far more female votes than the various men who ran - just as black turnout was higher for Obama. I KNOW many women who were super excited that there was a female nominee, but ... my family circle, friends and neighbors are VERY Democratic. I know of only one usually Republican relative who voted for Clinton, but it was not because she was a woman, it was disgust for Trump.

It is insulting to women to say that they are controlled by the opinions of their husbands. I bet there might be some on either side who do --and husbands influenced by their wives.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

198. Spot on... especially, that last part.

[brewens]

59. She didn't stay home and bake cookies either. Doesn't have much use for Stepford types.

I don't blame her, they are out there.

[Kirk Lover]

60. No matter what she says or doesn't say she'll catch shit...so LET IT LOOSE WOMAN.

[ismnotwasm]

61. Typical The Hill bullshit

They’ve been retweeting this for days. Why is there this compulsive need to shut Hillary up? I happen to agree with her, RW women follow a specific set of bigotries and she called them out. So what?

[Docreed2003]

64. More outrage of an honest statement by HRC

Than over Republicans actually running for office calling children fighting for sensible gun laws “skinhead lesbians” or accusing the opposition of “hating Gawd” or any of the many audacious shitty things Trump hurls daily.

I live around and grew up around these “supposedly conservative” women. I see the impact that their upbringing and church and household and schools have on them, we fight those influences in our own house with our daughters! What Clinton said was spot on, and she has every right to that opinion.

[LSFL]

65. if anyone can say

Whatever they want to, it is Hillary. Call everyone out who helped to bring this abomination of a presidency into being I say. Just go ahead and "wish", "loyal DU democrat",that people should not not offend these enablers who gifted this horror upon the world. Just keep on wishing. We see you. We see you very well.

[MicaelS]

68. In one word, BULLSHIT!

This crap of we have to watch what we say all the time, lest we piss off some voters, when the Right says anything they, want has to stop.

If anything HRC was too nice, during the campaign, and ever since.

[stonecutter357]

70. I agreed with everything she said !

[EffieBlack]

73. Because God forbid anyone ever say anything that might offend the white women who sold us out

[ismnotwasm]

175. Exactly

[lunamagica]

91. She is right, and I stand with her!

[still_one]

92. I guess some can't just handle the truth, but that is besides the point. Hillary is NOT a

Democratic spokesperson. SHE IS A PRIVATE CITIZEN. She has made it clear she is NOT going to run again, but the Hillary haters can't let their venom against her go.

Everyday people like Limbaugh, Hannity, Alex Jones and others spew their 24/7 hate, and where is the pushback? Trump spews his racist, sexist, bigoted garbage, appoints and surrounds himself with the most deplorable people, and where is the pushback?

The media is so interested in Hillary's statement made in India, but why the hell aren't they asking WHY HAVEN'T THE RUSSIAN SANCTIONS BEEN IMPLEMENTED?

Gee, how dare a WOMAN, who is a private citizen, speak her mind.

F**K THE MEDIA

[lapucelle]

94. ,,,

[sheshe2]

115. This!

[jrthin]

96. Dear Hillary, please keep speaking your truth.

You've been right all along. Those who can't take it, oh well.

[JCanete]

105. maybe problematic, but I don't at all disagree with her on this point, although, I'd argue that

the effect is often more insidious...a go along to get along kind of thing. If it makes life easier(in terms of safety and approval, etc.) to have one opinion or world view over another you may just kind of steer that way without ever doing the due diligence of questioning its merits.

[tandem5]

107. I'm just fine with her comments. That is all.

[Sparkly]

113. She can say whatever she wants

and I, for one, would like to hear her voice more often, and more loudly.

[ellie]

122. She is absolutely

correct.

[BoneyardDem]

125. Hillary spoke a truth

A woman at my work ( in this red state) said she could never vote for a woman. Women were not supposed to have dominion over a man. That mentality is not a one off.

And why do you suppose women would vote for a lying, mysoginistic, pussy grabber under any other conditions?

[McCamy Taylor]

127. The Hill is running a Divide and Conquer campaign against Dems.

This is the second article this week someone has linked that attempts to show how much we hate each other.

Dudes, we do not hate each other. We are united in despising the traitor Trump

[chowder66]

130. What's interesting is that the article doesn't list a single persons name until the end

when they list the Reed guy from the RNC.

[samnsara]

132. i totally agree with HRC.. there will always be some still intimidated by her..

[Stinky The Clown]

137. Unrec

[BeyondGeography]

138. It was politically brain dead

Like many of the responses here.

[Snackshack]

139. Agreed

There was no need for this. Truth or not there is no reason to hand the right/faux news etc sound bites to use against Dems as the mid-terms ramp up.

I completely agreed with her comment about trump voters being “deplorable” (because a lot of them are certainly “deplorable”) but the cost she paid in constantly being hammered with the sound bite by the right certainly outweighed any value making it provided.

Self-inflicted wounds are so easily avoidable.

[StevieM]

168. I don't think it was too big of a factor. People were more concerned about her tumble on 9/11.

And didn't Obama say something about people being bitter and clinging to their guns and religion? Didn't Romney say something about 47 percent being moochers?

HRC isn't the only one to have a gaffe. But hers didn't stop her from establishing a huge lead, one that had to be eliminated by Comey and Putin.

[Snackshack]

196. No, you are correct.

It was not a show stopper. However the right did get a lot of mileage out of it and as I mentioned there is no need to hand them anything that they can use/ cast in a negative way because they will and their base eats it up. She still had a large lead and IMO did win the election by 3mil popular votes only to have it snatched away.

Yes, President Obama did say the guns and religion thing and it was true also. Again the right twisted it and used it against him. The right will use anything they can, they even slammed President Obama for simply pointing out the fact that proper tire inflation will improve gas mileage and tire wear, mocked him with tire gauges and once again their base ate it up and went right along with it instead of sitting back and saying wait a minute it is true that proper tire inflation is a good thing.

Which goes to show that it does not matter if something is true or not. The hatred that has been fanned by years of rush/hannity/savage/jones has made facts unimportant, it is simply about hate now and there is no good reason, be it true or not, for Dems to hand the right anything that can be used to fan the hatred further.

[UTUSN]

147. Fine. I'll put it under my name.

[KPN]

156. Mountain out of molehill. Hillary said what she believed -- honesty. Is that so

unacceptable? The Hill does favor "controversy" over objectivity. Move along.

[happy feet]

158. I agree with Hilary

Damned if you do, damned if you don’t. She speaks her truth and is told she shouldn’t/she’s wrong. She’s ‘poltically correct’ so as not offend these women and you would call her disingeneous/pandering/a liar. She has earned the right to speak ‘her mind/truth’ in her recounting of her campaign.

[Demsrule86]

164. The Hill is very right wing...and I see nothing wrong with a private citizen having an opinion.

At least she goes after Trump supporters and not Democrats or the Democratic Party.

[MFM008]

173. My mom

Was working with a physical therapist
who stated her and her husband hated
Hillary and since HE was voting for
maggot, she was to.
So it happens.
Unfortunately.

[dawg day]

182. Well, do you know women Trump voters? What IS their reasoning?

My mother votes GOP because her father always voted GOP. (Fortunately, her daughter is not carrying on that tradition.)

A friend of mine voted for Trump because -- yes-- her husband was so obsessed with Trump she did it just to keep the peace.

Another said something about coal miners (she's an attorney in Boston... not sure if she's ever even met a coal miner, or would even shake hands with him if she did meet him). She said, "If the coal miners could go back to work, their wives wouldn't have to have jobs."

I'm not sure there's any logical reason for a woman to vote for Trump. We're all trying to understand how that could happen. But "because they wanted to please their husbands" is just as plausible a speculation, and more polite, than "because they're stupid and nasty."

[EffieBlack]

190. I LOVE this!

[Bettie]

202. She's not wrong

most of the white women I know who voted for that orange thing were motivated by two factors: their preachers and their husbands.

They have been raised to comply and they do. It really is that simple.

[LAS14]

213. She was answering the worn to death chant about "the coasts."

She was in an environment where every person had been the target of pundits casually dismissing the liberal, pseudo-sophisticated "coasts." She was answering back, highlighting the flip side of that stereotype. Her mistake was to think that she was among friends.

[MichMary]

215. "Discretion is the better part of valor"

Just because something is true, or just because you think it's true, you don't need to say it.

Her comment about "deplorables" was offensive, not just to people who think of themselves that way--and who really does?--but to people who were friends and family of staunch Trump supporters, who may have been planning to vote for Hillary. My theory is that a lot of them voted for Trump (since there was no way he could win, right?) just as a passive-aggressive slap in the face to Hillary.

This is just as offensive, and should have been kept to herself, for the good of the party and the country.

[question everything]

216. Thank you. It is hard for me to believe that so many

here are willing to declare "the truth" and consequences be damned.

As for so many who know women who voted as their husbands told them - I wonder whether they are from the south, or from other area of Trump.

Here, in suburbs of the very blue Twin Cities, many white women voted for Trump. They are business owners, self employed, not all are married. They just love what the Republicans offered: low taxes, low regulations and small government.

And, like many they thought that once Trump would be elected he would "pivot" and become a main stream Republican.

We have to save the country from Trump. Unlike a Bush, or McCain or Romney, Trump is ruining the country for generations to come. Both domestic and foreign. We have to reach to Trump supporters. And this includes keeping our mouth shut and not offend them. Not now.

[billh58]

223. And yet another attempt

to divide Democrats on DU.

Vote Democratic, and ignore these attempts at division and diversion.

[Gothmog]

224. Hillary Clinton was right: The parts of America that support Trump are stuck in the past

https://www.salon.com/2018/03/15/hillary-clinton-was-right-the-parts-of-america-that-support-trump-are-stuck-in-the-past/

[dalton99a]

226. +1

[MrsCoffee]

230. Hillary haters coming out of the wood works months before another big election.

Color me shocked!

Same ol' same ol'.

[Gothmog]

237. Some fact checking