Does Hillary's Intransigence Create the Perception that Women Won't Play Ball?

[SoDesuKa]

It really is time for Hillary to drop out. She needed big victories in Ohio and Texas just to stay in the running. She didn't get them. But instead of dropping out, Hillary is adopting a scorched earth policy.

Hillary's intransigence can be interpreted as a refusal to play ball. Potential supporters of a female presidential candidate may have cause to reflect on the damage Hillary is doing to the Democratic Party as a whole. Is this how women act when they can't win?

She's not "principled," she's just plain stubborn. Obama has this thing locked, and Hillary is running ads for his opponent. In the future, her behavior may be cited in discussions about the glass ceiling that keeps women out of top positions.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

1. No; it creates the perception that *Hillary* won't play ball.

[grantcart]

8. 100% correct - there is nothing trancendental about Hillary she is one off

[Johnny__Motown]

25. I agree, but will it look that way in retrospect, years or decades from now the next time a woman

is a leading candidate for a major party's nomination?



I agree that Hillary is Hillary and you can't project her actions onto her entire gender. I am just not so sure that it won't be easy for history to paint her as the "woman candidate" and trying to us her actions to predict the possible behavior of other women.

[dkf]

2. She gives a bad impression of women period.

I find her embarrassing.

[Revlon10]

43. Playing ball,

If you want to play ball, play ball, but remember to play by the rules, no hitting below the belt, a good player must understanding that you can not always win, and can't change the rules in the middle of the game the moment you see you can no longer win
I don't care it your husband used to be the caption of the team.
and when its clear that your team can not win, you call it a game, only spoil brats do what she doing.

[Cant trust em]

3. I don't think that just because Hillary is the woman candidate

that she, somehow, represents all women.

I'm a man, so maybe my opinion here doesn't hold water.

[Frances]

4. If Hillary drops out,

it will give the impression that she is a wimp and doesn't deserve to be President.

Both Hillary and Obama are strong candidates.

Neither has the delegates that it takes to be the nominee.

Neither should drop out.

[Liquorice]

6. I agree. She's fighting for the presidency just like Obama. nt

[SoDesuKa]

10. Leading by Example

Neither has the delegates that it takes to be the nominee

This is true as far as it goes, but the point is irrelevant in the context of the larger issue of the good of the party as a whole. Hillary's refusal to concede in the face of all-but-certain defeat can be interpreted as political courage. But it can also be interpreted as pig-headedness.

Hillary's actions as a defeated candidate will become the factual data around which glass ceiling discussions will center. What I mean by playing ball is accepting personal disappointment for the good of the team. Perhaps it's unfair to judge all women by Hillary's behavior, but as a matter of fact that's just what people will do. Especially because Hillary is a pioneer.

[Frances]

44. Why do you want Hillary to drop out and not Obama?

As far as I can tell, a case can be made for either candidate to get the nomination.

As an older woman, I have stepped aside many, many times for the good of whatever team I was on. But in this case, stepping aside is not the right thing for Hillary to do IMO.

Neither is it the right thing for Obama to do.

[scheming daemons]

5. My wife, reading over my shoulder at your OP, said....

"What the hell? Don't lump all of us women with Hillary!"


Awfully sexist to assume that HILLARY = ALL WOMEN.

That's an insult to most women.

[stratomagi]

7. Get it right.

Hillary is the candidate of political dynasties, not women. She insults the other women who earned their places in Senate and Congress who represent their own districts and didn't ride the coattails of her president husband into a senate seat of a state she had no prior connection to. The logic behind her senate career is the same damn logic that made George bush governor of Texas.

A Mary Landrieu or an Amy Klobuchar would be a womans candidate. Hillary is just a Clinton candidate.

[melody]

9. Only to those without balls n/t

[MADem]

11. What an incredibly sexist post. Clinton refuses to concede, so she's a "bad" woman?

How dare Clinton not demurely step aside?

:rofl:

It would be funny...only you're serious. That makes it kind of .... sad.

Hey, the magic number is 2025.

First one who reaches it, wins. No discussion at that point.

It ain't "who's ahead" that counts. You either hit that number, or you don't win.

And then it's on to Plan B, like it or not.

Deal with that.

[scheming daemons]

12. You have it backwards..... Clinton is a bad woman, so she refuses to concede....

Got that whole cause/effect thing backwards there...

[MADem]

13. 2025. No win without that number. Any other argument IS backward. nt

[scheming daemons]

16. ....and the SDs will vote with the PDs and the Pop Vote.... so he'll get there... she won't....

...

[MADem]

19. Oh Kaaaaay....so why is your crew so doggone AFRAID, if that is how it will play?

Your candidate,by the very scenario you propose, emerges victorious from a hardening battle, and everyone falls in line. ONward to victory in NOVEMBER, then.

Why the insistence that the process be truncated and the "little woman" give up before the whole scene plays out? That's UN-Democratic. It's also bullying, and it doesn't do Obama any favors.

The winner has to WIN it. Not bully the loser into stepping aside.

Again. 2025. You can dance and sing when your candidate reaches that number. Exercise patience; it's a virtue. Unless you're afraid, for some reason.

[CampDem]

30. Exactly MADem!!

;-)

Plus, on Meet the Press today Rendell did a great job making the case that Hillary could still win. He said that the Clinton campaign will come up with 15 million for the redo primaries for Michigan and Florida. This is a nice chunk of delegates we are talking about. Also on MTP was a roundtable discussion in which nearly everyone said this was a statistical tie. There is no way she should drop out until it is over! Heck, she might end up with more popular votes even if she has a few less delegates! It will give the supers a big choice after the last primary/caucus, but we will know who won before the convention.

Go Hillary!!

here is the link to the MTP transcript if you haven't seen it already

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23546011/

:thumbsup:

[SoDesuKa]

34. Running the Table

Yeah, she'll certainly win all the remaining states by a 2 to 1 margin. Ed Rendell said so, and he would know. Thanks for clearing that up.

[MADem]

36. If your lad comes up with 2025, all engines stop. If he doesn't, the ship sails on. NT

[SoDesuKa]

40. Locked In

You're locking yourself into a position that doesn't acknowledge the practicalities of the democratic process. True, Hillary can run this thing out until she's mathematically eliminated. I've been arguing that it's a different matter whether she ought to do this. For one thing, it's an option available only to well-financed candidates. It's also very divisive.

Using your nautical terminology, you seem to be saying Damn the torpedoes full speed ahead. I don't consider that heroic rhetoric in the context of a presidential election. Hillary might justify her statements unfavorably comparing Senator Obama with Senator McCain by saying she's in a "tough" fight. But she's so far behind that she'll have to take all the remaining states by a 2-1 margin.

When Hillary loses the nomination - which is a virtual certainty - we Democrats will have to win the general election, a task complicated by Hillary's remarks about Obama's lack of qualifications for the job. I don't accept your assumption that whatever doesn't kill us makes us stronger. It's naive of you to say that Hillary's intemperate attacks are easily overlooked.

I would also suggest that you not use the word "lad" to describe Senator Obama. It sounds too much like "boy."

[MADem]

41. You're the one tossing around that "lock" word, not me. So don't try to pull that foolishness

If Obama doesn't make it to 2025, he's "mathematically eliminated" too.

That's when it goes to the floor for a decision. And that's probably where it will go. Fine with me.

I don't want a candidate who doesn't earn the support of the convention. I, and others as well, don't agree with handing it to someone because they're halfway there and a hundred votes ahead. Sorry if you don't like that.

And "lad" does not sound like "boy." TOY, POI, or COY sound like BOY. It doesn't even evoke the vulgar imagery you're seemingly eager to drag into this discussion, perhaps as a deflection device?

"Lad" is a word that evokes a young, carefree (often innocent, often naive) male--oftimes one of privilege, entitlement and a life of ease, not a toiling and victimized black person of any age from eight to eighty who is brutishly insulted and mishandled by red-faced and angry white men. It is a term frequently used in English novellas and earlier American literature to specifically refer to a quality of YOUTHFULNESS, and I challenge you to find ANY association of that word with denigration of people of African ancestry.

Yet another long and failed stretch, that. Considering you opened this pathetic salvo with a deliberately sexist assault, you might want to swiftly get off that erroneous high horse before it tosses you, and carefully gather your dignity and credibility. Methinks thou dost protest WAY too much, there.

2025. That's the end of the line.

[SoDesuKa]

42. Electoral Math

Your understanding of the task ahead of Hillary Clinton underestimates how difficult it will be for her to catch up. There are only a few states remaining, and she has to take all of them with landslide majorities. It's very unlikely she will do this.

Hillary certainly knows this, too. True, she hasn't been mathematically eliminated, but for all practical purposes she might as well be. It's not clear to me why she's hanging on. Apparently she's hoping for a miracle. I think she's setting some ugly precedents by refusing to face reality. I don't apologize for saying that by being obstinate she's hurting other women. She's certainly not helping the Democratic Party when she unfavorably compares Senator Obama to Senator McCain.

[MADem]

46. There's no "catching up" at issue. The magic number is 2025. Not the one who is "ahead."

Math doesn't rule in this instance, UNLESS the winning candidate crosses the finish line. Being ahead doesn't rule. No more than the Tooth Fairy does.

Crossing the 2025 finish line is the ONLY thing that "counts"--that "Locks it in" as you keep referencing.

That's what YOU aren't understanding.

It's just as likely that Obama won't cross that finish line either, and both candidates will come to a screeching halt on the racecourse.

So put your "math" to the side. It does not matter, for the tenth time, who is "ahead." If you don't get to 2025, you have NOT won, you have NOT locked, and you are NOT the victor.

In that circumstance, "something else" happens, and the decision is made at the convention. Get used to it.

[SoDesuKa]

15. Scorched Earth

Hillary's refusal to concede in the face of all-but-certain defeat comes at a price. OK, she has plenty of money and lots of support, so technically she can continue. The larger question is whether it's in the interest of the Democratic Party for her to do so.

The other question I raised is whether Hillary's stubbornness reflects on women. I'd agree that it shouldn't, but that's not to deny that it might. What is she trying to accomplish by refusing to concede? Is she trying to prove a point? She doesn't have the delegates and isn't likely to get them.

She's setting up a calamity for the Democrats. She's already feeding the Republican noise machine by comparing Sen. Obama unfavorably with Sen. McCain. Do you think she's going to get a free ride from Democrats? Do you think she deserves one?

[MADem]

18. "All but certain?" Says YOU. But your opinion doesn't hold sway.

Nothing's certain. Let it play out. What are you AFRAID OF?

A tough contest makes for tough candidates.

If you're all doom, gloom, and calamity, at these early stages, maybe the Democratic Party isn't for you. A rough and tumble primary will produce a battle-hardened, savvy and strong nominee--not a "Waaah, waaah, the end is near" scenario.

Let's put the shoe on the other foot. What is OBAMA gaining by refusing to concede? He's the inexperienced freshman, after all. Hell, most of his delegates have come from caucus states, not reflective of the popular vote, but rather, the "activist" core. And of course, caucus states are disenfranchising--the elderly, the shift workers, the sick, disabled, hospitalized, they can't vote--and neither can servicemembers.

Don't like that argument? Well, where you stand depends on where you sit, see?

Get over it. Let it play out. Stop trying to play Election Nanny. It makes you look fearful. And the GOP CAN smell fear a mile away.

We've done this "slightly chaotic" thing for many, many decades. It's a hallmark of our outfit, even if it "disturbs" you.


Ask the ghost of Will Rogers.

And stop being sexist. Clinton's actions demonstrate she's a tough and savvy politician --- even if you don't like that fact. Obama's gonna have to earn it, no matter how much his acolytes whine that it should be handed to him all wrapped up in fancy paper with a nice big bow.

[SoDesuKa]

23. "Big Picture" Perspective

I don't think you are seeing the forest for the trees here. Hillary is harming the Democratic Party by staying in the race this late in the game. The nominating season is OVER. Hillary should pack it in before she further damages the party, and secondarily, contributes to the perception that women don't play ball. I don't deny that this perception is unfair, but it is out there.

A tough contest makes for tough candidates.

A bitter primary fight doesn't necessarily produce tough candidates. As these things have done in the past, internecine battles have produced wounded nominees who are easy pickings for the opposing party.

What are you AFRAID OF?

I'm afraid Hillary is going to continue comparing Barack Obama unfavorably to John McCain. You really can't be pleased with that development, are you?

at these early stages . . .

No, it's not in the early stages anymore. This thing is just about over. Hillary will need to take all of the remaining primaries by a 2-1 margin. Do you think there's any real basis to believe she can do it? She barely squeaked past Texas, where she was supposed to win by 20 points. And she didn't get the delegates she was looking for.

[MADem]

26. If a little "infighting" can "harm the Democratic Party" it ain't much of a party.

I see the forest, and I see the trees. I've lived in the forest for many, many years. I know it like the back of my hand. All the whining in the world for one candidate to leave to make it easy for the other one is just, well, whining. And bullshit.

Sorry, that's how it sounds, because that is what it is.

How's this flip of your dire commentary : The nominating season is OVER. "Barack" should pack it in before he further damages the party, and secondarily, contributes to the perception that (fill in your favorite--freshmen senators, blacks, young men) don't play ball.

Sounds pretty stupid, doesn't it? OFFENSIVE, even. Well, it should. Because it sounds just as stupid when flipped again.

Please. Your FEAR is showing. You even said it yourself "I'm AFRAID Hillary is going to continue comparing Barack..."

Look, Barack can either fight back or take his toys--particularly the pacifier-- and go home. If he can't handle Clinton, he won't be able to handle McCain.

It IS early stages. It's early stages until the winner hits 2025. And that's the way it is. Even if you don't like it.

Popeye McCain has as many weak spots; a united party behind our nominee, whosoever that may be, will beat him like a rented mule.

[SoDesuKa]

29. Flipping the Argument

There's no symmetry here. Clinton and Obama are not in the same position anymore. Obama has the nomination all but locked up; whereas Clinton will have to take all the remaining states by a 2-1 margin even to catch up. She can't do it. Staying in the race when she can't win damages the Democratic Party and doesn't help her.

You're introducing the notion of fear here, but I didn't bring it up. I quoted you. I'm not afraid that Hillary will stay in the race, but I think it's foolish for her to do so. She's also going around comparing Senator Obama unfavorably to Senator McCain. What word would you like me to use to describe behavior like that? It should stop, and so should she.

She's not going to win. This thing is over.

[MADem]

38. You can repeat that all you want. It still is not true. You display a

paucity of knowledge about how the process works when you repeat that falsehood.

The candidate who "has the nomination all but locked up" is closing in on an INEVITABLE 2025. Your candidate isn't there. He's not even CLOSE. Neither is Clinton.

So for you to keep "insisting" that what you want to happen is, in fact, happening, is called "Wishful Thinking." It has no basis in fact.

I'm not afraid at all. Whoever wins, wins. It could be Clinton, it could be Obama. Even if you think otherwise.

I will vote for the nominee, no matter who we end up with.

You were the one who used the AFRAID word about Hillary, and you are afraid--plainly--that your candidate is losing momentum and will fade in the stretch.

You can keep bolding the "over" word till the cows come home. The fact remains, like it or not (bolded to return the favor):

"It ain't over till it's over."

Get used to it, because it is what it is.

[WinkyDink]

14. Nice attempt. but you still get an "F" in "Subtlety".

[SoDesuKa]

17. An F in Sublety

I'm not sure what point you're making here. My point is that Hillary's refusal to concede is hurting the Democratic Party and may also be feeding the perception that women can't play ball. That perception is well-established, and is probably the basis of the "glass ceiling" that women face when going for top jobs.

There's no free ride. Hillary can't win. She should drop out.

[MADem]

21. There's no free ride. Obama can't win. He should drop out.

Magic number: 2025.

First one there wins.

It ain't over until it is over. No matter how much you and others of your ilk cast aspersions, sexist innuendo, or get angry.

2025. Let it play out, unless you're afraid.

[SoDesuKa]

27. Magic Number

The word "magic" appears in this discussion because Hillary seems to expect something miraculous between now and the end of the primaries. Hillary's supporters aren't using ordinary common sense when they refuse to accept that this struggle is over. Hillary has not been mathematically eliminated, but she'll have to take all the remaining primaries by a 2-1 margin. There isn't any rational basis to believe she can do this - that's just wishful thinking.

Hillary's intransigence is damaging the Democratic Party as a whole, and secondarily, feeds the perception that women don't know how to play ball. Running for president does not give her the right to compare Senator Obama unfavorably to Senator McCain. Hillary should pack it in. It's time.

[MADem]

33. There you go again...personifying and determining what people "expect."

"Hillary" expects to keep pushing hard for every vote. So does "Barack." Beyond that, we don't know squat. Nothing's "over" at this stage, even if you don't like that fact.

At the end of the day, if neither one makes it to that Magic Number, it goes to the convention and "something else" happens.

No one gets it handed to them, even if you don't like it.

This isn't horseshoes, and it isn't hand grenades. Nearsies, like it or not, do NOT count. There is no rule that says "The one who is ahead in the delegate count GETS to WIN." Sorry.

Being ahead in delegates isn't necessarily the deciding factor, particularly if there's a question as to who got more popular votes in large primary states AND who's more "electable." Those factors will come into play--IF no one makes it to the Magic Number. Even if you don't like it.



It's time, all right--time for the abrogators of the democratic process to step aside and let the process play out. Let everyone vote, let's see who gets the biggest chunk of those votes--it'll be helpful in coming to a decision.

The whining and 'being very afraid' is rather tiresome. Let it ride--it will have an end soon enough.

Stop trying to push, hector and bully. You don't win converts to your cause that way--if you keep pushing for abortion of the process, you'll either demotivate people to vote at all, or push people to McCain with that kind of entitled attitude. It's not the way to play it.

And running for President gives a candidate a right to say whatever they can get away with. It's not table tennis. It's a rough sport, and if your candidate can't handle "the little woman," he will get his skinny ass handed to him by Popeye.

You might want to focus more on supporting your candidate, and stop telling the other candidate to leave to make your life easier. It's not going to happen just because you want it.

[SoDesuKa]

37. Abrogators

time for the abrogators of the democratic process to step aside and let the process play out

"Abrogators of the Democratic Process" sounds a bit like "Raiders of the Lost Ark." I'm assuming you are including in this category the people who want do-overs in Florida and Michigan. (At first it didn't sound like Hillary really wanted a do-over in Michigan either. She liked the outcome after she ran unopposed there.)

Hillary's taxi will need to catch every green light in a crosstown dash just to catch up with Obama. It's unlikely that she can do this, although strictly speaking it is possible. I don't see it happening. What I do see happening is that Hillary is comparing Senator Obama unfavorably with Senator McCain. That's got to stop, and she's not forgiven for the fact that she's running a "tough" race. As Democrats we can't overlook this.

[MADem]

39. FL and MI are interesting issues. The committee needs to take that up.

Those people should not be disenfranchised because of decisions taken by politicians.

I don't care if they seat them or have a "do over" but they need to do something.

Abrogators of the democratic process are people who want to say that because Obama has, what, a bit more than HALF the votes he needs to secure the nomination, that he should be given it. Handed it, on a silver platter, because he's "special" and must be "coddled." Oh, and he's judged to be "Cute" by Tiger Beat Magazine.

That's what those abrogators are--people who don't care much for what democracy--messy and confusing though it sometimes is--looks like.

Obama's taxi, like it or not, has the same problem. He needs a miracle to reach that finish line, too. And like I said--it ain't hand grenades, it's a nomination. Nearsies do NOT count.

2025. That's the finish line--not 1200, not 1500, not even 1800. 2025 (technically 2024, but 2025 puts the winning candidate one over the top) gives a winner a "LOCK."

Nothing less will do, like it, or not.

[WinkyDink]

22. My point is your thinly-disguised anti-women dig. Go play with your own ball.

[SoDesuKa]

24. Thinly Disguised

There's nothing thinly disguised about Hillary's statements that unfavorably compare Senator Obama to Senator McCain. She's damaging the Democratic Party.

It's too late for her. There's no miracle happy ending in the forecast. Hillary can't make up the deficit unless she takes all the remaining states by a 2-1 margin.

It's over. Hillary's support for John McCain has to stop. She should pack it in.

[MADem]

28. And there's nothing thinly disguised about your "women won't play ball" remark.

Mote, beam, anyone?

Stop transmitting your fear. THAT's what the GOP feeds on, not a little party infighting.

Magic number: 2025. Deal with it.

[SoDesuKa]

31. Precedents

You'll certainly agree that Hillary's candidacy is precedent-setting, right? Everything she does is the first time through. It's only reasonable to expect that precedents will be seen as models. In the real world, that's actually how things happen.

Hillary refuses to condede even though Obama has a lock on the nomination. She'll have to take all the remaining states by a 2-1 margin just to catch up! Why does she refuse to play ball with the rest of the Democrats? People will judge future candidacies by what Hillary does today, or - significantly - what she refuses to do. Is Hillary hopeful or courageous or anything positive? Not really. She's just obstinate. There's no miracle coming - that's wishful thinking. It's over.

[MonkeyFunk]

32. Nobody has a lock on the nomination

until they reach 2025 delegates.

Neither of them are there yet.

[MADem]

35. It is precedent setting because she is the first female candidate with a real shot. Not a vanity

candidate. Barack's is precedent setting, too--he's the first candidate with black ancestry (advertised, anyway--you can look to Harding, Lincoln, and so on if you want, but they've been shopped as white to the general population) to be a semi-finalist for the nom.

But if you think this election is precedent setting because it could well go to the convention floor without a fixed nominee, you need to hit the history books. HARD. That used to be the PARADIGM. And our party didn't "fall apart" when it happened, either.

This isn't the "first time" for this kind of thing. At all. It's how it used to be done, on more than a few occasions. Look at James Polk--there were six or seven names in contention at that convention. Where do you think that whole "smoke filled room" term came from?

Obama does NOT have a "lock" on the nomination. The one who has a "LOCK" on the nomination has 2025 votes. That's what it TAKES to have a "LOCK."

Having more votes doesn't make you the winner, unless you have 2025. Being ahead in the delegate count isn't the objective. Getting to 2025 is. And Obama isn't there, either, and he might not get there.

So then, we'll see what happens.

You don't understand the process, apparently.

[JVS]

20. No it only reflects poorly on herself.

[Zuiderelle]

45. Nice scare tactics "Is this how women act when they can't win?" WTF?

So now, because of Hillary, ALL women everywhere will be judged and considered to not be team players. That's the stupidest thing I've seen anyone write here about why Hillary should drop out.

[anigbrowl]

47. No, I think it's just her.

I wouldn't judge any other woman in politics based on my opinion of Hillary Clinton.