4 ms·

Contrast her making her candidacy a Feminist (and by absurd extrapolation LGBTQ and diversity) issue with Obama's campaign. Yes, everybody felt good about havin

by pluma 10y ago

Contrast her making her candidacy a Feminist (and by absurd extrapolation LGBTQ and diversity) issue with Obama's campaign. Yes, everybody felt good about having elected a black president when it was over but he didn't offer "black cards" for download on his website and show grandiose self-promoting videos about the Black Man's Struggle. A large part of Hillary's campaign (both officially and via her supporters on social media) was actively shaming people into voting for "the woman" instead of "the bigot". Unsurprisingly that seems to have backfired, leaving many liberals flabbergasted how "Women for Trump" was ever a thing. I would have been upset with either candidate winning but the entire candidacy showed the worst side of American election cycles: mudslinging, character assassination and trying to convince everyone the other guy is literally the devil. Trump's accusations of Clinton being "a liar" and "a criminal" (IOW a typical career politician) were pretty harmless compared to the hyperbole (deserved or not) hauled at him.

Alex3917 10y ago
Agreed. Ideas are only as strong as the arguments defending them, and the problem with feminism as identity politics is that it takes a bunch of unconnected ideas and packages them in such a way that if you attack the ideas then you're attacking women. This makes it so that bad ideas and bad arguments don't get weeded out and just keep getting repeated. For whatever barriers Clinton faced due to her gender, she also wasn't held accountable early enough for a lot of legitimately bad things that she's done, which came back to hurt her in the end.
domfletcher 10y ago
> Trump's accusations of Clinton being "a liar" and "a criminal" (IOW a typical career politician) were pretty harmless compared to the hyperbole (deserved or not) hauled at him I'm sorry but that makes no sense to me. Now maybe it's my liberal tendencies talking but the things that have come out of his mouth are flat out dangerous for a person who has that much power (now). Not much of it was hyperbole because it didn't have to be. He was already after foreigners, women, "the washington elite", the internet etc. before any of the media got involved. He was addicted to the cycle coverage but he still said all of those things and you can't wish that away.
- jazzyk 10y ago
  In politics, as in real life, it is important to judge people on what they do not what they say. While Clinton mastered the "experienced, competent" persona, what she actually did was mostly driven by her ambition to become the first female president. Trump, who has been accused of being a bigot, has always been very liberal towards LGBT (see his interview for Rolling Stone from a few years ago), while Hillary had been strongly against gay marriage until it became very clear public opinion changed in favor of it.
  - geofft 10y ago
    How can one be liberal towards LGBT folks while picking Pence as a running mate? I can see him being apathetic towards them: if they get married, that's not my problem, but if they get "conversion therapy," that's also not my problem. Now, I'm not sure that bigotry is the right word for that. But it is something at least as monstrous. (Also, as a tangent: let's please not confuse gay marriage with "LGBT" as a whole. Trump has come down firmly on the evangelicals' side about trans people and bathrooms. If we mean "LGB" or "gay marriage", we should say what we mean.)
    - jazzyk 10y ago
      Yes, Pence's position is unfortunate, but he was brought in to please the religious supporters. I believe Trump's administration will focus on pressing trade/economics and foreign policy issues, not bathroom identification issues, which affect 0.3% of the population. To people disappointed with his victory, the consoling fact should be that Trump is not a religious nut. Yes, he said things about Supreme Court/abortion - as a Republican, you have to, to win the primaries.
      - geofft 10y ago
        Well, one would have hoped that the federal government would have stepped in and voided the laws being made by religious nuts at the state/local level. Obama was trying to do that. It seems exceedingly unlikely that Trump will continue trying to do that. Also, while these issues directly affect 0.3% of the population, it is a subset of the 99.7% of the population that's calling for these bills. Perhaps enough of a subset that he'll continue wanting to please the religious supporters.
zghst 10y ago
Absolutely agree here

by pluma 10y ago

Alex3917 10y ago

Agreed. Ideas are only as strong as the arguments defending them, and the problem with feminism as identity politics is that it takes a bunch of unconnected ideas and packages them in such a way that if you attack the ideas then you're attacking women. This makes it so that bad ideas and bad arguments don't get weeded out and just keep getting repeated. For whatever barriers Clinton faced due to her gender, she also wasn't held accountable early enough for a lot of legitimately bad things that she's done, which came back to hurt her in the end.

domfletcher 10y ago

> Trump's accusations of Clinton being "a liar" and "a criminal" (IOW a typical career politician) were pretty harmless compared to the hyperbole (deserved or not) hauled at him I'm sorry but that makes no sense to me. Now maybe it's my liberal tendencies talking but the things that have come out of his mouth are flat out dangerous for a person who has that much power (now). Not much of it was hyperbole because it didn't have to be. He was already after foreigners, women, "the washington elite", the internet etc. before any of the media got involved. He was addicted to the cycle coverage but he still said all of those things and you can't wish that away.

jazzyk 10y ago
In politics, as in real life, it is important to judge people on what they do not what they say. While Clinton mastered the "experienced, competent" persona, what she actually did was mostly driven by her ambition to become the first female president. Trump, who has been accused of being a bigot, has always been very liberal towards LGBT (see his interview for Rolling Stone from a few years ago), while Hillary had been strongly against gay marriage until it became very clear public opinion changed in favor of it.
- geofft 10y ago
  How can one be liberal towards LGBT folks while picking Pence as a running mate? I can see him being apathetic towards them: if they get married, that's not my problem, but if they get "conversion therapy," that's also not my problem. Now, I'm not sure that bigotry is the right word for that. But it is something at least as monstrous. (Also, as a tangent: let's please not confuse gay marriage with "LGBT" as a whole. Trump has come down firmly on the evangelicals' side about trans people and bathrooms. If we mean "LGB" or "gay marriage", we should say what we mean.)
  - jazzyk 10y ago
    Yes, Pence's position is unfortunate, but he was brought in to please the religious supporters. I believe Trump's administration will focus on pressing trade/economics and foreign policy issues, not bathroom identification issues, which affect 0.3% of the population. To people disappointed with his victory, the consoling fact should be that Trump is not a religious nut. Yes, he said things about Supreme Court/abortion - as a Republican, you have to, to win the primaries.
    - geofft 10y ago
      Well, one would have hoped that the federal government would have stepped in and voided the laws being made by religious nuts at the state/local level. Obama was trying to do that. It seems exceedingly unlikely that Trump will continue trying to do that. Also, while these issues directly affect 0.3% of the population, it is a subset of the 99.7% of the population that's calling for these bills. Perhaps enough of a subset that he'll continue wanting to please the religious supporters.

zghst 10y ago

Absolutely agree here