Clinton: 'Misogyny played a role' in 2016 - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Fangz;52117198] No Hillary, being a woman isn't the main reason why people didn't like you.[/QUOTE] I ctrl+f'd and couldn't find where in the article she stated that it was the main reason. You can at least read your own article before posting. Of course misogyny played a small role, I think what killed Hillary more was the obvious split of Bernie v Hillary. The democrats ruined their chance long before the election even started by making it so divided to begin with. I also have friends who are hardcore feminists who did not want to see Hillary in the white house for various legitimate reasons, and instead opted to vote for Bernie.

[QUOTE=Wafflemonstr;52117308]Did she say it was? Not seeing how her loss in 2008 is relevant to what she is talking about here. Misogyny absolutely played a roll in her loss in 2016; it wasn't the key factor, but it absolutely did. The amount of both Democrats and Republicans I read and saw calling her a cunt, bitch, etc, was despicable, and it was all because she comes across as tough, rather than timid.[/QUOTE] how exactly is calling someone a cunt misogynistic when calling someone a dick is just a regular insult? she's a cuntbitch because her whole campaign was about calling the opposition a bunch of manbabies. has nothing to do with not being timid. if a guy runs on that platform I call him dickbag.

[QUOTE=Fangz;52117198]No Hillary, being a woman isn't the main reason why people didn't like you.[/QUOTE] Why even say 'main reason' as to emphasize that it's not what she said nor implied?

It's also pretty worthless of an observation. How many voted for her because she'd be the first woman president? I mean a big part of her campaign was that she was a woman running for president, and the other part was that she wasn't trump. The campaign was terrible, I doubt people that won't vote for women were any sort of meaningful influence on the election.

[QUOTE=butre;52117484]how exactly is calling someone a cunt misogynistic when calling someone a dick is just a regular insult? she's a cuntbitch because her whole campaign was about calling the opposition a bunch of manbabies. has nothing to do with not being timid. if a guy runs on that platform I call him dickbag.[/QUOTE] There are far more derogatory words in referring to a woman than there are men. This is a common discussion in the feminist movement. Calling someone a dickbag is not the same as calling a woman a bitch, slut, whore, etc.

[QUOTE=cdr248;52117212]you can't say it didn't play a role but its like one tiny thing surrounded by 30 other things[/QUOTE] Yeah, I think that's the beauty of the statement, she's not wrong, but she's deliberately trying to make it so one of the smallest issues surrounding her loss is the biggest so that she doesn't have to admit that her campaign was fucking awful.

[QUOTE=butre;52117465]there are plenty of women I'd vote for over trump. condi rice for starters would have been a hell of a good choice.[/QUOTE] why would you want anyone involved with iraq anywhere near the white house ever again

[QUOTE=redBadger;52117483]I ctrl+f'd and couldn't find where in the article she stated that it was the main reason. You can at least read your own article before posting. [/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Talvy;52117502]Why even say 'main reason' as to emphasize that it's not what she said nor implied?[/QUOTE] Did you watch the video? She makes it clear at around 30 seconds. She also says it is unconscious too. Plus, she agrees to what the guy before her that said "Misogyny won with a lot of women voters" at the beginning of the video.

[QUOTE=butre;52117484]how exactly is calling someone a cunt misogynistic when calling someone a dick is just a regular insult? she's a cuntbitch because her whole campaign was about calling the opposition a bunch of manbabies. has nothing to do with not being timid. if a guy runs on that platform I call him dickbag.[/QUOTE] dick isn't backed up by years of societal misogyny though lmao it's like a white person getting offended by being called 'cracker' - 'why yes my race did openly subjugate yours for hundreds of years, and yes you're still feeling the effects of that. that really hurts!'

[QUOTE=Fangz;52117524]Did you watch the video? She makes it clear at around 30 seconds. She also says it is unconscious too. Plus, she agrees to what the guy before her that said "Misogyny won with a lot of women voters" at the beginning of the video.[/QUOTE] 'Certainly played a role' does not mean it was the main reason. It means it played a role, certainly. It's not impossible to tell what people actually mean vs. what it sounds like.

[QUOTE=Wafflemonstr;52117308]Did she say it was? Not seeing how her loss in 2008 is relevant to what she is talking about here.[/QUOTE] Actually, she kind of did back in the day. Look up "Obama's Boys." It was the 2008 version of Berniebros, only focused on Obama. Same talking points too; misogynist males scared of a strong progressive woman leader, rejecting her because of her feminist ideals. Only difference is that enough people bought the spiel this time around. And now [i]here we are[/i].

Also people calling women bitches or cunts is just plain in bad taste. Imagine if I called Dr Carlson a nigger simply because I didn't like him. See why it's shitty?

[QUOTE=Generic Monk;52117530]dick isn't backed up by years of societal misogyny though lmao it's like a white person getting offended by being called 'cracker' - 'why yes my race did openly subjugate yours for hundreds of years, and yes you're still feeling the effects of that. that really hurts!'[/QUOTE] It's another "any race that isn't white can't be rayciss" episode. What compelled you to bring race into this thread?

[QUOTE=Talvy;52117556]'Certainly played a role' does not mean it was the main reason. It means it played a role, certainly. It's not impossible to tell what people actually mean vs. what it sounds like.[/QUOTE] She was still saying it was a bigger impact than it actually was, especially after following a comment that used a lot to describe the situation.

Didn't imply it was the main reason is what I'm saying.

[QUOTE=Talvy;52117600]Not the main reason is what I'm saying.[/QUOTE] Hence, why I revised my post to one of the main reasons, not the main reason.

[QUOTE=GhillieBacca;52117583]It's another "any race that isn't white can't be rayciss" episode. What compelled you to bring race into this thread?[/QUOTE] totally possible for non-white people to be racist, but considering that the system in most white-majority countries is heavily weighted in favour of whites it's not exactly a major issue and how is rhetorically comparing two forms of institutional prejudice irrelevant in the pursuit of trying to illustrate how the word 'cunt' is offensive [editline]17th April 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Fangz;52117586]She was still saying it was a bigger impact than it actually was, especially after following a comment that used a lot to describe the situation.[/QUOTE] the election was close enough that any one of tens of factors, if changed, could have resulted in a different outcome. i don't think what she's saying here is particularly objectionable. if it becomes a talking point with establishment libs like the russia hacking story has, then i would view it as another attempt to try and distract from the decaying, putrefied husk the democratic party has turned itself into. but it's not; it's an uncontroversial comment at an event relevant to the issue.

Constantly claiming misogyny and using it as a blunt instrument to somehow try and guilt people into voting for her did more damage to the Clinton campaign than actual misogyny ever did Maybe it lost her a handful of votes in some of the more backwards hick towns of the United States but she still won the popular vote by [I]three goddamn million[/I] Her campaign was divisive, alienating, and [I]incredibly[/I] arrogant. More time was spent fellating private interests and celebrities while making snide remarks about the opposition and their presumed voters More time was spent hounding the sixteen million Democratic voters about how awful they were for not voting for poor oppressed Hillary Clinton than actually addressing their concerns and creating compromises for the good of the future I sound more and more like a broken record the more I bring this shit up, but I think it's worth repeating every time this arrogant fuckwit tries to skitter out from under the blame

[QUOTE=Generic Monk;52117516]why would you want anyone involved with iraq anywhere near the white house ever again[/QUOTE] she's smart and has experience. I could give you the same talk about clinton cough benghazi cough email scandal cough that one fucked up rape trial she laughed about cough [QUOTE=Generic Monk;52117530]dick isn't backed up by years of societal misogyny though lmao it's like a white person getting offended by being called 'cracker' - 'why yes my race did openly subjugate yours for hundreds of years, and yes you're still feeling the effects of that. that really hurts!'[/QUOTE] I know flamebaiting when I see it. intentionally obtuse isn't a good way to carry out your life

[QUOTE=butre;52117776]I know flamebaiting when I see it. intentionally obtuse isn't a good way to carry out your life[/QUOTE] that's uhhh...not flamebaiting my dude. A lot of the gendered insults we have target women in particular (and the ones that don't target women tend to target sexual minorities instead, hey-ho!). And are associated with much, much more vile meaning than the male insults we have (which basically all boil down to variations of "you penis"). This is backed by eons of society viewing women as second class citizens. After all, who wants to be compared to the thing alpha manly men males smash their cocks into huh? Generic Monk (there's a name I've missed) is right in comparing it to how racial slurs formed too. Most of them target groups that have historically been horribly oppressed by the majority ethnicity of a country (nigger, chink, gook, slope, paddy, etc.), and all the stereotypes associated with those insults are awfully insulting (lower intelligence, exaggerated facial features, submissive personalities or destructive personalities, etc.). In comparison we have "dick" and "cracker" for white, straight males, and variations thereof. Not really evoking as nasty imagery in anybodies head there tbh. A lot of our insulting language is based in how we mistreated various groups historically. It's pretty hard to deny this. And the insults do vary from place to place based on the majority ethnicity. But in the western world, it's all pretty similar.

You know, Clinton's a smart woman, but I think her head's a little too far up her own ass. Yes, I can understand her perspective. She genuinely seems to believe that her bid for a presidency was all about a woman becoming the POTUS for the first time in history. Her policies are pretty good, and there's no doubt she's politically experienced. But it was her backroom dealing and her connections with her husband's political dynasty that lost her the election, not that she was female. If it had been, say, Elizabeth Warren running against D.T., I honestly think he would've lost by an even bigger landslide than he lost the popular vote. Her collusion with the DNC was the biggest and only real scandal that lost her the vote of many Democrats. Conspiring with the head of the convention against Sanders did her no favours whatsoever. In her mind, victory at any cost was more important than integrity.

[QUOTE=Wafflemonstr;52117308]Did she say it was? Not seeing how her loss in 2008 is relevant to what she is talking about here. Misogyny absolutely played a roll in her loss in 2016; it wasn't the key factor, but it absolutely did. The amount of both Democrats and Republicans I read and saw calling her a cunt, bitch, etc, was despicable, and it was all because she comes across as tough, rather than timid.[/QUOTE] Maybe she should stop being a cunt and a bitch then, also a dick. She lost because she failed to promote her image to the correct demographics in addition to alienating them through shit like "deplorables". Donald Trump on the other hand was [I]thought[/I] to represent a radical change to shitload of people that have begun to hurt as a result of past government leadership.

[QUOTE=Fangz;52117605]Hence, why I revised my post to one of the main reasons, not the main reason.[/QUOTE] At this point it just feels like you are just playing with words to make yourself feel more righteous. She was asked a question about misogyny (at a women's summit; lets not forget context) and answered it rather accurately. Would you have had her say that misogyny played absolutely no part in her loss? [QUOTE=GhillieBacca;52117583]It's another "any race that isn't white can't be rayciss" episode. What compelled you to bring race into this thread?[/QUOTE] He didn't bring race into the thread, he brought in an analogy. You actually made the thread more racially charged by implying that he thinks non-whites can't be racist.

I dislike Hillary because she's a cunt, not because she has a cunt.

[QUOTE=The Jack;52117991]I dislike Hillary because she's a cunt, not because she has a cunt.[/QUOTE] That's the spirit.

The perception that Hillary Clinton blames her unpopularity/loss on misogyny is a bigger reason why she lost than actual misogyny.

[QUOTE=butre;52117776]she's smart and has experience. I could give you the same talk about clinton cough benghazi cough email scandal cough that one fucked up rape trial she laughed about cough I know flamebaiting when I see it. intentionally obtuse isn't a good way to carry out your life[/QUOTE] don't imply i don't think that hilldawg was an awful candidate; she absolutely was. and don't try to prove your cough point with cough right wing talking points cough cough cough rather than the actual material ways she made people's lives worse with her bullshit incrementalism and warhawking, at home and abroad. it's generally best to run someone relatively new to public office and with charisma, since the least amount of people are entrenched in their opinion and it's easier to like someone charismatic. neither condi or hill have those qualities, though admittedly hill is more grating just because of how desperately she wants to be liked. and if that uncontroversial statement makes you irrationally angry that's your problem, wasn't my intention

Why are you not highlighting the bigger issue here: you defeated Trump by almost 3 million votes but he still was allowed into office anyway. Have you got some sort of quiet political pact with the Electoral College or something? It makes no fucking sense. The result of 2016 was that the majority of the American people who voted did so for you over him and all the other candidates. You won. Why are you not bringing this up?

If she cried about pop vote shed be a cunt and an idiot.

[QUOTE=-nesto-;52118294]If she cried about pop vote shed be a cunt and an idiot.[/QUOTE] [img]http://gossiponthis.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/trump-tweet-popular-vote.jpg[/img] Rofl.