Topic: Hillary and the whole "first woman president" thing?
Denmark guy !jJEom8Ii3E started this discussion 10 years ago #55,773
Hillary appeared in "between two ferns" and she mentioned how important it would be for little girls to see a woman president, then she threw in "..... And little boys really "
But is that really true, is it not just a weak selling point? Like Obama is the first black president but have things really improved for blacks since then?
I think those children won't be inspired by hillary at all, maybe just when it comes to looking after your health but that's it.
But is that really true, is it not just a weak selling point? Like Obama is the first black president but have things really improved for blacks since then?
I think those children won't be inspired by hillary at all, maybe just when it comes to looking after your health but that's it.
Anonymous B joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 5 hours later[^] [v] #721,406
What is it with you stalking kids?
Denmark guy !jJEom8Ii3E (OP) replied with this 10 years ago, 10 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #721,415
Anonymous C joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 1 minute later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #721,417
Denmark guy !jJEom8Ii3E (OP) replied with this 10 years ago, 11 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #721,428
buto joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 14 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #721,431
Denmark guy !jJEom8Ii3E (OP) replied with this 10 years ago, 3 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #721,432
Green !BEERiVqJJw joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 1 hour later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #721,476
She won't be the first woman president.
beckyderp !Hi.HILLARY joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 7 hours later, 16 hours after the original post[^] [v] #721,544
Why wouldn't it matter? It doesn't have to fix gender inequality entirely to be important.
Anonymous Q joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 2 minutes later, 16 hours after the original post[^] [v] #721,545
Catherine !TGirlYJKXM joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 1 hour later, 17 hours after the original post[^] [v] #721,549
Anonymous I joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 40 minutes later, 18 hours after the original post[^] [v] #721,558
@OP
I liked his comment that for young kids she will actually be the first white president
I liked his comment that for young kids she will actually be the first white president
[^_^] !IOdbnXsKDk joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 8 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #721,595
@721,544 (beckyderp !Hi.HILLARY)
No offense, electing a murdering lying elitist person president, especially on the basis that she is a woman, is the worst thing someone can do as a voter. Jill stein or whatever, shes a woman and not a republican right? Vote for her! Support her!
No offense, electing a murdering lying elitist person president, especially on the basis that she is a woman, is the worst thing someone can do as a voter. Jill stein or whatever, shes a woman and not a republican right? Vote for her! Support her!
beckyderp !Hi.HILLARY replied with this 10 years ago, 9 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #721,601
@previous ([^_^] !IOdbnXsKDk)
Good point, my post definitely stated that her vagina is the only reason to vote for Hillary.
Good point, my post definitely stated that her vagina is the only reason to vote for Hillary.
buto replied with this 10 years ago, 4 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #721,603
u not gonna fix the... barn.. with just 1 tool
FuckAlms !vX8K53rFBI joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 1 hour later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #721,616
[^_^] !IOdbnXsKDk replied with this 10 years ago, 6 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #721,703
buto replied with this 10 years ago, 49 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #721,707
buto double-posted this 10 years ago, 53 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #721,708
FuckAlms !vX8K53rFBI replied with this 10 years ago, 1 hour later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #721,729
[^_^] !IOdbnXsKDk replied with this 10 years ago, 11 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #721,732
Metæ joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 4 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #721,733
I still think Democrats made a huge mistake by not running a Warren-Sanders ticket. You get the first woman president, but with like 90% less baggage and more progressive youth cred.
I mean in '08 and '12 a lot of kids were excited about Obama. I don't see anybody excited about Hillary. It's more like a "well I guess I'll vote for her because she's the lesser of two evils/she's less scary than Trump" sentiment.
I mean in '08 and '12 a lot of kids were excited about Obama. I don't see anybody excited about Hillary. It's more like a "well I guess I'll vote for her because she's the lesser of two evils/she's less scary than Trump" sentiment.
(Edited 4 minutes later.)
buto replied with this 10 years ago, 52 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #721,738
[^_^] !IOdbnXsKDk replied with this 10 years ago, 15 hours later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #721,851
buto replied with this 10 years ago, 3 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #721,853
[^_^] !IOdbnXsKDk replied with this 10 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #721,856
buto replied with this 10 years ago, 7 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #721,857
@previous ([^_^] !IOdbnXsKDk)
dude honestly you are the judgiest fucking hippie ever so shut your mouth
dude honestly you are the judgiest fucking hippie ever so shut your mouth
[^_^] !IOdbnXsKDk replied with this 10 years ago, 32 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #721,859
buto replied with this 10 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #721,861
[^_^] !IOdbnXsKDk replied with this 10 years ago, 2 hours later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #721,891
beckyderp !Hi.HILLARY replied with this 10 years ago, 1 hour later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #721,902
Metæ replied with this 10 years ago, 1 hour later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #721,913
@previous (beckyderp !Hi.HILLARY)
How would she be any worse than Obama? I think people would get genuinely excited about Warren, not just like "ugh, lesser of two evils I guess".
How would she be any worse than Obama? I think people would get genuinely excited about Warren, not just like "ugh, lesser of two evils I guess".
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU joined in and replied with this 10 years ago, 2 hours later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #721,949
@previous (Metæ)
That's true of literally every candidate, it's just a matter of degree. Warren/Sanders would basically be the middle class white college student/recent grad dream ticket, but that is a tiny segment of the population that historically doesn't vote. The Democratic candidate has to have a lot of minority appeal since Dems lose the white vote, and also a decent chance of winning voters outside the 18-29 age range.
That's true of literally every candidate, it's just a matter of degree. Warren/Sanders would basically be the middle class white college student/recent grad dream ticket, but that is a tiny segment of the population that historically doesn't vote. The Democratic candidate has to have a lot of minority appeal since Dems lose the white vote, and also a decent chance of winning voters outside the 18-29 age range.
Metæ replied with this 10 years ago, 56 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #721,959
@previous (Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU)
> The Democratic candidate has to have a lot of minority appeal since Dems lose the white vote
Right, but the Clinton/Kaine ticket is white female/white male. A Warren/Sanders ticket would be white female/white male. Unless I'm counting this wrong, both tickets are equally white.
> and also a decent chance of winning voters outside the 18-29 age range.
Who are the older Democrats gonna vote for? Trump?
> Warren/Sanders would basically be the middle class white college student/recent grad dream ticket, but that is a tiny segment of the population that historically doesn't vote.
That's why it's so important to get them excited. That's why Obama '08 was perfect.
> The Democratic candidate has to have a lot of minority appeal since Dems lose the white vote
Right, but the Clinton/Kaine ticket is white female/white male. A Warren/Sanders ticket would be white female/white male. Unless I'm counting this wrong, both tickets are equally white.
> and also a decent chance of winning voters outside the 18-29 age range.
Who are the older Democrats gonna vote for? Trump?
> Warren/Sanders would basically be the middle class white college student/recent grad dream ticket, but that is a tiny segment of the population that historically doesn't vote.
That's why it's so important to get them excited. That's why Obama '08 was perfect.
(Edited 46 seconds later.)
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU replied with this 10 years ago, 9 hours later, 3 days after the original post[^] [v] #721,999
@previous (Metæ)
If black people voted purely on skin tone we'd be looking at Incumbent President and VP Herman Cain and Ben Carson running for reelection. It's about policy and a history of concern for their causes and communities just like every other constituency. Hillary and Bill were very attentive to the concerns of black people in the 90s and Hillary served as Secretary of State under the first black president (who has over a 90% approval rating among African-Americans). Bernie lives in a state that's 97% white and probably hadn't set foot in a black church in his life until this primary season. Approximately the same is true for Liz Warren.
> Who are the older Democrats gonna vote for? Trump?
Yes or stay home.
> That's why it's so important to get them excited. That's why Obama '08 was perfect.
Obama was well-suited for his time but giving the youth vote all the credit is pretty wrong. Youth turnout was like 55% while overall turnout was slightly over 60%. There are more people in that age grouo than there are among the 65+ crowd so their actual power is slightly above what their % indicates but the simple fact is even when youth turnout is really high, it's below average compared to overall turnout.
If black people voted purely on skin tone we'd be looking at Incumbent President and VP Herman Cain and Ben Carson running for reelection. It's about policy and a history of concern for their causes and communities just like every other constituency. Hillary and Bill were very attentive to the concerns of black people in the 90s and Hillary served as Secretary of State under the first black president (who has over a 90% approval rating among African-Americans). Bernie lives in a state that's 97% white and probably hadn't set foot in a black church in his life until this primary season. Approximately the same is true for Liz Warren.
> Who are the older Democrats gonna vote for? Trump?
Yes or stay home.
> That's why it's so important to get them excited. That's why Obama '08 was perfect.
Obama was well-suited for his time but giving the youth vote all the credit is pretty wrong. Youth turnout was like 55% while overall turnout was slightly over 60%. There are more people in that age grouo than there are among the 65+ crowd so their actual power is slightly above what their % indicates but the simple fact is even when youth turnout is really high, it's below average compared to overall turnout.