I won't persecute you. At least you were able to decide. I'm still undecided with less than a week to go. I won't vote for Clinton, but I'm up in the air about the other three. It's like choosing between lethal injection, the electric chair, or a firing squad.YoungAndWise wrote: (I'm feel like I am going to be persecuted for this on the thread, but I voted for Clinton. Her resume seems better than anyone else on the ballot.)
I don't think the discussion of female alternatives is misogynistic because Clinton herself has framed this election as the one where we should elect a woman. If one of her main arguments is that it's time to shatter the glass ceiling (which I think most people -- conservative and liberal --agree with including me), then it's not surprising that when people don't like Clinton they suggest other women who seem better suited for that role in history.CS wrote:I'd say that's deep seated misogyny. "Any woman but THAT woman." Clinton's approval ratings were extraordinarily high as Secretary of State but the moment she shows some ambition (a huge no-no for women), then they drop. Make no mistake, Michelle's ratings would drop the same way too, for the exact same reason.
I'm a little disappointed that Clinton chose to use her gender that way. I know it's tempting, but IMO it reduces her election to token status. True equality is when people vote for someone regardless of gender, not because of it.