|date:||22 April 2015 at 18:56|
|subject:||Fw: If Hillary Doesn’t Win, It’s Sexism|
If there’s anything worse than a sore loser, it’s someone who starts making excuses before they ever play the game. Granted, in this case, it isn’t Hillary Clinton herself grumbling about the reasons she may not win the White House in 2016, but her liberal champions in the media are already providing her with a soft landing should she be unable to secure a win.
Appearing on ABC this weekend to promote her book, Cokie Roberts told George Stephanopoulos that the “crack pollster” at the network had determined why many Americans might have an unfavorable view of the Democratic contender. No, it’s not because the name Clinton has become synonymous with the worst of Washington politics. No, it’s not because she has all the charm and charisma of a three-dollar tuba. And no, it’s not because scandal seems to follow the Clintons wherever they go. It’s because –
duh – she’s a woman.
“A woman who is strong and powerful is seen as not friendly and empathetic,” Roberts said, quoting an unspecified ABC poll. “Here we are in 2015 and we still have to deal with that. So that’s what she’s doing. She’s trying to figure out how to show people she’s a warm and friendly person.”
Stephanopoulos noted that this strategy differed from her last campaign, where Clinton seemed eager to show the country that she was as tough and strong as any man.
Roberts said, “Right, because she was afraid people would think a woman was too weak to have her hand on the button or the red telephone in the night. Now she’s selling wisdom, which is a good thing in an old woman.”
isn’t that they are making excuses for her eventual loss. Maybe they are trying to shame Americans into voting for her.
Don’t you know that it’s sexist that you don’t like her? Don’t you know that you would feel differently if she was a man? You don’t want to come off as a bigot, do you? Hmm?
What these sycophants are unwilling to admit is that Hillary’s gender is literally the only thing she has going for her. Put her next to the legion of fresh, vibrant faces on the right and she comes off as positively ancient. And that’s less to do with her chronological age and more to do with how long she’s been in the public eye. We’ve known Hillary Clinton for nearly 25 years now. There’s no way for her to capture that thrumming sense of miraculous surprise that helped Senator Barack Obama in 2008. The fact that she would be the first female president is her only point of interest.
If people aren’t excited about that, maybe it’s not because of sexism. Maybe it’s because of the woman herself.