• dhork@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    5 months ago

    Sexist enough that a woman who no one likes won the popular vote in 2016. …

    • mosiacmango@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      40
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Popular vote dont get you shit here.

      She lost the race in swing states where “independents” choose the winner. If she had been “John Clinton,” with every single bit of the politcal baggage and none of the sexist baggage, I guarantee she would have cleared that 80k vote hurdle in those 3 states.

    • BarbecueCowboy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      5 months ago

      I think people underestimate how much the Clinton name helped her even when the sexism hurt her. Beyond maybe Michelle Obama now, I can’t think of any other woman out there likely to perform as well as Hilary did. During the race, I heard more than one person make comments along the lines of “If she’s in trouble, she can just call her husband”. She definitely got a lot more points from the Clinton name than she lost for being a woman. It’s a sad world sometimes, yall.

      I personally think Bill Clinton’s brother Roger could have won that race even with all his controversies and the fact that he has zero qualifications.

    • mightyfoolish@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      5 months ago

      I remember the conservatives I worked with hated H. Clinton for “wanting to take our guns away.” I told her (it was a white 20 year old girl I was talking to specifically in this group) that whole idea is untrue.

      Clinton didn’t lose because of her horrible treatment of Africans, her philosophy that abortion should be a states’ right issue, because she is a woman, etc. She lost because the “Dems want our guns” propaganda. Conservatives are a simple breed.