Opinion of Hillary Clinton

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

Awesome woman, radical at heart, champion of the true working class American, the white working class, black working class, Hispanic working class, the invisible Americans of all stripes... champion of children's rights, intelligent and pragmatic, understands the game of politics and how it is played. Need I say more?

I ask again, Beet.  Are you really supporting Schweitzer in 2016?

[Sopranos Republican]

Awesome woman, radical at heart, champion of the true working class American, the white working class, black working class, Hispanic working class, the invisible Americans of all stripes... champion of children's rights, intelligent and pragmatic, understands the game of politics and how it is played. Need I say more?

I ask again, Beet.  Are you really supporting Schweitzer in 2016?

I'm still holding out hope that this post was sarcastic.

[IceSpear]

Awesome woman, radical at heart, champion of the true working class American, the white working class, black working class, Hispanic working class, the invisible Americans of all stripes... champion of children's rights, intelligent and pragmatic, understands the game of politics and how it is played. Need I say more?

I ask again, Beet.  Are you really supporting Schweitzer in 2016?

I'm still holding out hope that this post was sarcastic.

Considering that only 5% of Democrats have an unfavorable opinion of Hillary, I think it's the "she's an evil sociopath!" posts that are more likely to be joking...

[traininthedistance]

I'm not a fan of Hillary.  She does need to answer for her conduct in the 2008 campaign and assure us that it will not be repeated.

But, that one issue aside, I am less a fan of the hyperbolic attacks being lobbed at her from the wingnuts and True Leftists and conspiracists of all stripes.  And, yes, that includes centrist detractors as well- case in point being that recent, awfully misogynistic, TIME cover.

Eh, she's better than Cuomo and that's all we can realistically hope for these days.  Lean FF.

[The Dowager Mod]

Murdering vince foster in a coke fueled rage will keep her from ever being president.
am i doing it right?

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

Murdering vince foster in a coke fueled rage will keep her from ever being president.
am i doing it right?

You forgot he was her secret lover.  Get with it, gurl!

[DevotedDemocrat]

Cold, nasty political woman with no warmth or charm. Probably a Third Way New Democrat like her husband and also the main chance for a Democratic victory in 2016. I really dislike her, but I'll hold my nose and vote for her if she's the nominee out of both party loyalty and to keep a Republican out.

[Oakvale]

I'm not a fan of Hillary.  She does need to answer for her conduct in the 2008 campaign and assure us that it will not be repeated.

But, that one issue aside, I am less a fan of the hyperbolic attacks being lobbed at her from the wingnuts and True Leftists and conspiracists of all stripes.  And, yes, that includes centrist detractors as well- case in point being that recent, awfully misogynistic, TIME cover.

Eh, she's better than Cuomo and that's all we can realistically hope for these days.  Lean FF.

How on earth is that cover misogynistic?

Anyway, the near-definition of HP (normal, and so on).

[traininthedistance]

How on earth is that cover misogynistic?

Wait, really?  You're joking, right?  Even you can't be that blinded by Hillary-hatred to see the obvious symbolism, no?

Please tell me you're joking.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

How on earth is that cover misogynistic?

Wait, really?  You're joking, right?  Even you can't be that blinded by Hillary-hatred to see the obvious symbolism, no?

Please tell me you're joking.

I hope he isn't joking, because it's not.

[Miles]

FF.

[All Along The Watchtower]

Her fans are more annoying than she is, IMHO.

[Paul Kemp]

How on earth is that cover misogynistic?

Wait, really?  You're joking, right?  Even you can't be that blinded by Hillary-hatred to see the obvious symbolism, no?

Please tell me you're joking.

I hope he isn't joking, because it's not.

I don't get it either. Is it because of the heels?

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

How on earth is that cover misogynistic?

Wait, really?  You're joking, right?  Even you can't be that blinded by Hillary-hatred to see the obvious symbolism, no?

Please tell me you're joking.

I hope he isn't joking, because it's not.

I don't get it either. Is it because of the heels?

Maybe.  Mrs. Grumps would have just said "wow, nice shoes"   

[Paul Kemp]

Found this article on it. I'm not sure I agree though.

[Oakvale]

Found this article on it. I'm not sure I agree though.

I stopped reading after this

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I mean for Christ's sake you don't even need to do any research to see how dumb this criticism is

[traininthedistance]

Found this article on it. I'm not sure I agree though.

Yeah, that's more or less the shape of it.

There are plenty of ways to criticize Clinton without being anti-woman, and definitely many of her defenders have taken it too far.  But, Jesus f**k, picturing her as a giant stiletto stomping on a tiny emasculated man is not the way to go.  That's pretty much Respect 101 goddamit.

[traininthedistance]

Found this article on it. I'm not sure I agree though.

I stopped reading after this

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I mean for Christ's sake you don't even need to do any research to see how dumb this criticism is

Maybe if you bothered to actually do the research with an open mind you'd realize that it's not as obviously dumb as you assume.  But the central point of the article's criticism stands even if you don't accept that particular assertion.

[Oakvale]

I guess I'm missing some kind of brain wiring or something because I have no idea what that article is talking about or how the cover is misogynistic at all. If the frontrunner was a man polling at similarly unstoppable levels they could easily have done the same cover with the only difference being it'd be a man's shoe...? The purpose of the artwork is to depict Clinton as a political colossus towering over insignificant opposition. If you want to complain about sexism toward Hillary Clinton there's plenty of valid points you could argue (some of the reaction towards her crying that one time in 2008 etc.) without resorting to this kind of hysteria.

As regards the above point, Hillary Clinton's been branding herself as "Hillary" ever since her 2000 Senate run. I don't notice Elizabeth Warren being referred to as simply "Liz" or whatever in the media, for example.

[traininthedistance]

I guess I'm missing some kind of brain wiring or something because I have no idea what that article is talking about or how the cover is misogynistic at all. If the frontrunner was a man polling at similarly unstoppable levels they could easily have done cover with the only difference being it'd be a man's shoe...? The purpose of the artwork is to depict Clinton as a political colossus towering over insignificant opposition. If you want to complain about sexism toward Hillary Clinton there's plenty of valid points you could argue (some of the reaction towards her crying that one time in 2008 etc.) without resorting to this kind of hysteria.

As regards the above point, Hillary Clinton's been branding herself as "Hillary" ever since her 2000 Senate run. I don't notice Elizabeth Warren being referred to as simply "Liz" or whatever in the media, for example.

I do actually agree that the quoted point is one of the weaker bits in the article.  I'm just not ready to ignore all the other points because this one is somewhat shaky.

I don't think that all opposition to Hillary is sexist, or even necessarily most of it.  I'm just saying this particular article was framed in a sexist manner; it was something I picked up on entirely on my own, without any prodding from other corners of the Internet; so it's something I would expect many other folks to pick up on as well.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

There's certainly been some awful sexism against here (that satirical KFC special, for instance), but I see nothing sexist about that TIME cover.

[Beet]

Awesome woman, radical at heart, champion of the true working class American, the white working class, black working class, Hispanic working class, the invisible Americans of all stripes... champion of children's rights, intelligent and pragmatic, understands the game of politics and how it is played. Need I say more?

I ask again, Beet.  Are you really supporting Schweitzer in 2016?

Nah, the Schweitzer thing is a bit of a joke/backlash against the whole Hillary is inevitable meme, which as you know I am against. I have always liked Hillary.

Sometimes, I do wish we could get someone younger, but it's not because I have anything against older presidential nominees, it's because I'm afraid other people will be irrationally biased against her because of her age and status as a Clinton.

[Mordecai]

Lean FF.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

The TIME cover is sexist because it shows stilettos?? Hillary refers to herself as a "hair icon" and "pantsuit aficionado." Is Hillary sexist?

[Marokai Backbeat]

The TIME cover is sexist because it shows stilettos?? Hillary refers to herself as a "hair icon" and "pantsuit aficionado." Is Hillary sexist?

Apparently it would be sexist only if a man called her that.

Count me as someone who also doesn't get the outrage. The imagery of a giant shoe stepping on/kicking through a pack of nobodies is incredibly common. They made it a stiletto because it's Hillary being the towering figure in the pack instead of someone else. That's it.

It actually immediately reminded me of an ad from the Ontario NDP where they ran with the imagery of a pair of orange stiletto heels for the 2011 election. Is the Ontario NDP playing on sexist imagery?