Hillary: ‘Misogyny Played a Role’ in Election Loss
Get over it.
Unable to accept electoral defeat, Hillary Clinton found a new reason she lost the presidential election: misogyny:
“Certainly, misogyny played a role,” Clinton said at the Women of the World Summit in New York. “I mean, that just has to be admitted. And why and what the underlying reasons were is what I’m trying to parse out myself.”
https://twitter.com/SteveKopack/status/850096954872926211
Give me a break. It had nothing to do with the fact that Hillary was a terrible candidate and ran a horrible campaign? Obviously not:
“I think in this election there was a very real struggle between what is viewed as change that is welcomed and exciting to so many Americans, and change which is worrisome and threatening to so many others,” Clinton said. “And you layer on the first woman president over that and I think some people, women included, had real problems.”
As I said, this is not the first time Hillary or her team blamed her loss on sexism. They cannot accept the fact that most women care about issues rather than the chromosomal makeup of the candidate:
What mattered most to voters, exit surveys indicated, was the economy, and, to borrow Trump’s words, “draining the swamp” in Washington. Four in 10 voters attested that they were in search of change, and three in five said the country was seriously on the wrong track. About the same proportion of people felt the economy wasn’t working for them, and two-thirds indicated that their financial situation was either the same or worse than it was when President Obama started his second term four years go.
Our ability to pursue happiness trumped electing the first female president:
Yet in interviews, some women said that electing the first female president wasn’t a reason to back the Mrs. Clinton. They cited misgivings about her use of a private email server while secretary of state, the fact they didn’t trust her or that they disagreed with her policies to expand government aid, such as her plan for free tuition for certain colleges.
“There isn’t a great deal of evidence that either her positions on issues or her candidacy as a woman [moved] the numbers very much,” said Karlyn Bowman, senior fellow at the conservative American Enterprise Institute in Washington.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Oh sure, I voted against her because I’m a misogynist? She’s delusional, and she probably would have been delusional as president.
Hillary is not insane.
She’s just exhibiting the normal “delusions” of psychopaths – in my opinion.
Misogyny? The Democrat Party owns that evil in this world.
Hilary… I don’t hate all women.
I just hate you.
Bye, bye.
I don’t have a contempt for women, in general.
Just a contempt for one woman, in particular. That doesn’t make me a misogynist.
That’s reasonable; from where I’m standing, she’s a contemptible woman.
It wasn’t that voters didn’t want to elect a woman as president; it was that they didn’t want to elect a corrupt, incompetent, hyper-partisan, paranoid, secretive, sickly woman as president.
But it’s understandable that Hillary wouldn’t want to admit that.
Hillary is totally right.
Bill Clinton’s misogyny played a part in this election.
The alternative would have been to vote for her because she’s a woman (which is exactly what she expected people to do). Is that a good reason to vote for someone? Yet that was the basis of her campaign and she’s surprised so many women (who she obviously considers too stupid to think for themselves) didn’t vote for her.
The democrats are all about victim groups and Obama was elected twice because he was black. She naturally assumed that she could be elected because she is a woman. She never got the fact that she is probably (there is Pelosi) the most disliked woman in America. Since the election, other women have tried to take Hillary’s title, but they don’t have Hillary’s long history.
The Leftist mindset of “someone else’ fault!”.
Pitiful and sad.
Wouldn’t you first have to think of Hillary Clinton as a woman before rejecting her due to sexism? Argument: refuted.
Hillary should know .. she had all the misandrists
Yes, yes, yes! I’d buy her a tank of gas to keep traveling down her highway to nowhere.
What Hillary says is not a clue to what she actually believes. She believes she should be the First Woman President. This has been her life’s goal.
Such an ambition is not inherently bad. During his escape from a Boer POW camp in 1899, Winston Churchill told one of the men who helped him that he would be Prime Minister. And so he was, although it took him over forty years to do it.
I’ve seen no signs that Hillary has any goals beyond the Presidency; no great plans for fundamental transformations of the United States. And that means that she has no way to convince anyone that she’s worth voting for. Identity politics only; First Woman President, so take that, all you glass ceilings out there. That’s all she has to offer voters. So she has to keep hyping it, whether or not anyone’s actually interested.
Besides votes, she needs money—she burned through more than a billion dollars last time ’round—and she needs political influence, mainly inside the Party; and the Dems have, in the past, shown no great enthusiasm for running losing candidates. The days when the Party would run someone like William Jennings Bryan for President three times seem to be long over. (Besides, unlike Hillary, Bryan actually had a message besides “I wanna be President.”)
The takeaway is that Hillary isn’t out of our misery yet. We can run out the clock and wait for her to drop dead, or pursue her for her life of crime and put her behind bars. Otherwise, she’ll definitely be working toward a comeback.
Are the Dems so hidebound and unimaginative that they’ll run her again? It’s not impossible.
I am on my knees praising God for saving us from this woman.
You are not alone in that Helen!!!!!!!!!!!!!
AMEN!!!!!!!!!!!
Misocrookery.
She largely cited these factors for her defeat:
– Russia. “A foreign power meddled with our election,” she said, labeling it “an act of aggression.” She called for an independent, bipartisan investigation into the Kremlin’s involvement and said the probe should examine whether there was collusion with the Trump campaign.
– Misogyny. “Certainly, misogyny played a role. That has to be admitted,” she said. Clinton added that “some people — women included — had real problems” with the idea of a woman president.
– Comey. Clinton cited as damaging to her campaign his unusual decision to release of a letter on October 28, less than two weeks before Election Day, that said he was looking at additional emails related to the FBI probe of the former secretary of state’s use of a private server.
– WikiLeaks. Weeks of disclosures of stolen emails from the personal account of then-Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta, were particularly harmful, Clinton said, adding that it “played a much bigger role than I think many people yet understand.”
For me, it came down to a feeling that Hillary would be a continuation of Obama and that Trump had fresher ideas about improving America.
Then, it was the SCOTUS nomination.
Finally, it was Hillary’s health issues and I started looking at the VP options. Pence was a much better option than Kaine.
I had problems with Trump, but Hillary was far worse in many of the categories.
I wonder if Rice, et al, also unmasked Hillary and was gathering info on her which would have been used against her to keep the Obama people in power.
It seems not unreasonable to suppose that at least some voters were unwilling to vote for a female for president.
BUT it also seems certain that there were millions willing to vote for any woman (or at least any non-conservative woman), almost regardless of any other arguments for or against the candidate.
So the question isn’t whether some voted against her because of her sex, but whether her sex was a net positive or a net negative. Ignoring one side of the ledger while complaining about other side is dishonest accounting.
But, it’s Hillary Clinton; why would anyone expect any better?
The Russians/Fake news did not cause Hillary to lose the election!
And she did not lose because she was a woman.
The one person that influenced the election was the candidate herself- Hillary.
Did the Russians/Fake News/ Misogyny set up the Clinton foundation?
Did the Russians/Fake News/ Misogyny set up a unauthorized server?
Did the Russians/Fake News/ Misogyny place highly classified material on a unclassified server?
Did the Russians/Fake News/ Misogyny pick a candidate for the democratic party that was under a active criminal FBI investigation?
Did the Russians/Fake News/ Misogyny tell Hillary not to have a decent economic message for the rust belt?
Did the Russians/Fake News/ Misogyny tell Hillary to slime half of the country? Basket of deplorable’s!
Did the Russians/FakeNews/ Misogyny force the Clinton campaign to rig the primary against Sanders?
Did the Russians?Fake News/ Misogyny tell the campaign to act like they won the election before they actually did? (arrogant, condescending, we are better than you)
So the left is so traumatized they will say anything or do anything to try to make sense of the loss.
The Russian/Fake News/ Misogyny excuse is just the latest. So once this plays out another excuse will pop up!
Hillary please stop making up phony excuses!
So….in summary….of what Common Sense said….
“Good News Hillary!!! You LOST the Election ALL BY YOURSELF!!!!!”
More accurately, she was done in by sanguivoriphobia, and/or kinemortophobia.
Vampires and Zombies? Really? And here I thought it was voters having scelerophobia.
If it weren’t for misogyny and the Putin the Dems would have held the House and Senate in 2010 and 2012.
Damn you, misogyny and Putin!
“Hillary please stop making up phony excuses!”
I disagree. The longer the party of “hate America first” deludes itself the better off we all are.
Hillary you lost the woman vote and Trump brought more minorities to his ticket than any other GOP candidate.
Get over it.
Her IT Tech person that configured her server was reportedly Paul Combetta, a male. (https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/hillary-clinton-tech-guy-asked-reddit-for-email-advice).
The server was a main issue for her campaign.
So was HILLARY a misogynist for choosing a man instead of a woman to configure her server??!!
I’m shocked that Hilary would let a “man” into her toilet……
“So was HILLARY a misogynist for choosing a man instead of a woman to configure her server??!!”
Poor economy on Hillary’s part; she could have gotten a female IT for 30% less!
This time it was Truth that slayed the beast.
This time it was Truth that slayed the beast.
Couldn’t have been that you’re a shrill, arrogant, thoroughly unpleasant person who lacked actual qualifications and had no message, could it?
Perhaps it was her role in running the Clinton Crime Corporation, and her efforts to paint that thoroughly corrupt organization as a “legitimate charity” … a charity that paid for her daughter’s college and wedding expenses, and funneled millions to Hillary and her unregistered sex offender spouse. Oh, and also accepted millions of dollars from foreign powers that had business pending before Hillary in her capacity as Secretary of State, deals which were approved *after* the checks cleared. Or the bodies of all the people connected with Hillary that died mysteriously when they became a threat to her.
Nah, it couldn’t be that! It has to be misogyny, for sure.
She is simply looking for a way to defend running a very bad campaign while being corrupt to the core.
Gender was not the cause. She lives the delusion.
She’s in denial. It was about the baby girls and boys, too.
That said, I would have voted for Sarah Palin.
What do you think, Hillary, Sarah Palin in 2020? Perhaps Michelle Bachmann. There are a number of women whose character is right for the job.
Assholeisogyny played a far greater role.
Baggage played a bigger role in your loss, and being a terrible candidate.
she used that argument in her fictitious account of trying to enlist in the Marines and being shot down by the recruiter.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2015/11/12/hillary-clintons-claim-that-she-tried-to-join-the-marines/?utm_term=.a5c3dc3a9b8c
If gender is just a construct that each of us have, then there is no such thing as gender and no such thing as misogyny.
She’s right. Her own misogyny was a factor in this election, because there were people like me who noticed, and pointed it out to the kiddies.
When the young ladies were squeaking “Well, why *wouldn’t* I want to vote for a woman?????” there were older ones to tell them, “Honey, this woman spent decades telling us that her husband’s affairs were private matters that had nothing to do with his performance as President, and now she claims that mere words (not even actions) by DJT disqualify him for high public office. Further, she did everything she could to ruin the reputation of women who credibly accused her husband of rape. I could forgive her for that right up to the point where she claimed to be an advocate for rape victims.”
All blame, no responsibility, sounds right. Only accomplishment: marrying and enabling lying whoremonger. It’s your fault, you racist, misogynist bastard!
I am sure there are a few who voted against Hillary simply because she was a woman. However, there is little doubt that an enormous number of women voted for her simply because she was a woman. It takes a lot of chutzpah to claim the five men who refused to vote for her cost her the election while ignoring the tens of thousands who voted for her because she was a woman. Given these numbers, it would have been a far worse lose for Hillary if she had been a man.
This woman is a sociopath, and delusional only with reference to her ability – like Obama, she actually believes her own press. She knows she f-cked up – she always has. But the MSM wiped her fat bottom when she crapped all over herself (a la Obama.) This time, they couldn’t do it, and she was sh-t-stained loser.
The woman is incompetent scum. Good riddance.
FROM THE NY POST. THIS SAYS IT ALL:
“One evening while they were having drinks with friends, he turned to Hillary and said, “Let’s ask Steven for help.”
“Their old Hollywood buddy Steven Spielberg could supply Hillary with acting coaches to help her when she had to give a speech.
“Hillary didn’t think she needed help.
“I get $250,000 to give a speech,” she said, according to one of her friends, “and these Hollywood jackasses are going to tell me how to do it!”
http://nypost.com/2015/09/26/hillary-enlisted-steven-spielberg-to-make-her-more-likeable/