Is Hillary Hatred simply misogyny?
 

her marriage is a sham, and I do not respect her for that reason.

True enough, I don't actually know the details of her marriage. And I'm not going to be going on and on about wifely duties or some such. She's a free woman to do what she pleases. But a marriage with no sex (when it is obviously physically possible) is no marriage. I would feel the same way if Bill was withholding from her, it isn't right. the only reason to stay together is for political motivation.

and again I don't know the details of her or any of congress' marriages, I could be all wrong.

and I don't think Hillary is any worse than the rest. I have just as little respect for a male candidate who cheats on his wife, doesn't love his wife and stays together just in hopes they will run for the white house.

Originally posted by Winston
But perhaps the women who have the good sense to "hate" her are misogynists too? Or could the OP be just a rather puny strawman? The OP holds: I have trouble believing that Hillary's female detractors would bring the same level of intensity to their opposition to a male candidate. So, sure, misogyny; kind of a self-hating Jew thing, but for women.

Why do I get the feeling that options 1 & 4 won't get very many votes?

Originally posted by Cort Haus
This poll is invalid. Where is the "dislike her politics" option? http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...es/doitnow.gif "I'm a Hillary hater, but it's about her personally, and I'd feel teh same way about a male politician with her views and attitudes" is the closest he gave us. I don't "hate" her, but I strongly dislike the way she triangulates EVERYTHING. The woman is like she's from the Neutral Planet in Futurama. Zap Brannigan was right to try to destroy them. She doesn't seem to have any convictions of her own from what I've seen and her whole handling of her own record on Iraq is utterly repellent.

I'll vote for whoever wins the Dem nom, but please God let it NOT be Hillary. The Bush/Clinton/Bush/Clinton(?) dynasty must stop.

Well, she is a carpetbagger but I could care less about that...

...so long as she's not a Californian moving to Nevada; bunch of gutter trash they are. http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...ons/icon13.gif

http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...ilies/wink.gif

Originally posted by DRoseDARs
I'll vote for whoever wins the Dem nom Scots get to vote in US elections? That's THREE countries you guys get to vote in.

I'd like to have a woman as president, but I don't like Hillary's politics

Originally posted by Rufus T. Firefly
... with a vehemence that I've never seen directed at any other presidential candidate, ever. It's so visceral, so personal, so fueled by a rage I can't even imagine feeling, that it's just beyond me... Can't think of one? http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...ilies/cute.gif

GWB isn't currently a candidate, and he wasn't hated so much when he was still just a candidate. So no, he probably can't, Ogie.

In 1999/2000? I was too young to vote at the time, so I didn't pay super-close attention, but he seemed to be getting only mild mockery for his difficultitudes with the English language. The virulent 2004 opposition had more to do with his performance as president, which makes it not very comparable to "Hillary Hatred," whatever that is. I didn't know Hillary was hated as such by anyone other than right-wing hacks using her as an emotional punching bag for their grievances with her husband (hey, I'm sort of agreeing with Patroklos...odd).

Originally posted by Elok
... which makes it not very comparable to "Hillary Hatred," whatever that is. I didn't know Hillary was hated as such by anyone other than right-wing hacks using her as an emotional punching bag for their grievances with her husband (hey, I'm sort of agreeing with Patroklos...odd). You support my point. This supposed ground swell and wide spread white hot hatred is not so much when it comes to Hillary. Making it a bigger thing than it actually is feeds the mania.

Originally posted by joncha
Why do I get the feeling that options 1 & 4 won't get very many votes? I voted for option 1 http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...milies/nod.gif

I intend to vote for Hillary.

I think the hatred is in part misogyny, in part about her relationship with Bill Clinton, but its also about aspects of policy that intersect with the above - she integrates "new democrat" policies popular in the DLC, social justice rhetoric (And some policies) popular with the left, with a liberal-religious, communitarian outlook, that appeals to me, but drives lots of folks up the wall - esp A. libertarians, for whom it contradicts all they beleive B. Theocon rightists - for whom its a leftie distortion of their religious and "paleo-traditionalist" outlooks C. Hard lefties, for whom its a religious, traditionalist distortion of their communalist principles. Plus its a "mommyish" position, which drags up all the misogyny. Plus, her relationship with Bill would seem to some to preclude her being "mommyish"

As for the Clinton-Bush thingie, who cares? So some Euros will laugh. Its gonna end here anyway - no political future for chelsea, and I think Jeb Bush is dead in the water as far as presidential prospects are concerned. We had 4 terms for FDR. If she is what we need, lets vote for her.

Originally posted by Arrian


Bush was a sitting President, so I'd say it's not the same.

However, much of the virulent Hillary hatred, I think, goes back to when she was First Lady... the First Lady who tried to ram through her healthcare plan that so many people hated. First Ladies, I think, are generally expected to lay pretty low - or if they do stuff, to do pretty ideological neutral stuff (charity work). That is probably more than a bit mysogynistic in and of itself. Hillary didn't act like that. She came off as arrogant, IIRC, and people really took exception to her (an unelected person) acting like part of the executive branch.

-Arrian quibble - Theres only one elected person (or maybe two, see thread on Dick Cheney) in the executive branch, and hundreds of thousands of unelected people in it. Leaving aside the civil servants, the cabinet,etc theres still the white house staff. Essentially Hilary was like an unofficial CoS, not unlike Cheney in some ways, and probably less influential than Cheney.

Right, but she wasn't even appointed to a particular job, was she? No, she was "just the First Lady." If Bill had campaigned as "Bill and Hillary - team America" and won, maybe it would've been different. As it was, it seemed like, shortly after the election, Hillary kinda came out of nowhere and started acting like a major player.

Anyway, that was just my recollection of what went down in Bill's first term. At which point I was in highschool, and thus not necessarily paying full attention...

-Arrian

Originally posted by Arrian
Right, but she wasn't even appointed to a particular job, was she? No, she was "just the First Lady." If Bill had campaigned as "Bill and Hillary - team America" and won, maybe it would've been different. As it was, it seemed like, shortly after the election, Hillary kinda came out of nowhere and started acting like a major player.

Anyway, that was just my recollection of what went down in Bill's first term. At which point I was in highschool, and thus not necessarily paying full attention...

-Arrian I realize that is the perception. I'm not arguing with you there. I'm just saying its an unfair one. Considering that the Chief of Staff isn't a position that is ratified by the Senate. Who says Bill can't have have two CoS's? Would there have been an uproar if Bush II sent Andrew Card to Congress to push for something?

Then again, early on in Bush II's admin, the deputy CoS, Karl Rove, had far more power. In the Clinton administration, the CoS weren't considered that powerful... mostly because Clinton liked to deal directly with cabinet officials, and because Hillary acted somewhat like a CoS.

I'm with DD. I never really had an opinion about her until she came to San Francisco and started talking about a wealth tax. Sometimes, like most politicians, I wonder if she really knows what she is talking about. I hate her views, not her. I bet she is a really nice person, but her ideas for the country I do not share.

Originally posted by Arrian


And is duly hated with just as much virulence as Hillary is (or would be if he was actually going to run for Pres). Dude, people HATE Rove. I know I do... http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...ilies/wink.gif

At least Rove was formally appointed to a role. Hillary wasn't, was she? Technicality? Definitely. But it contributed to the "out of nowhere" feel to her role in the administration.

-Arrian Dude - I was 32 in 1992. Everybody knew she would play a big role in the admin. Clinton introduced her at campaign stops saying "You'll get two for the price of one" There were SOME women who said theyd rather just vote for Hillary. ISTR speculation on her getting a cabinet seat. The Hillary-hatred of the right was already quite strong at that point.


When she was given leadership on the healthcare plan (was that an official position, I dont recall) that was NOT a huge surprise. What WAS a surprise was that, in trying to thread the needle between single-payer on the one hand, and a policy that wouldnt have guaranteed universal coverage, like the Cooper plan, on the other, shed have A. come up with something so complex B. done it in secret and C. been blindsided by the industry PR campaign D. Mishandled coalition building deals

Originally posted by Rufus T. Firefly


Hillary never "came out of nowhere"; just the opposite. Throughout 1992, whenever Clinton campaigned with Hillary at his side he used the slogan "Buy One, Get One Free." He couldn't have been more blatant about the fact that Hillary was going to be taking an advisory/policy role in in the White House (and not without precedent; see Rosalynn Carter and Eleanor Roosevelt). And if Hillary had been Bill's well-educated, well-credentialed brother, a la Bobby Kennedy, instead of his well-educated, well-credentialed wife, there wouldn't have been nearly as much of a stink. Which brings it back to gender. Of course Eleanor was hated too. And Hillary identified with Eleanor. But as both righties and some feminists pointed out, in Eleanors time there wasnt much of an alternative path to power for women, and in Hillarys time there was.

Eleanor also had a marriage that was dead on the intimate level. But in those days (prewatergate, preGaryHart) the press hid pols personal pecadillos. And FDR at least kept to just one mistress, IIUC.