Why are so many voting for Bernie simply because he is male?

[BainsBane]

Last edited Sat Nov 21, 2015, 11:27 PM - Edit history (3)

Read the whole thread The first paragraph is meant as a parody of the crap posted over and over again about Clinton's candidacy. I would have thought that was obvious, but evidently people like to comment just based on titles.
-------

Why do so many "liberals" insist on voting exclusively for male presidents? Why are they supporting a candidate only because of his chromosomes, when his experience and qualifications doesn't come close to the far superior, woman candidate?

I am FED UP with people announcing that we are voting for Clinton exclusively because she is woman. We see one of these posts every day, and what it tells me is that too many who pass themselves off as progressives assume women to be so inferior to themselves that we can't make rational decisions. It tells me that their opposition to Clinton is inexorably linked to her gender, but that it isn't enough for them to decline to vote for her. They need to insult millions of women across this country who have the audacity to support someone whose qualifications, fortitude, and substantive approach to policy make her infinitely more qualified than the male candidate that members here assume we owe are votes to. They are so certain that men own our votes that the failure to automatically deliver them on command makes us somehow deviant or errant--irrational.

It is no different from the right calling Obama the "Affirmative Action" president. Throughout this country's history, we have had politicians, and presidents in particular, who came exclusively from a narrow, white male demographic. And yet when African Americans and women seek to enter than exclusive white male club, we are told they get some sort of special consideration based on race and gender, because it's so easy for black men and women to be president. Can't you tell by the scores of women and black presidents?

Such arguments are ludicrous, entirely divorced from reality and counter to all evidence. If people were so anxious to vote for women simply because they were women, we wouldn't be in 2015 without ever having had a woman president. Clearly they are upset that society is moving forward, that men are losing their exclusive grip on power, so in order to try to cling to it they invoke reactionary, right-wing arguments about special treatment.

This is 2015. Start acting like it, and quit treating women as though we are less with you because many of us don't support who you tell us to. It is insulting, reactionary, and sexist. I don't give a shit who you vote for, but you have NO RIGHT to announce that women are supporting a candidate simply because she is a woman.

If Hillary Clinton becomes president, it will be in spite of her being a woman, not because of it.

[bravenak]

1. Most have no idea how 'ist' they are.

They think the victims of oppression are their oppressors merely by the act of wanting the same opportunities. Their jealousy shows too.

[wendylaroux]

5. say what?

[bravenak]

15. Click the link in my sigline

[DemocratSinceBirth]

55. Holding yourself out...

Holding yourself out as a member of a race that you aren't a member of to score political points is deplorable.




>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> white guy

[jeff47]

2. So when someone posts they are voting for Clinton because they want a woman president

what would you like us to take away from that statement?

Not a laundry list followed with that statement. That is the entire reasoning provided.

Apparently, thinking that particular DUer is voting for Clinton because of her gender is wrong. So what's the correct answer, according to you?

[BainsBane]

6. Bullshit

Firstly, I seriously doubt anyone has said that, or that in another post they might not have given other reasons for supporting her. If they only wanted a woman they would have voted for Palin or they could just as easily vote for Fiorina. It's not like Clinton is the only woman on the planet.

The people who speak most about Clinton's gender are those who oppose her. In doing so, they reveal far more about themselves than her or her supporters.

And don't even pretend you haven't seen multiple threads insisting support for Clinton is because she is a woman. This isn't about one DUer. It's about thread after thread where men insist women are supporting Clinton exclusively because of her gender. It is hostile to women and treats us as less. I will add that those who make such comments never display any signs of the intellectual superiority they are so certain they possess.

The correct answer is to cast your own vote and mind your business. Work on GOTV activities for your candidate. It's not up to you to decide the basis for which others are voting. You get one vote only. Your vote is no more equal than anyone else's, even if you default for male candidates in every single election. Of course, you can set about insulting the women of America, just as some Sanders supporters have already done to African Americans, to ensure your candidate continues to lose support. The fact is most Americans do not maintain 19th or mid-20th century notions of gender relations. The argument is a losing one, in addition to being idiotic.

[jeff47]

20. So your answer is.....?

Firstly, I seriously doubt anyone has said that, or that in another post they might not have given other reasons for supporting her.

While I do not keep track of what every poster says in every thread, there's plenty of posts where the only cited reason in that thread is gender.

If they only wanted a woman they would have voted for Palin or they could just as easily vote for Fiorina. It's not like Clinton is the only woman on the planet.

Well, Palin was running for VP. As for Fiorina, the same reasoning would apply, but they did not state they would cross party lines to vote for a woman. And I'm not going to assume they would.

And don't even pretend you haven't seen multiple threads insisting support for Clinton is because she is a woman.

I didn't. I asked what we are supposed to take away from the ones listing it as the reason they want to vote for her.

The correct answer is to cast your own vote and mind your business. Work on GOTV activities for your candidate. It's not up to you to decide the basis for which others are voting.

I'm not deciding the basis. I'm taking posters at their word.

Your vote is no more equal than anyone else's, even if you default for male candidates in every single election. Of course, you can set about insulting the women of America, just as some Sanders supporters have already done to African Americans, to ensure your candidate continues to lose support. The fact is most Americans do not maintain 19th or mid-20th century notions of gender relations. The argument is a losing one, in addition to being idiotic.

Good thing I never claimed I was supposed to decide how other people are allowed to decide who to vote for then.

Of course, that still leaves the question unanswered. Instead, you are attacking a post I did not make and have not made elsewhere.

[jeff47]

64. Btw, on "doubt anyone has said that"

From today:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251839727

[jimlup]

3. Sorry ... not buying it

I would prefer a woman presidential candidate. That is why I am a strong supporter of Elizabeth Warren and was hoping she would run this cycle. But I will not vote for Hillary Clinton just because she is XX and not XY. I don't discriminate on the basis of chromosomes. An attack post assuming that supporters of Bernie Sanders do is ridiculous, especially here. Get a grip.

[BainsBane]

11. You're missing the point

Read past the first paragraph, which is meant sarcastically. The rest is the point.

[TeddyR]

4. Personally

Don't care about gender or race. If that's a quality you think is important then you shouldn't be voting. Sarah Palin is female and Ben Carson is African American, and neither is qualified to be president. Nor for that matter is the white guy, Donald Trump. So instead of focusing on a trait the candidate can't change, let's focus on their policies.

[Hydra]

7. +1000

If you aren't voting for policies, what are you voting for? A beer at the WH?

[BootinUp]

9. A persons knowledge and priorities

may be partially shaped by their ethnic or religion or gender or orientation. I am not suggesting it should be a major factor, but I do not think there is anything wrong about it being factored in to someones decision.

[BainsBane]

13. "If you think race and gender are important than you shouldn't be voting"

That's exactly what the GOP's position is, which is why they are working to restrict the franchise.
We all get to vote, and what you think about why or how others vote is completely irrelevant.

[stevenleser]

24. You have a lot of work to do explaining to most firms that diversity is not a worthwhile thing to

pursue.

Keep in mind that while doing so, you will be undoing a lot of efforts to promote fair hiring and promotions of women and minorities.

[JonLeibowitz]

27. Did the poster say anything about firms hiring for diversity? Seems he was talking about voting.

Nice strawman, though.

[stevenleser]

28. Voting for someone is hiring someone for office. Did you really not understand that? nt

[JonLeibowitz]

30. Electing leaders is a tad bit different than telling others how to run their firms.

But since you asked: if I were running a firm I would be looking for the most qualified (based on experiences, education, recommendations) candidate that applied. I would encourage underrepresented minorities to apply, and then pick the best applicant for the position.

That's also my strategy for the election. I only wish Warren had entered the fray, I might be supporting her instead of Bernie.

[cui bono]

34. No it is not.

How can you possibly think the two are the same?

[stevenleser]

35. How can you possibly think the two are different? nt

[cui bono]

37. I asked you first. :p You made the assertion.

[neverforget]

38. Did I vote for you for your job?

[DianeK]

8. complete rubbish

[earthside]

10. Attempt at political judo - FAIL

I would aver that 90 percent of supporters of Sen. Sanders would instead be enthused supporters of Elizabeth Warren if she had run.

Guess what? It is about issues, ability and experience.

[BainsBane]

14. Try reading more than the title

because you clearly missed the point.

[earthside]

45. I understood the point entirely.

Just like I understand the meaning of the little 'Hillary being arrogant and dismissive' gif in your (and others) signature line.

[BainsBane]

47. So sorry that she didn't pay the GOP Benghazi witchhunt panel the

difference you think they deserve.

[anti partisan]

12. I'm not voting for Hillary because she's a war hawk, and a whole bunch of other reasons

Not sure about you, but I don't easily forgive people whose decisions lead to unnecessary people getting killed.

This applies to both capital punishment (which Hillary is for by the way) and war.

[BainsBane]

16. I guess you're not going to be able to vote at all then

because Bernie has supported plenty of wars, voted against gun control, and for immunity for gun corporations. He's also voted to allow loaded guns in public places like national parks. More Americans die from gun violence than war.

[anti partisan]

18. I said "war HAWK", way to take that out of context.

Are you really trying to put the blood on Bernie's hands for gun violence? That is just shameful, and a lot of more people are dying from war (overseas gun violence) than American gun violence. They just aren't Americans so people like you don't care.

[Agschmid]

23. "People like you don't care"

Over the top and complete bull.

Consider an edit.

[Logical]

32. Alert or quit whining. nt

[Agschmid]

33. I'm good. Thanks.

[BainsBane]

25. Yes, it is no different than putting blood on Hillary for the Iraq War

Last edited Sun Nov 22, 2015, 05:24 PM - Edit history (1)

You said you don't forgive people who vote for War. Bernie voted against the Iraq War, which is fantastic. He has supported and continues to support many more wars, including against ISIS.

As for my being shameful by blaming Bernie for the consequences of his votes, it is no different from your blaming Clinton for the consequences of hers.

To claim I do not care about non-American lives is malicious and false. What I don't do is pretend deaths from gun violence don't exist or don't count. And while I actively protested the Iraq War, frankly I do care more about gun violence because it affects my life. I live in a community that has a great deal of gun violence. It sucks having gun fire right outside your front door, destroying your property and threatening your life. It sucks having bullets fly through your windows into your building, barely missing people sleeping. And it especially sucks to be killed by gun fire, as happens all too often here.

This, however, is not the point of this OP, which is about so-called liberals insulting women for failing to vote as we are told.

[immoderate]

17. Female candidates are third way triangulators.

At least less so than male candidates.

--imm

[BainsBane]

22. Is that somehow embedded in the female genetic make up?

making us defective?

[immoderate]

26. Appears embedded in female CANDIDATES genetic makeup.

Are you running for something?

--imm

[Dem2]

19. I don't normally get involved in the back-and-forth

But you've hit on an issue I've noticed here and your post does a good job of making the point with a clever headline to boot.

The reaction you've received thus far is verification that your point was indeed well made.

[BainsBane]

21. Thank you!

I appreciate that.

[cantbeserious]

29. This Citizen Will Vote For Bernie Sanders Based On Policy And Position

This citizen will not vote for HRC because one never knows where that candidate stands on policy and position.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

48. Yes and her warhawkness

[JonLeibowitz]

31. I'm going to call Bullshit.

I read the whole post. Then I went to youtube and did two searches:

1) "Men for Hillary"

2) "Women for Hillary"

Only (2) returned this video:

Candidates don't use lines that they don't think will help them win votes. And Hillary keeps saying how she would be a change candidate because she is a woman.

As someone who votes on issues, I am unpersuaded. And yes, I might easily have supported Warren over Bernie. issues are what matters.

[BainsBane]

39. That wasn't my point

It was about people who insist the only reason women are voting for Hillary is because of her gender.
.

[JonLeibowitz]

40. Doesn't bother me. What would bother me is if people are voting not on the issues.

[BainsBane]

49. People vote for a variety of reasons

Issues, qualifications, experience, whether they think the person is a good fit for the presidency. I myself approach it like I'm interviewing someone for a job. Others look for a candidate to reflect back their own views. I suspect very few people, if anyone, votes based entirely on gender, though it likely influences votes for both candidates. Yet we have seen a series of posts insisting that Hillary is supported exclusively because she is a woman. It is illogical, counterfactual, and insulting to women voters.

[cui bono]

36. Bernie is the best candidate running regardless of gender.

What a bunch of hooey. If you want people to read the whole thing change your headline. If they don't read past bullshit then it's your own fault.

[Initech]

57. [phone]

[AgingAmerican]

41. Neither gender nor race decide anything for me

I vote based on policy.

[Tarc]

42. They are called the "BernieBros"

A group that overlaps with Gamergate.

[AgingAmerican]

43. If only they existed!

Not that it matters to some folks.

[BainsBane]

46. I didn't think BernieBro sounded so bad

compared to some.

I've seen some well meaning Bernie supporters on reddit trying to clamp down on bad behavior toward women in particular. They rightly argue it hurts their candidate.

[MeNMyVolt]

44. K&R. Found myself cheering at parts, especially the last two paragraphs. nt

[Comrade Grumpy]

50. More useless crap. Not surprised, given the author.

[JTFrog]

51. Same goes for your reply. n/t

[Android3.14]

52. I'm fed up with her supporters announcing that too

Glad we can agree on something. Now why would you support her over Bernie, who obviously has the voting record, integrity and independence from Wall Street that she lacks?

[MannyGoldstein]

53. A straw man jumping a shark

Ending in immolation.

Don't see that very often; brava!

[BainsBane]

59. Are you saying you haven't seen the threads claiming

women are voting for Clinton solely because of her gender?

It's not a strawman when it responds to specific arguments.
I don't think you actually know what that term means, Manny.

[99Forever]

54. Bullshit.And no....

.... I don't resd trollbait.

[BainsBane]

58. Why comment then?

Clearly you don't know what the point of the thread is.

[99Forever]

60. I know exactly what "the point" is.

Same as always. Same same same. And I'll comment anywhere and anytime I please. If you don't like it, that would be your personal problem. Deal with it.

[Initech]

56. Who needs some butter? I got plenty of it!

[Owl]

61. Why all of the silliness?

I as many here will certainly back Ms. Clinton and obviously vote for her if she is our candidate.

[Fawke Em]

62. I know of no one voting for Bernie because he's male.

They're voting for him because he's not bought-and-paid-for by the 1 percent.

If Hillary becomes president, it will be because of the 1 percent.

[McCamy Taylor]

63. If you note the gender gap in Clinton's support, it is clear lots of men DO want a man.

Meaning that Sanders will clean up the "Lord no! Not a woman!" vote. That does not make him sexist. It makes some of the folks who will vote for him sexist.