Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
2016 Postmortem
Showing Original Post only (View all)Let’s not lose sight of how historic a Hillary Clinton presidency would be for women [View all]
To announce youre excited about Hillary Clinton is an oddly subversive act, and to suggest others ought to feel the same, even more so.
But following a decisive victory in New York and with her path to the presidency ever-more surefooted, the possibility of the first female president is sinking in. And whatever your feelings about Clinton as the vessel for this achievement, its an extraordinary one.
Even Clinton herself will acknowledge she doesnt have the magnetism of certain politicians, telling feminist writer Lena Dunham memorably of her candidacy, If you cant get excited, be pragmatic. Clintons bid for president may not have the dreaminess of Barack Obamas, but its on track to be every bit as historic. And to simply say she would be the first female commander-in-chief is almost too glib. Should she actually win in November, shell have overcome a political process that, until Obama, systematically kept everyone but white men from the presidency for the last 220-plus years.
If young Democrats, who champion inclusivity in politics, cant start getting excited about upending that centuries-old tradition, they to quote a popular internet meme are doing it wrong.
http://www.rawstory.com/2016/04/lets-not-lose-sight-of-how-historic-a-hillary-clinton-presidency-would-be-for-women/
But following a decisive victory in New York and with her path to the presidency ever-more surefooted, the possibility of the first female president is sinking in. And whatever your feelings about Clinton as the vessel for this achievement, its an extraordinary one.
Even Clinton herself will acknowledge she doesnt have the magnetism of certain politicians, telling feminist writer Lena Dunham memorably of her candidacy, If you cant get excited, be pragmatic. Clintons bid for president may not have the dreaminess of Barack Obamas, but its on track to be every bit as historic. And to simply say she would be the first female commander-in-chief is almost too glib. Should she actually win in November, shell have overcome a political process that, until Obama, systematically kept everyone but white men from the presidency for the last 220-plus years.
If young Democrats, who champion inclusivity in politics, cant start getting excited about upending that centuries-old tradition, they to quote a popular internet meme are doing it wrong.
http://www.rawstory.com/2016/04/lets-not-lose-sight-of-how-historic-a-hillary-clinton-presidency-would-be-for-women/
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
93 replies, 2697 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (11)
ReplyReply to this post
93 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Let’s not lose sight of how historic a Hillary Clinton presidency would be for women [View all]
SecularMotion
Apr 2016
OP
That's true, but poster didn't mention the Queen, they mentioned Margret Thatcher
SFnomad
Apr 2016
#64
Thatch was the head of the government. But she wasn't the queen. Will Hillary be a queen
imagine2015
Apr 2016
#81
It will be exciting to have the first woman president. In the case of Hillary,
Thinkingabout
Apr 2016
#2
Filling congress with Democrats is so very important, also having members who want to work
Thinkingabout
Apr 2016
#63
Thanks for sharing this link. Her judgment and her lack of remorse seem like that of a sociopath.
sus453
Apr 2016
#37
A woman getting elected on one hand versus endless wars, feeding the industrial prison pipeline,
Skwmom
Apr 2016
#7
That is a HUGE sentiment with woman which is why it will be hammered home in the general election.
Skwmom
Apr 2016
#28
Let me get this straight, when hillsquad brings up gender...it is ok. But when others do
insta8er
Apr 2016
#8
Libyan women had equal opportunity once - in the work force, equal pay, the right to divorce,
polly7
Apr 2016
#11
It's sickens me that neither she nor Bill has made any real effort to atone for it
loyalsister
Apr 2016
#65
It could leave a real bad taste if she stays corporate,trade or wallstreet- like a Thatcher disaster
larkrake
Apr 2016
#24
This is so dumb. The US will have a woman prez, everyone is fine with this. It need not be Hillary.
reformist2
Apr 2016
#29
Electing Obama didn't help race relations. Electing Hillary won't help gender relations.
hellofromreddit
Apr 2016
#44
Without drastic Climate Change Action Now, there will be no women, nor any men.
highprincipleswork
Apr 2016
#53
There is no worse heresy than that the office sanctifies the holder of it. Lord Acton
Tierra_y_Libertad
Apr 2016
#71
Gender should be a qualifier in exactly the same proportion it is a disqualifier.
Ed Suspicious
Apr 2016
#77
Same old same old corporatist politicians is historic? Nope not in my lifetime.
Nanjeanne
Apr 2016
#80
... as the President who sent 20,000 of their sons off to die in Syria. n/t
lumberjack_jeff
Apr 2016
#82
It would certainly be historic in a way that electing yet another elderly white male would not be.
Nye Bevan
Apr 2016
#90
As a caller told me from Pa. they would like to see a woman, but Hillary is not that woman ...
slipslidingaway
Apr 2016
#92
If anything and as a woman over 60, GENDER is not a reason to hire or not hire someone for a job ...
slipslidingaway
Apr 2016
#91