Could someone PLEASE explain why some Clinton supporters are so angry?

[Bleacher Creature]

Seriously, Obama won fair and square. There was no backroom deal and he won majority of the pledged delegates. The whole point of having superdelegates is to act as a backstop in the event that one candidate gets a majority of pledged delegates, but not two-thirds. Superdelegates were created to overturn the decision of the pledged delegates only in extraordinary circumstances, not based on a couple of random general election polls in May.

There hasn't been a single documented incident of sexism among prominent Obama supporters or any attacks that go beyond simple campaign rhetoric, and the idea that the election was somehow "stolen" from her is ludicrous.

So please, explain to me how people are worked into such a tizzy that they are now organizing to defeat the Democratic nominee simply out of spite. I'm not trying to create another avenue for argument, I seriously just don't get it.

[XemaSab]

1. self delete

in the interests of a kinder, gentler GDP. :P

[Blue-Jay]

2. I dunno. Ask Harriet Christian.

She'll explain it to you.

[Lucky 13]

7. An inadequate black male is to blame.

These people need to slither back under their rock.

[DeschutesRiver]

60. Hillary needs to end this

before people start listening to Ms. Harriet as a representative of her voter base, and start assuming that Pastor Fleger was correct. That a white woman felt entitled, and is pissed off at the black man who won instead of her.

If these people won't slither back, then I hope they are as forgotten as this crappy Clinton candidate is about to be - she is headed for political obscurity. I thought she'd finally find her grace and use it to leave the race, but seeing how she is holding on, I realize she'll have to be kicked and kicked seriously to the curb by her party's movers and shakers. And they won't ask her back later.

[wvbygod]

106. Because Harriet represents all of Clinton supporters right?

I guess we can ask rev Wright why all white people are so bad too?

[SoonerPride]

3. They're mad that her entitlement was taken away.

They have a word for that kind of mentality over in freeperville.

I won't use it here.

[ampad]

117. That is exactly right

Entitlement is exactly why.

[JVS]

4. Because their campaign has spent months spinning and lying that she'd win and now she's done.

Everyone else saw this coming since WI or TX, OH at the latest.

[Lucky 13]

5. Unlike most 7 year old little leaguers - they WON'T accept defeat gracefully.

Go to any local little league game and watch how 7 year olds know how to cope better with defeat than Hillary or her supporters.

Graceless, bitter, spiteful, nasty human beings.

My grandmother used to tell us to conduct ourselves respectfully... even if we didn't FEEL like it. How we FEEL had nothing to do with it.

[JackORoses]

22. hillary is the kid who spits in their hand when doing the 'good game' handshake at the end

[Lucky 13]

24. The kid that would slap hands deliberately too hard.

uh huh... yeah... I know the ones...

[BuyingThyme]

6. According to what I've seen around here, it's because they've

been led through a little forest of lies and they still haven't seen daylight.

And Hillary last night simply continued the lie, with her "most votes ever" nonsense. It was like she was telling them that their team was required to keep living the lie, no matter how many times they have to change the story.

It's kinda like WMD.

[LakeSamish706]

8. I'm beginning to think that racism has become a factor... Don't know for certain...

But I have no other explanation as to why we are seeing this.

[Terran]

59. I'm thinking you're right.

The behavior is irrational, and racism is irrational too, ergo...for *some* people, I think the shoe fits.

[sybylla]

101. You know, I'd prefer not to think that's the case

But I keep asking myself who the heck would want to be here in the days and weeks after their candidate lost - especially in GD - P? Both times my favorite candidates have dropped out of the primary, I took a break to let the emotions settle. Showing up to take my frustrations out on everyone else, to feed and water those feelings of anger and self-pity just seemed like a thoroughly depressing thing to do, not to mention pointless. And yet there are posters all over DU doing just that.

I don't understand what on earth could have them so cranked up they felt the need to show up simply to do battle for a candidate who is no longer in the race?

It seems you may have hit on an answer.

[wvbygod]

105. When in doubt...blame racism

A very sad state of mind.

[Lerkfish]

9. there are objections that are based on real outrage. In those cases, the

objection is related to , and proportional to, the actual outrage.

other objections, which are not proportional to actual outrages are fabricated justifications for already existing prejudice.

(note: small "p" prejudice, here, meaning a prejudgement)

on edit: I'm speaking about the nature of objections in general. I am NOT sayin a small proportion of clinton supporters have objections based on real outrage. In fact, I'm hard pressed to find any justifications for their hatred. I'm just pointing out how their bias is based on their own decision to hate first, and then trumping up charges later.

[Barack_America]

10. It's disappointment and such faith in Hillary that...

...they can't yet see the poor campaign that she ran.

[grasswire]

11. They perceive that Obama supporters are ruthless and rude

I think that's a good part of it. I think they have less trouble with Obama than they do with Obama supporters, and that transfers to gut feelings about him.

[LakeSamish706]

17. But thats inaccurate... I would venture to say that 90 % of any rude remarks...

by Obama supporters are in response to a nasty remark by a Clinton supporter.

[EstimatedProphet]

90. Not really

I think what is going on is so many attacks on Clinton supporters, instead of Clinton. For example, all the posts (and there's been a lot of them) saying that Clinton supporters are secret Republicans, or losers, or crybabies, etc. Also there's been things posted here that put Free Republic to shame. I saw a number of occurrences of the "Clinton wants to be VP so she can have Obama assassinated and become President" line yesterday. I think that's what's driving it all. Hell, I'm not a Clinton supporter and it pisses me off!

[Fresh_Start]

18. I'd agree with the reaction to supporters is part of it

I've been nauseous over some of the vile from both sides

[MethuenProgressive]

121. That's an excellent, and accurate, comment.

His supporters act nothing like him.

[no_hypocrisy]

12. Both legitimate and illegimate reasons.

Legitimate. They were true believers in HRC and what she promised them. Under stress like the rest of us from the past seven-plus years. Also vicariously supported Bill Clinton through HRC. They are disappointed that their work and support didn't have the pay-off they envisioned.

Illegitimate. The HRC campaign came close to shamelessly manipulating their raw emotions. Tried to take the outrage of the Florida vote non-recount and extend that anger to HRC being "robbed" of her potential of winning Florida and Michigan, and hence the nomination, and further hence, the general election and White House. Also used HRC to woman as their spokesperson. Women having to "wait their turn" forever, and having HRC succeed was their success.

[DJ13]

13. Many people bought into her "Im inevitable" line

And instead of looking objectively at her chance after losing 11 states in a row they preferred to believe the MSM that she still had a (non-existent) chance.

[Fresh_Start]

14. I'm not a Clinton supporter

but there was overt sexism in this campaign.
How many weeks did we at DU live with the Hillary nutcracker ad on the main page?
Do you think that a comparable racial slur would have survived as long?

I think that sexism over and over again....without the democratic party leaders united against it a major issue.
But I don't know what their hot buttons are.

[NOLALady]

15. Somehow

I think of the boxing match in the 30s, I think.

I'm not a sports person, so someone else may know the particulars.

After the black boxer defeated the white hope, whites across the nation were so angry they began to randomly attack and kill blacks.

The black boxer won fair and square, but many white Americans felt victory was somehow "stolen" and the black boxer didn't deserve his win.

[closeupready]

74. I do think this is a substantial portion of those who are angry.

Honestly.

[OzarkDem]

16. I'm not angry

I've been working in politics far too long to get angry over it.

Sometimes people get so caught up they no longer listen to reason. They usually end up learning by their failures. Not being able to grasp the concept of real "unity" is fairly common with inexperienced candidates, campaigns and their supporters. They learn eventually, but you can't force it.

[Xenocrates]

19. She was INEVITABLE

The General Election was a given, all Hillary had to do was waltz across the country and win her strongholds and secure the nomination. It was a done deal. Inevitable.

And then along came the Senator from Illinois, who in the mind of Hillary's supporters, stole the Democratic nomination.

[JuniperLea]

20. I'm only guessing here

Sore winners will piss anyone off. They piss me off and I don't care for Hillary any more than I care for Obama... I'm voting against McCain.

[shaniqua6392]

21. Empathy.

Empathy defined: Identification with and understanding of another's situation, feelings, and motives.

Just put yourself in their shoes for a moment and pretend that it was Obama who lost. I am sure they are just hurt and the wounds are fresh. Let's just back off from poking sticks at them. Things will settle down soon. It has only been a matter of hours and they need time to let things sink in. They will see the bigger picture soon. Let them have their time of mourning and not judge all Clinton supporters by the actions of a few. If we want him to win and if we want peace, we have to be more understanding and compassionate.

[Kool Kitty]

28. Yes, but this is the nature of politics.

There are elections-someone wins, someone loses. Obama won. Clinton lost. Would the same concessions be made to him that are supposed to be made to her? I honestly can't remember having to handle the loser of a campaign and their supporters with kid gloves before. I have seen posted on these boards before the phrase, "Politics ain't beanbag", and it applies here. I don't get this. Yes, it was a long campaign and I think she ran a good campaign. But she came up short. It is time to look ahead to the GE and get to work.

[NashVegas]

32. You Can't Have It Both Ways

You can't set out to inflate the numbers by getting people personally involved, encourage personal attacks, and then expect everyone to drop everything and sing kumbaya on your stopwatch.

[Kool Kitty]

33. I don't have a stopwatch.

I want to know would the Clinton supporters do the same for Obama if the situation were reversed.

[JVS]

29. How can the wounds be fresh? Everyone knew she was losing 2 months ago!

[Radical Activist]

39. But moving on can't happen until she endorses Obama.

She's destroying the party.

[BearSquirrel2]

42. The poking stops when Hillary condedes ...

Honestly, I sympathize with Hillary supporters. I do not sympathize with the lying about popular votes (not counting Caucaus voters) and the delusion that she can still win. Reconstruction doesn't start until there is an armistice. Hillary hasn't surrendered yet. ... poke, poke!!!

[hfojvt]

57. been there. Done that

Have the t-shirt

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4907098

[Arugula Latte]

69. Imagine, though, that Obama was the one who lost 11 in a row and the math became impossible

Then if he tried to strategies of victimhood, complaining, whining, crying, aligning with McCain, and insisting he could still win when clearly he couldn't, and then tried bullying and threats to retain power, all the while refusing to concede that he had truly lost, and raising the specter that he would throw the party under the bus for his own supersized ego and sense of entitlement ... Well, it just wouldn't have happened. He would have read the writing on the wall weeks ago, and he would have bowed out graciously, and he would have thrown his support to the nominee. Veruca seems incapable of that.

[Raineyb]

118. Exactly!

Clinton has been on this quixotic road for awhile. Instead of admitting defeat she continued, with the attacks getting uglier and uglier as the primaries continued and no one had the cojones to tell her to stop.

If Obama was in her position the Democratic party wouldn't put up with that crap and a lot of the people making excuses for HRC would be excoriating him.

Now we have all this ridiculous talk of respect. Respect? Where was the respect for black voters by the Clinton apologists when they accused black people of being racist for voting for Obama after years of evidence proving that black people vote for white candidates? Where was the respect when Obama supporters were being accused of being automatons, robots, cultists? Where was the respect when Clinton supporters were basically calling black people stupid by accusing them of being sheep for not believing that what they heard was racist until Obama told them it was? The disgusting implication being that instead of black people having decided for themselves that what they heard from the Clinton camp was racially divisive (at the very least) they were fed the meme by the Obama camp.

This primary has exposed a rather nasty double standard but the same people who cry about Obama supporters being sore winners won't even admit that thte double standards exist.

And then they have the nerve to want their asses kissed before they'll vote for Obama.

I am disgusted beyond words.

Regards

[ChairmanAgnostic]

23. i am not sure they understand it. But I have a theory.

they cannot believe that the inevitable nominee, the one that represents women, the one that cannot understand how such a yute, of color no less, could beat her. He had to cheat, probably by playing by the rules in all primaries and caucusi. That's CHEATING in their book!

[TahitiNut]

25. Some didn't merely 'support' her ... they became emotionally codependent.

It's ugly when such codependencies are broken.

[Growler]

41. agreed n/t

[Mist]

26. Because they're bitter? nt

[NJmaverick]

27. They feel the black MAN stole the white WOMAN's nomination for President

That's why

[JVS]

30. Someone call Fr. Pfleger for an interview!

[NJmaverick]

31. No need, just ask this Hillary supporter

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VeGPzk8Oca8

[BlueStateGirl]

123. Bullshit. n/t

[bain_sidhe]

34. one of the sources, I think

First, my "Hillary supporter" creds: In my heart, I was always pulling for her, for a variety of reasons, even though I was officially on the fence for most of the primaries, and eventually decided (just before Pennsylvania) that Obama would be our best nominee for this time in history.

(Further disclaimer: I'm from Michigan, and had that as my avatar as a reflection of the "my vote doesn't count" concept. But I changed my avatar (and my sig) after last night. I was going to make my own, making one half an Obama avatar, and the other half a Michigan one, but that seems petty, today.)

On to the OP's question. For one thing, I think the feeling that it was "stolen" from Clinton comes more from earlier events--specifically the Michigan and Florida rogue primaries. If Dean had not announced that there would be NO delegates seated from those two primaries... if he'd gone with the half delegates penalty proposed in the rules, those primaries would have mattered, at least to some extent, thus her wins in those two states would have mattered too, again, at least to some extent. Those wins could have changed the narrative, and her momentum, and very possibly the outcome of the race. By denying her *any* delegates out of those states, the narrative became all about Obama taking the delegate lead in the February contests. That changed the tenor of the coverage of both campaigns.

But.

The time to fight that was then, not now, and Clinton didn't. So I don't have as much sympathy for this view as I might have back in February.

[BearSquirrel2]

43. Blame the credentials comittee ...

It wasn't Dean's decision. It was up to the credentials committee. Among them was Harold Ickes who for all his granstanding Saturday, voted for the 100% penalty as did a lot of Hillary supporters. And as I recall, Hillary supported the decision as well.

So, as you can see, Hillary is lying to her own supporters and being very disingenuous on the whole issue.

[bain_sidhe]

44. I'm not blaming anyone

I'm just saying this is a source of some of the anger, from what I've heard and read from Clinton supporters.

[uponit7771]

47. Hmmm, then it would be logical to conclude that Hillary supporters have been lied to

[BearSquirrel2]

51. You blamed Howard Dean ...

For one thing, I think the feeling that it was "stolen" from Clinton comes more from earlier events--specifically the Michigan and Florida rogue primaries. If Dean had not announced that there would be NO delegates seated from those two primaries... if he'd gone with the half delegates penalty proposed in the rules, those primaries would have mattered, at least to some extent, thus her wins in those two states would have mattered too, again, at least to some extent.

You attributed the 100% penalty to Howard Dean. I also think the 100% penalty was a mistake.

However, you need to realize that the campaigning ban hurt Obama. Hillary was trumpeted as the "inevitable nominee" and benefited greatly from her name. In every state Obama campaigned in, he knocked down Hillary's advantage. It's foolish to believe the same would not be case in Michigan and Florida.

Your attribution as well as your logic is flawed. Hillary had a mega lead going into all this and she blew it. She blew it because she ran an arrogant campaign, then a spiteful one that ultimately made her inclusion on an Obama ticket impossible.

[bain_sidhe]

55. Again. *I'm* not blaming anyone.

I'm repeating arguments I've read.

[BearSquirrel2]

84. What part of what YOU wrote do you not understand?

If DEAN had not announced that there would be NO delegates seated from those two primaries... if HE'D gone with the half delegates penalty proposed in the rules

What part of what YOU wrote do you not understand?

[LisaM]

35. OK, I'll bite, and try to give an answer, though I'm sure I'll be jumped on

First, I never thought she was inevitable. I don't believe she thought that, either. If she did, why would she have worked so hard? I've never seen a candidate work harder. She was not my initial choice of candidate, but when I was left with two to choose from, I chose her, and I've never regretted it. In fact, I think now that I actually like her better than Edwards. I liked his MESSAGE, but I thought he folded rather quickly (the morning after I donated $100 to him, too).

Second, and I'm sure there are many who will disagree with this, but you asked the question, so please give me the courtesy of hearing me out. I believe it was the Obama campaign that injected race into the debate. It started around the time of the South Carolina primary, with the memo circulated within his campaign on how to frame certain remarks as racist (starting with the "fairy tale" remark - one only has to see how the supposedly-neutral Donna Brazile reacted to this to see how successful a ploy it was). Obama (IMO) had a problem before that primary in that the AA community was very fond of the Clintons. He, however, needed that vote. I believe the Obama campaign, engineered by David Axelrod, found a way to demonize the opponent. At that point, Clinton was labelled as a racist. The campaigns became more negative, and she was accused of a negativity that was at least fuelled, if not begun, on the Obama side. This is when issues just started vanishing and the finger-pointing started. In reviewing Axelrod's techniques with Obama in other elections, it's clear that he succeeds when the other candidate is marginalized. In three of his races, they managed to just clear the slate of other candidates. In this case, they needed to force negative perceptions of the opponent. It also didn't hurt him either with the way the primaries unfolded, and with the enormous advantage he had in caucuses, and with the electoral map, with two states that would have helped Hillary knocked out of the way.

I was also personally turned off by his rallies. I didn't see substance. In fact, I think that their effect started to wane, as well. He is fine on script, but when he gets a little bit off script, he starts saying things such as the remarks about people in small towns being bitter, that are really tone deaf. People are people, whether they live in small towns or large cities. There are plenty of highly religious people in big cities and plenty of atheists in small towns. I also didn't like that he rejected additional debates. Yes, there had been multiple debates over time (I thought the campaign started too early). However, when it got down to two candidates was about the time I started paying attention. Seeing eight candidates standing in a row while Wolf Blitzer asked for a show of hands on this and that is not what I term a debate. It's like the Miss America pageant, where the contestants all walk across the stage, before they are winnowed down to the few that will actually compete. I got quite tired of the, "we've already had 20 debates" meme. There had NOT been that many between the two one-on-one, and there should have been more (I also think that they should have been in a classic debate format, but that's another issue).

Finally, I think that there has been an acrimonious history, wrongfully so, between the civil rights movement and the women's movement. They should not be mutually exclusive. I found that to some degree in this race that they were. Identity politics are messy and ugly. They often reduce the people who use that type of politics down to a single focus that will of course create more anger. I find it really unfortunate, in a way, that we had to have two viable candidates who represent a first for each in the same race. It's empowering to the winner, even more embittering to the loser, who can't see that things will ever change. One of the strangest comments I encountered here was from some younger guy, well meaning, I think, who tried to console another woman who was 53 and didn't think she'd ever see a woman president, by saying, 'don't worry! I'm sure there'll be a woman president within the next three election cycles! that's only 25 years!' Well, how much of a balm is that to a 53-year old woman who will be 77 when that occurs, well out of her career by then, and facing issues that older women face at that age? Small consolation indeed.

Finally, I do think Hillary would make the best President of the three. And face it, this is her last shot. She's 60 years old - a vibrant, young, energetic 60-year old - I only hope I have half her energy when I'm that age - and Obama is only 46. I'm not going to vote for McCain. I absolutely detest him and always have. I'll have to trust that any rights I hope to retain or achieve as a woman are in safe hands. I don't necessarily believe it at this point, since being the first viable women candidate was such a compelling issue for Hillary, and it was completely taken away from her because Obama's story was compelling also. She was not able to run on her own "first" when he had a "first" of his own that apparently resonated more with voters. I dreamed about it last night - all the ways women think they have gained all these rights, when a lot of it is a chimera - it was a strange, wandering dream, where no one would listen to me while I was trying to earnestly to explain things. I think we've all had those dreams from time to time, you wake up frustrated and feeling as if no one cares about what you're trying to say.

So that's where I am right now. And Obama could have waited one more day to make his speech.

[SeaLyons]

48. Great post....

I share your feelings...

:hug:

[bain_sidhe]

54. Thank you for putting that so well

I may have been that woman you're talking about (although I'm 52), because some time ago I mentioned that if it wasn't Hillary, I didn't think I'd see a woman president in my life time. Not because I'm that old, but because the sexism I saw in the media this time convinced me that they'd revert to form and marginalize any female candidate that didn't have Hillary's unquestionable "viability." This is part of why I was pulling for her, at least in my heart.

But some of the things you said - especially about Obama's tactics. I agree with you that a lot of the demonization was done "under the radar" by the Obama campaign. But you know, ugly as they were, and as much as I hated those tactics applied to Hillary, that was part of what decided me that Obama would be the best contender in the general. I felt that Hillary was using the strategy and tactics that Repubs know how to counter very well, and Obama was using a new kind of strategic/tactical mix that I HOPE will knock the repubs just as far off balance as they did Hillary.

Again, thank you for the lucid explanation.

[LisaM]

61. But do we want Republicans left equally smarting?

Because they're more likely to wreak revenge in the long run than disappointed Hillary supporters.

I didn't mean to add a year to your age! I typed in 52 and changed it for no reason (I was thinking: 3 election cycles = 24 years). It still makes me laugh that that guy was trying to be so consoling about the "shortness" of how long it would take. What is he, 12?

[bain_sidhe]

77. Just winning would be enough

We saw that in the way they attacked Clinton after he "stole" (i.e., "won") the election against Bush the elder They will be motivated to "wreak revenge" no matter how the Dems win. That's just how they are.

I've said since the beginning of the primary, my sole goal is to put a Dem in the White House, not any particular Dem. That's why I sat on the fence for so long. I wanted to see which one I thought would have the best chance of doing that. Obama isn't a sure thing either, and I have my moments of doubt... but I think he has the best chance of all the candidates of doing it. Not all of the reasons I think so are pretty, but given the dire straits in which we find our country today, I don't care.

I'd LOVE to see a woman President, and it feels terrible to see that dream die... but IMHO, the more important goal is to get the executive branch out of the hands of the repubs. This country cannot afford to give them four more years to complete looting the treasury, and eviscerating every institution that has the capacity to stop the corporate takeover of our country. I.e., the courts and the regulatory agencies. Four more years of these policies, and we truly will be the corporate fiefdom that the neocons lust for.

[Jen-MI]

66. I think that part of the issue...

is what you said about Obama doing things under the radar. I resent the fact that he got away with it when Hillary was criticized for all of the tactics she used. Most of us that follow politics see through them. I don't think Hillary was entitled to the Presidency, but I think she was not treated fairly.

[sfam]

87. As an Obama support, I agree that Obama played politics...but...

It seems that your angry that he did it well enough to largely do it while unnoticed by the media while Hillary got pummeled for her politics. The argument that Hillary didn't engage in these things doesn't fly. But I will agree that the Obama campaign was able to do things and largely get away with it. I wrote a pretty long and well praised post about this early in the race when there was all this talk about Obama not knowing how to "fight". Nobody is saying that any more.

And while I get that you're angry that Hillary got pinned to the wall for some things while largely got away for other things, I hope you would agree that this too is a normal part of politics. Said another way, if Obama was "not" good at politics, there would be no way he would have had a chance against such a formidable campaign as Hillary's early on. More importantly, he wouldn't stand a chance against the swift-boating. Now I think both of us can agree that the Obama campaign may be the best able to handle the swift-boat attacks.

Regardless, I get the anger, but realize your candidate did just as rotten type things, moreso from most Obama supporters' perspectives in fact.

[Jen-MI]

62. Exactly what I think... very well put! Awesome post!

[GirlinContempt]

83. What about black people 50+?

Might it not be their only chance to see a black person as president?

[nadinbrzezinski]

36. Several factors

some of these women KNOW that they will not be around by 2016... this is literally their last chance to see a woman president

So yes for some it is gender

For some... I'm not sure about the amount, it is about a black man.... and a fair amount of racism.

And for a few they see her as a symbol of what happens to women across corporate land regularly... quite not able to break that glass ceiling

[LisaM]

45. It makes me sick that we had to be divided along race/sex lines

I hate it. I would have loved for it to be a wonderful moment for me when a minority or woman was first nominated. I don't feel that way today.

[nadinbrzezinski]

56. I agree, but the demographic is quite clear

women who are 40 and above STATISTICALLY seem to have more of a problem with him and it has to do with color

I don't care... and I am in that demo

[LisaM]

63. I'm in that demo too. However,

I've voted for black men in the past, and against white women, too, for that matter. I don't appreciate being pigeonholed (not by you) as a racist because I preferred the woman this time.

I read a moving piece here by a person who supported Hillary but said that by voting for her, he felt that he also would thus have problems looking his African-American friends in the eye. I also read something here yesterday by a younger man who said he was going to his local Dem. meeting next week and was dreading encountering some older women (70s and 80s, he said) because they would be angry. But he DIDN'T say that he felt that he couldn't look them in the eye. I think he resented that they would make him feel uncomfortable, but I don't think he honestly understood that they were just as deserving of "being looked at in the eye" as the other man's African-American friends. WE ARE NOT EACH OTHERS' ENEMIES.

[uponit7771]

50. The last reason is what kills me, there are PLENTY of VALID examples of sexism were women are KEPT..

...from positions of influence not by rules but by hateful men.

That dilutes the meaning of sexism to me.

[nadinbrzezinski]

58. I know and having spent some of my youth breaking

glass ceilings and glass doors (never realizing I was a feminist, I just did it), it bothers me to no end

[polmaven]

79. I would like, if you will allow me to,

to add that the thing I kept seeing, and continue to see is the racism charge used so liberally, while at the same time, absolutely denying any hint of sexism.

....um...I am still in the office at the moment, and need to be able to switch gears, so I will get post more after I have had the time to be able to properly form my thoughts.

[polmaven]

80. Sorry about that!

I have had a little while now to get out of the office think and into what I am trying to express.

I think that, while racism has thankfully and at long last become unacceptable in this country, in any form, not so with sexism.

Comedians do whole routines using sexism as a basis. Cartoons are filled with it.

Look at what the coaches of many male sports teams use to "insult" the players when they are trying to chastise them..."OK girls".."Try not to throw like a girl".

Commercials are filled with it. I don't even remember the product being sold about 1/2 hour ago on my TV, with the man pushing the product while the empty headed, scantily dressed girl held up the sign and showed off her body behind him. Or the spot remover ad with the sour faced "drill Sargent yelling at the troops..."LISTEN UP LADIES".

America is still a very sexist country. It is FAR from unacceptable.

The words WITCH, BITCH and WHORE are widely used.

Just 6 years ago, when my church got our first female pastor, several men found that to be unacceptable, and actually left because of it, and didn't even try to hide it.

Look at the language here and in the media...."Cackle", "Shrill", etc. Even Senator Obama "knows" that "sometimes when she gets upset, out come the claws".

Meanwhile, Senator Clinton and her supporters are called racist at the drop of a hat. I could go on and on, but I became more angry the more I write, and I need to have something to eat and settle down with a good sudoku puzzle.

Later.

[reflection]

102. I agree with your analogies as they pertain

to the sports arena. Sexism is very prominent in sports and by extrapolation, a lot of 'competitive' situations.

One thing my wife and I noticed a long time ago and point out to each other when we see it on TV (yes, we are pretty boring) is that as far as *television* is concerned, the reverse almost seems true. In almost any sitcom or commercial, the father or other male protagonist figure is usually portrayed as a complete blithering idiot, while the wife is the level-headed smart one with sound judgement. Not always, but most of the time.

I'm rambling and my cell phone is ringing so I'll cut my thoughts short. I was doing a pretty lousy job anyway. :)

[NeedleCast]

37. I Think It's Like Sports

You're a Bills fan, so I'm guessing a sports fan in general. It reminds me of what happens in a big rivalry game to the fans of the losing team. Some will accept it and congratulate their opponent on a good game. Some will be upset but accept their fate. Some will do what some of the Hillary supporters are doing...complain. It's no different from fans of the losing team complaining that their teams lost because the officials did a bad job, or because of injuries or whatever. Ultimately they either don't wont to admit - or can't admit - that it's over, and their pony lost.

[springhill]

38. This post really makes me laugh............

Why Hillary supporters are so mad? Sheesh, have you not been reading the absolute filth posted about Hillary on this board? Are you really that blinded? And this isn't just limited to today, this has been going on for months.

[BearSquirrel2]

46. This post really makes me laugh ...

Why Obama supporters are so mad? Sheesh, have you been reading the absolute filth posted about Obama on this board? Are you really blinded? And this isn't just limited to today, this has been going on for months.

Dude, seriously, the Clintons fired first and they compounded the issue with spurious logic, race bating, sex bating, and of course Hillary's "popular vote" lie that does not included caucaus goers. This is why she couldn't get her own pledges to vote with her on the credentials committee. She is using Faux News logic now and acting really Rovian. And of course ... this is why she will not be on the ticket.

[EstimatedProphet]

92. Not true

Has anyone posted that Obama intends to kill Clinton? The reverse was said multiple times yesterday. Also, have the Obama supporters been taking the attacks that the clinton supporters have? I've seen Obama members described as fanatics, but then again, I've also seen Obama supporters claim that Clinton supporters are Republicans, freeper operatives, "low information" (i.e. stupid) voters, uneducated...It's way out of balance.It isn't all Obama supporters by any means, it's just a few. A very loud and assholish few. IF I were a Clinton supporter, I know I would take it personally.

[BearSquirrel2]

98. Hillary supporters described Obama supporters as ...

Hillary supporters were active describing Obama supporters as cult followers. Classy, real classy.

BTW, Obama did not make a comment alluding the assasinations as the reason HE was staying in the race. If she didn't mean to conjure the imagery, she should not have said it.

As far as Republican disruptors go ... it HAS been the policy of Faux News to promote Hillary. This is a strange policy for a network that used Hillary as a punching bag for a VERY long time. It HAS been the policy of right wing hosts to get Republicans to cross over and support Hillary since they perceived her as easier to defeat as they have conditioned their followers to hate Hillary and they know full well she has high negatives that will return if they start dredging up their old material.


I think Hillary supporters have been lied to and in some cases deluded. And of course, I think a LOT ARE Republicans setting her up for a Republican take down.

It's over now. Obama won. If you believe in Democratic values, you will vote for Hillary. If you claim you will vote for McCain, I will assume either:

a) That was always your persuation (you're a Republican), or
b) You're stupid.

[Bleacher Creature]

49. Thanks for making my point.

How do random posters on DU who are not connected in any way to the Obama campaign push you in the direction of handing the keys to this country to John McCain? Sounds like an excuse for something else to me.

Also, I'd be curious to know what constitutes "filth posted about Hillary" in your mind.

[uponit7771]

52. Do you think it's contructive to take the word of random posters who could be OC folk?

[Warren DeMontague]

40. I think some of them genuinely thought it belonged to her from the get-go.

And they thought her 'inevitabilty' was so iron-clad, the ONLY way Obama could have gotten the nomination is if he 'stole' it.

[apocalypsehow]

53. It's the entitlement mentality on steroids. See, the voters derailed the coronation, damn them!!!!11

x(

[liberalhistorian]

64. Because the Queen wasn't automatically coronated

and because she was "upstaged" by an uppity black man, and because everyone who didn't support her is automatically a sexist pig or self-hating sexist???????? Those would be my guesses, for what it's worth.

[redqueen]

65. Mental illness. (nt)

[Godhumor]

67. Because many of them worked extremely hard and invested a lot in this campaign

It's been less than 24 hours since Obama became the presumptive nominee, and there should not be an expectation that Clinton supporters will all automatically give up something they have fought so hard for. The fact that people on this thread are already spouting racism, mental illness, etc. as reasons for this reluctance is also proof of how invested people become in this process.

Obama is the nominee and most people will come around to that fact. You certainly can't expect people to fall in line less than a day after their candidate is defeated. Frankly, it's a hard time.

Speaking as a Clinton supporter who accepted that Obama would win about a month ago.

[Maribelle]

85. Absolutely

[kerry-is-my-prez]

68. Don't hate him: but it's like some smooth-talking newbie came along and got the promotion

over the old steady workhorse who's been around. I happen to identify with the old workhorse.

It also reinforces the pain and anger when so many O supporters and media attacked her and Bill so nastily. Also - to see so many from the old guard turn on her and jump on the Obama bandwagon was hurtful.

[tedoll78]

71. You've hit something I've felt.

The GOP has vociferously attacked the Clintons for the past 18+ years, and now I've seen fellow Democrats co-opt and repeat some of those attacks. I'm more disheartened than angry. She differs from Obama, sure, but their voting records aren't all that different. You can strongly disagree with her on a number of things without stooping to GOP-level. (And the same goes for Clinton fans' critiques of Obama.)

[EstimatedProphet]

93. Exactly.

[Bleacher Creature]

73. Wow, I actually got a helpful response to my post. This makes sense to me.

Thanks.

[rucky]

70. Mixed messages from their leader.

when the path is unclear and people are confused, they go looking for scapegoats.

[butterfly77]

72. Because she is a woman..

[Crunchy Frog]

75. She's encouraging it. She's doing everything she can

to keep her supporters "riled".

[billyoc]

76. Somebody told them they have a right to be angry. Nothing Americans love more than righteous anger.

[WeDidIt]

78. OpErAtIoN KAAAAAAAOOOOOOOOOS

McCain operatives are on all the pro-Hillary sites fomenting anger at Hillary being denied the nominaiton.

Wikileaks has the memo.

[joshcryer]

81. Read these forums. :)

[TexasObserver]

82. Why they're angry?>>> I want! I can't have?! WAAAAAAAAAHHHHHH!!

basic childish reaction to frustration

[Maribelle]

86. Attempting to throw sand in the eyes will really help.

I believe some Obama supporters need to read up on how some of their rantings against Hillary and her supporters are truly abusive.

If you think, even for a split second, that intimidation, bullying, and attempting to castigate them will force Hillary supporters to 'fall in line' - - you are not serving Obama very well.

[Name removed]

88. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[moondust]

89. Do you have any experience with small children?

[hokies4ever]

91. It was HER turn

Obama stole it away from Hillary and didn't wait in line. :rofl:

[raebrek]

94. quit it n/t

[EstimatedProphet]

95. I think this thread indicates why

Look at the responses. You ask reasonable questions. You got very few reasonable answers. Most are saying that Clinton supporters are mad because they are all spoiled brats. Some of them actually are claiming they are freepers in disguise. Now, why on Earth would they be mad about that?

[paperbag_ princess]

96. I am angry because

Obama supporters don't seem to want me to be part of the party that I have been loyal to for 25 years.

I am too moderate so I must be a racist republican or delusional or crazy or a poor sport etc etc etc
I am angry that opinions of Clinton supporters are attacked and mocked.
I am angry that Obama supporters find joy in the dissapointment and concerns of half of this party.

Just for starters

[EstimatedProphet]

97. Some "big tent", huh?

[Catherine Vincent]

99. The same reason why some Obama supporters are rude and hateful. nt

[AtomicKitten]

100. That's simple: She lost and they're not having it.

[my3boyz]

103. Because she was the inevitable one! It was her turn! nt

[Mimosa]

104. It's the racist fears they dare not confess

[NashVegas]

107. Because Y'all're Acting Like Wankers

In a nutshell.

[Beacool]

108. Because we ended up with the least experienced candidate who ran this year.

Because he should have stayed in the senate until que acquired some actual experience at the national level. Because I think that he's an opportunist who spews platitudes and has sold his followers a bill of goods.

[newmajority]

109. Yet more experience than Hillary

And no, being married to a guy with experience does not count.

[cornermouse]

112. Nyetttttt. Hillary has served a full term in the Senate and been

re-elected. Obama hadn't even made it all the way through his first term.

[Beacool]

113. I wasn't counting the state senate.

We have hundreds of state senators and most of them are not fit to be president. At the national level she has more experienced than he does.

[Raineyb]

120. There's nothing that says that one has to have national experience to become President

And your convenient exclusion of his state senate experience makes your argument weak at best. Did you have this much issue with Senator Edwards run?

Regards

[NashVegas]

110. Okay ... You're Full Of It

"There hasn't been a single documented incident of sexism among prominent Obama supporters or any attacks that go beyond simple campaign rhetoric"

Right .....


After an MSNBC anchor pointed out that the claims the "Bradley effect" on NH voters were false claims (Obama performed as well in the primary as he did in the polls leading up to it) ... here's what Obama's campaign co-chair had to say:

Something else happened in New Hampshire that we're still analyzing within the Barack Obama campaign. First of all, we're moving onto South Carolina. But there were tears that melted the Granite state. And those are tears that Mrs. Clinton cried on that day that connected with voters. She somehow connected with those voters.

But those tears also have to be analyzed. They have to be looked at very, very carefully in light of Katrina, in light of other things that Mrs. Clinton did not cry for, particularly as we head to South Carolina where 45% of African-Americans who participate in the Democratic contest, and they see real hope in Barack Obama.

We saw something very clever in the last week of this campaign coming out of Iowa, going into New Hampshire, we saw a sensitivity factor. Something that Mrs. Clinton has not been able to do with voters that she tried in New Hampshire.

Not in response to voters — not in response to Katrina, not in response to other issues that have devastated the American people, the war in Iraq, we saw tears in response to her appearance. So her appearance brought her to tears, but not hurricane Katrina.




In one appearance, Jesse Jackson Jr. not only depicted Clinton as the devious she-devil with calculated tears, but he also blew the "Hillary Clinton doesn't like black people" whistle no less than three times.

[Bake]

111. Many Hillary supporters were just as passionate about their candidate

As you are about yours. For many women, e.g., Hill's candidacy was just as important to them as Obama's is to African Americans.

That's the plain and simple reason. Their candidate (hell, my candidate) lost. That's tough to swallow.

I'm a former Hillary supporter - and a fairly vocal one - who is now on board with Obama, since he IS our nominee. Can we not just leave it at that? Let people get over their hurt and their anger. It took me a few days. For others it may take a little bit longer. But it's neither necessary nor productive to rub it in.

Let's work TOGETHER to put our Democrat in the WHITE HOUSE! It's time. Come together, right now.

Bake

[trickydix2000]

114. FOR THE RECORD

I would have to say some OBAMA people are pretty angry too, just got my freaking head chewed off for just posting some GOP spin that we all could review and tear down but instead everybody came after me Damn claim down. WTF is the newbie death day?

[Bake]

115. I'm sorry that happened.

This primary season has not been wholly "representative," shall we say, of the DU I've been a part of since 2001.

We could ALL stand to chill out a bit. I do think it will get better. In the meantime, ignore the haters.

Bake

[OutaTowner]

116. This was the topic I've been looking for

The whole deal with the Clinton supporters not willing to back Obama now has been confusing me terribly. The thought hadn't even crossed my mind to tell the truth until my girlfriend, who is a very strong Clinton supporter, told me that she would probably end up voting for McCain because she couldn't even contemplate voting for Obama. I was luckily able to convince her not to vote for McCain due to his history to being an ass to women, but I only got her to say that she simply would not vote.

After reading this post and all of it's replies (particularly LisaM's well written and helpful replies), I've gotten a much better sense (I think) of why there is/was this initial animosity. Its been hard for me to see that side of the issue due to the fact that I've been an Obama supporter for quite some time. But I think now I can, at least for the time being, understand the animosity.

So hopefully this really is just a time period of grieving of sorts for those who were so passionate about Hilary. And I hope, and believe, that we all can solidify in due time under Obama.

--------

Now I am curious as to whether or not there are Clinton supporters out there who TRULY could never ever back Obama. I'm guessing this will be quite the small percentage of the supporters, but I know there will be those people. If you are reading this and can say you are one of these people, I would really like to know why.

[LisaM]

126. Well thanks!

:hi:

[GreenInNC]

119. bunch of bitter old women

[Raine]

122. cause Hillary wasn't "inevitable"

after all.

[JoFerret]

124. Impossible

The level of re-education is beyond the scope of an on-line discussion board.

[mcctatas]

125. I honestly think that there are a devoted number of

old-school feminists who truly percieve things differently because of what they had to live through. They see Hillary as the best hope of a woman president in their lifetime and for whatever reason are willing to believe that the media/party bosses stole the election and gave it to Obama (all evidence to the contrary not withstanding). That is part of why it is so important for Hillary to be the bigger person and acknowledge Obama and throw her supporte IMMEDIATELY behind the candidate of the PARTY.

*Of course, there are a few who are just batshit crazy too, but that can be said of any candidate's supporters;)

[Kahuna]

127. Because according to them, since black men got the vote before women..

black men OWE them something. :crazy: How stupid is that?

[B Calm]

128. They are for the most part a small group of republican disruptors. Ignore

them!