The persistent folly of pitting race vs. gender.

Sunday, May 18th, 2008 @ 1:28 pm | Election crap

Says headline on

If not now, when can a woman be president?
Women face letdown of seeing Clinton’s shot at presidency fall short…

For clarification, see headline from alternative universe where Clinton won the primary:

If not now, when can an African-American become president?
Blacks face letdown of seeing Obama’s shot at presidency fall short…

It’s very simple…it’s too bad that race and gender got pitted against each other, but it was incredible progress that a woman and a black man were the top contenders for the Democratic presidential nominee. Somebody had to lose, but that didn’t have to mean one was more or less important than the other. And hey, I still see no reason Hillary can’t run in 2016. Or any other woman, perhaps in 2012 if the Republicans dare to enter the 20th century sometime before the 22nd rolls around. The mold has already been broken, and despite Hillary coasting by on being Bill Clinton’s wife, she deserves the credit.


10 Responses to “The persistent folly of pitting race vs. gender.”

  1. Independent Says:

    How about the completely stupid analysis that because Clinton lost and because she is a woman that the country isn’t yet READY for a woman President? This assumes that Clinton is an ideal woman candidate; a stretch, in my mind.

    Then again, some will say (TT, my guy!) that because she isn’t Barack she was flawed from the start – in MY opinion. 😉

  2. Jldmeyer Says:

    All I know is that all this big baby stuff on all kinds of blogs on many different sites needs to end. There are those who continue to refer to Obama as a Muslim, by his middle name Hussein, or better yet, Barry. We even learned this week of someone selling Obama t-shirts with Curious George on them. Really mature stuff there. So your candidate isn’t going to get the nomination, what are you going to do? Those ignorant cry babies who are going to write in Hillary or vote McCain out of spite need to grow up and look at the bigger picture. How many presidents have been chosen because of the laziness of voters to actually know about real issues or apathy towards making a choice that can decide the future of our country. Or better yet, do we want presidents that are chosen because of laziness or apathy? If so, then we get what we deserve. Time will tell how the HRC crowd heals itself of the agony of defeat. Will they be sitting on the sideline with the towel over their head feeling sorry for themselves or will they be willing to cross the court and shake the hand of their opponent regardless of their race or gender.

  3. Independent Says:

    What about Ferraro’s insanely moronic comments this weekend? Is there a chance that she’s more senile than McCain?

  4. jeromy Says:

    That one is giving me indigestion. She claims that Obama only had his success due to being black, says she said nothing wrong, then calls Obama “terribly sexist.” Then she suggests she might not vote, which would help out McCain, who called his wife a cunt in public and laughed when a voter asked him about Hilliary, “How do we beat the bitch?” And, of course, McCain will be providing more SC judges like Scalia, Thomas, Alito and Roberts, which means painting a target on women’s rights for a generation.

    Look, Obama isn’t perfect but you cannot suggest the guy is mendaciously misogynistic or that his politics aren’t in the right place. People, we have until November to get our priorities straight, and if you don’t vote for Obama you might as well be endorsing the past 8 years.

  5. jeromy Says:

    Disclaimer: I also ate a plate of leftover ribs for breakfast, so the indigestion is debateable…

  6. Independent Says:

    But were they dry rub or sauced? It’s important.

  7. Dana Says:

    Well, perhaps you might consider the possibility that the president inaugerated on January 20, 2009 will be a white man. 🙂

    Seriously: Senator McCain is polling just about even with Senator Obama, and there every possibility that he’ll win the general election. Only a fool would say that he can’t win.

  8. mike g Says:

    Dana> Those polls you look at show a McCain that has yet to face any type of scrutiny, let alone the brunt of the Obama campaign machine. Right now the entire focus is on Hillary versus Obama. When attentions get focused on McCain versus Obama it’s going to be like watching my eight year old niece take on Royce Gracie. Corpse McCain has no money, no message and no momentum. He’s the 2008 equivalent to Bob Dole.

  9. Megan C Says:

    The hilarious thing is that guys like the above Dana think that they’re going to be able to beat Obama with flag pins and Jeremiah Wright.

  10. jeromy Says:

    Even more hilariously, Obama has been pwning McCain on foreign policy debates. McCain can only call Obama naive over and over again, but Obama is calling him naive right back, with tons of generals, foreign policy experts, and badass motherfuckers like Chuck Hagel and Jim Webb getting his back. It’s sad, but Chuck Hagel made the point that McCain honestly knows better than the Bush-junk he’s forced to fling lately. Alas, McCain is pinned down by the Republican base’s utter detachment from reality.