She was caught waffling on stage at the debate and now she's turning this into a gender issue?
If you can't pee in the high grass with the big dogs, stay on the porch where it's safe.
Now she falls into the Jesse Jackson/ Al Sharpton slot. Play-up being a victim. Any woman who goes with that is worse that someone who goes along with the race issue.
Never heard ONCE from Obama about him crying about being attack becasue he's not "black enough" which is a racist statement in and of itself made by Jackson/ Sharpton.
What a shame that she gets a little heat and runs behind Bill and the gender card.....
2007-11-02 05:30:49 · 25 answers · asked by USA 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
she has male genitalia
2007-11-02 05:38:18 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
It's the only thing she has left. She hasn't stated her position on any subject with decisive clarity. Oops,sorry yes she did. She supports the Governor of New York's position on giving drivers licenses to IL-legal aliens.
I am not opposed to voting for a woman,i have done it in the past. I have a right to question her competency on all matters that do and could apply to the highest office of this Nation.
If there would per,be a woman running that had the same qualities as a GOLDA MEIR or MARGARET THATCHER,make no mistake about it,i would vote for her without a moment of hesitation. These two women are indisputably the most politically astute females in modern times. Neither one of them would have thought of using the poor me gender card.
Perhaps history will again offer up women such as these two. Hilary Clinton is definitely not of that caliber.
2007-11-03 20:09:52 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, a very strange decision. Her campaign has made a point of making clear that a woman can have the toughness to lead our nation and lead the fight against terror, yadda yadda, so it seems odd that they would suddenly squeal that it's not nice to gang up on a little girl.
I think their "boys are picking on the girl" approach will either fail to gain traction entirely or it will backfire on them and they'll abandon it in the future.
The only reasons I think they may have used it are:
1) They wanted to "test" it and see if it helped garner sympathy toward her - if so, great - it'll keep her opponents from attacking her and they'll trot it out again if needed. If not, while at least they answered that question.
2) As an excuse for her sub-par showing in the debate - "no fair, those bullies were ganging up on her."
3) As an attempt to soften her image a bit. Hillary has very high negative numbers and early on her handlers determined that a lot of anti-Hillary folks perceived her as too masculine - sort of a battleaxe, and they wanted to get across the point that she did have a lighter side - thus the hokey "pick a song" contest and stuff like that.
But i think they'll learn in short order that if Americans are going to elect a woman as President they don't want one who who cries and whines when attacked for her positions.
2007-11-02 12:44:17 · answer #3 · answered by Whoops, is this your spleeen? 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Most people who have played cards know that you have to play the hand you're dealt, and success at Poker depends on playing a poor hand well. Some would argue that being tied to Bill Clinton for life would be a poor hand indeed, but if Bill and her being somewhat female are the only two cards she has to play, then no one should be surprised at her trying to make the most out of them.
Do you expect her to run on her expertise as a Commodities trader?
2007-11-02 12:41:48 · answer #4 · answered by open4one 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
The world isn't ready for a US woman president. Anyone who thinks Hillary getting elected is a good thing, needs to look to their left and right...If it was any other country it would be pallatable, but the US, China, and Russia are the big 3... and women don't belong in that ring. Love it or hate it, I don't care.
2007-11-05 13:44:36 · answer #5 · answered by CubeScience 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Hillary Clinton has nothing to offer, but is willing to say or do whatever it takes to get votes. I didn't trust her when Bill was in the whitehouse and I don't trust her now. Have you seen some of the pictures of her? She looks like a demented freak as opposed Bush's look of abject vacuousness. I think Obama in '08 will be my vote.
2007-11-02 12:44:24 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Why shouldn't she play the gender card? You can't possibly say that she is being viewed as equal to the other candidates. Obama is black, sure, but he's still a guy. Hillary has to fight twice as hard as any of them, and everyone knows that that's true.
2007-11-02 13:57:22 · answer #7 · answered by Sydney B 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
If you think that "If you can't pee in the high grass with the big dogs, stay on the porch where it's safe" is a gender statement then you have misconceived that statement. It is not gender specific.
2007-11-02 12:36:34 · answer #8 · answered by Lettie D 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Someone a few answers up actually commented on her appearance. Further proof that different rules apply to female candidates. Who cares what she looks like? It makes no sense to me. Is anyone actually pretending that she is on totally even ground with all the male candidates? We haven't progressed that far yet. Until then, Hilary is allowed to mention her gender because as the only woman to potentially ever run for president, you can't possibly argue she faces NO discrimination.
2007-11-02 12:44:53 · answer #9 · answered by vikingaprinsessan 2 · 1⤊ 2⤋
You guys (with Fox News leading the flock of sheeple) can 'manufacture' all the cr*p you want about Hillary, but, ...........
she is going to be the next President.
Get used to the idea!
(And, the mere fact that she is a woman makes people scrutinise EVERYTHING she says very critically. And you know that.)
Go Hilly-baby!
lol.
2007-11-02 12:45:07 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Because she was caught off guard so now she has to go for the sympathy vote.
2007-11-02 12:44:38 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋