Print This Post
Aug
29
Listen live here to Diane Rehm and her roundtable discuss it.
Dicey choice one guest says say, star quality, youthful, and inexperienced – contrast to how Obama chose Biden – they’ve sought to soften their liabilities.
McCain campaign has confirmed too according to Rehm.
For women’s vote, Eleanor Clift says: Clinton asked are you for me or the issues I stand for? Overturning Roe will now come up. How will she perform – like Dan Quayle and not up to it or dazzle us and make us think she can step in?
I have to say that if voters, independents in particular, couldn’t vote for a woman in Clinton? I don’t know how they can vote for Palin.
Guest: direct play for Clinton voters.
Me: this is a HUGE miscalculation based on thinking that women chose Clinton because she’s a woman. That voter did it because she’s a pro-choice woman, not because she’s female. The campaigns have a lot to learn and accept about how women choose. Sexism is really going to sting them – because we just do not vote that way. As proven by Obama’s win.
Not to mention: can you say foreign policy? Palin?
Rut roh. No stance.
UPDATE! Eleanor Clift says that Obama is at his floor and if one candidate is more likely to take off, it’s Obama. Way to go Eleanor.
Update x2: PhD from outside Alaska but part of early draft Palin movement didnt’ want her addressing the issue of Iraq, because it’s not a state issue.
Hmmm. Republicans. Who push for divestment. From Iran. Against the wishes of the Bush administration. At odds with the whole states should stay out of what’s not in their purview?
By Jill Miller Zimon at 10:47 am August 29th, 2008 in Gender, Hillary Clinton, John McCain, Politics, Republicans, Sexism, Vice President, Voting, WH2008, Women, leadership
Comments
30 Responses to “AP confirms Palin but sexism will sting because women don’t just vote for women”
Leave a Reply
See Jill Run…for Pepper Pike City Council
News Now
Upcoming
Twitter Updates
Agreed, Jill. Still about the issues for me. I consider Obama’s nomination momentous; however, if we didn’t agree on the issues (most of them), I would support him. Which is why I didn’t vote for Hillary. And I certainly wouldn’t vote for Palin given her position on capital punishment and abortion rights. I’m interested in hearing her stance of the economy, foreign policy, immigration, etc..
And – this may only be good for Obama. McCain cannot slam him for his lack of experience. She was elected in what, 2006? 2 years? hmmmm….
oops – meant I would NOT have supported Obama if I didn’t agree w/him! Sorry ’bout that.
Perhaps women won’t vote for Palin, but I will.
I have long been interested in reform, but I’ve been looking for a reformer of a more conservative bent than McCain. Palin, I feel, possesses a spirit kindred to my own.
I was hoping for a Washington outsider with a reform streak. The part of Obama’s speech that most resonated with me was the part where he said “Change doesn’t come from Washington. Change comes to Washington.” My support for Mitt Romney, who recognized that Washington is “broken,” is easily transferable to Palin.
I predict an energized RNC, with the base more solidified in their support for McCain than has been the case heretofore.
What the hell was he thinking? I’m afraid he wasn’t. He was merely reacting in panic, which certainly raises a question about his judgment. You just might have lost the election with this one, McCain.
But John! He has CHEERLEDERS! oy
http://www.wptv.com/news/local/story.aspx?content_id=d7ed3b72-8de4-481e-9a9c-68a2a3a12090
Live stream of his announcement – they intro’d The McCain Cheerleaders to entertain
Frat Boy heaven. omg so so sad
The poor bastard is but a shell of his old maverick self that I and millions of others loved and respected. I guess the number Rove & Co. did on him in South Carolina in 2000 has had a lasting effect. This piece from The Economist now takes on a bitter aftertaste:
http://www.economist.com/opinion/displayStory.cfm?Story_ID=12009710
“Me: this is a HUGE miscalculation based on thinking that women chose Clinton because she’s a woman. That voter did it because she’s a pro-choice woman, not because she’s female.”
Obama might be a more “pro choice” candidate than Clinton. What’s the difference?
Gordon – why is that a problem? I’m saying that for women who wanted a woman who was pro-choice (think EMILY’s list) they will not go for Palin – they will give up the woman part and stick with the pro-choice position.
What were you meaning?
What does Gordon the Tax Man mean? A glance at his slimy and repugnant Cro Magnon right views on his blog provide an answer: he apparently doesn’t think a whole lot. He mostly just reacts out of hatred, ignorance and a collection of cartoonish stereotypes he’s erected about liberals and progressives. Just make sure you take a bath after engaging with him.
“He mostly just reacts out of hatred . . .”
LOL, John Etorre! I find irony in your statement.
I am laughing at the Dem women and their put downs aimed at Palin. Really the bottom of the barrel. Experience?? First of all she has been on the job constantly since election, not out campaigning for 183 days, second her experience is EXECUTIVE experience something neither democrat candidate can put forth. Why no one sees the difference is beyond me. This is only the forth time in our history a senator will be elected president. That alone says volumes about the sense of voters.
Palin is a reformer, no doubt about it, regardless of party lines.
This was news to me. I didn’t know the right did irony. In my experience, they only tend to lampoon it out of their sense of intellectual insecurity.
Um – Stan – don’t show your sexist side or anything but most of the putdowns here in the comments are from a man.
Is there some excuse you like for the Dem mens’ putdowns of Palin? You hoping they’ll pull punches because…well, you know – she’s a woman?
By the way, Daniel, your blog is quite good, and you sound like a smart, principled fellow. I happen to be center left and you’re center right. But I stand by my characterization of the tax guy from Cincy, based on a reading of his blog.
I wonder about this:
“this is a HUGE miscalculation based on thinking that women chose Clinton because she’s a woman. That voter did it because she’s a pro-choice woman, not because she’s female.”
But was that really the biggest factor, or was it Hillary’s obvious lifelong experience and a clear command of the issues? I would think that her whole-package presentation was far more important than just the abortion issue. Did I miss something somewhere?
Stan – since when is critiquing policy a “put down” and “bottom of the barrel”? Or as women are we all supposed to just shut up and wear beige? Sheeshhhhh. I have many concerns about McCain; I have even more about Palin’s choices on a tie and readiness to lead our country if anything were to happen to McCain.
Len – sorry – yes – all those things are factors.
My point there was that I cannot imagine women who are anti-choice crossing lines and voting for Hillary, meaning to me that there are in reality far fewer women to cross-back over to Palin than might be portrayed.
Also, the women who voted for Hillary BECAUSE she was a woman are very unlikely to be anti-choice, therefore that group of women, who voted for Clinton because she was a woman, also probably don’t include many women who will cross to Palin.
Does that make more sense to you?
OK I think I follow you now.
I agree that the governor of Alaska won’t be peeling away many of Hillary’s pro-choice supporters, or indeed anyone who actually believed in what Hillary advocated for. And I still think the “huge numbers of disgruntled Hillary voters” narrative is almost entirely a media creation.
Oh boy. The McCain campaign better hope this cheesecake alert stuff doesn’t remain Topic A about his new running mate:
http://wonkette.com/219635/gilf-update-gov-sarah-palin-as-miss-wasilla
[...] Jill at WLST – McCain camp making HUGE miscalculation. [...]
I really don’t think that it comes down to abortion. It just isn’t that big of an issue to people of the younger generation anymore. I am happy to say that I think that this is going to be the first election where that really isn’t that big of a deal. The media might like to make it an issue.
Local Alaskan tv report nails Palin lying about firing scandal. What was McCain thinking?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6UojMnCgqVA
That can’t be any worse than Biden’s kid lobbying for MBNA and then Biden voting for a terribly anti-consumer bankruptcy bill and seeking earmarks for the company. Just about anyone in politics for some time is going to have something bad in the closet.
“I really don’t think that it comes down to abortion. It just isn’t that big of an issue to people of the younger generation anymore. I am happy to say that I think that this is going to be the first election where that really isn’t that big of a deal. The media might like to make it an issue.”
It IS a big issue for the younger generation (and older if 32 is no longer considered young) IF the next President of the US appoints Supreme Court Justices who would take the choice away…a very big issue…
I am an instructor in a high school and college and when we discuss politics it never comes up.
I am an instructor and am around 18-30 y/o young adults every day and when we discuss politics, that issue never comes up. Times are changing.
NO exceptions for rape and incest? It might come up…
A nice mainstream pick there John.
There may be a nasty surprise awaiting the “reformer” contingent in the firing of the Public Safety Director in relation to Palin’s (ex) brother in law. Using executive office in regard to relatives is not acceptable policy – regardless whether said relative is a scumbag or not. But then it never pays to forget Chuck Keating…
IOCIYNR – It Only Counts If You’re Not Republican
Shalom Jill,
McCain’s choice of a woman may be brilliant. I don’t know yet.
But his choice of this woman is a mistake. I have yet to see anyone address what I think ought to be the central question concerning McCain’s choice:
Is Sarah Palin the very best female Republican in our Nation? If she is, and I can’t believe that to be true, then the Republican party is a very sad place.
If, however, she is the very best female Republican in our Nation that doesn’t look like she should be at the top of the ticket, not John McCain (think Bush/Quayle), then Republicans should be marching to Arizona with torches and pitchforks.
B’shalom,
Jeff
OMG!!! I was so excited that Dad picked a girl!! She’s SO ready to step in as commander in chief! l I even posted her amazing resume on my blog (NOT to be confused with my tired older sister’s blog.
http://mccainblogarella.blogspot.com/
[...] the day John McCain announced that Sarah Palin was his VP choice, I wrote this: I have to say that if voters, independents in particular, couldn’t vote for a woman in Clinton? [...]