Hillary Clinton: misogyny 'certainly' played a role in 2016 election loss

Your blinders are only surpassed by your incredible exposure to FOX and RUSH bias.

 

Never watch fox or listen to rush.

When you invoke what you think others listen to it proves you are wrong and know it

 

Good evening, Ms FoxHastings,

May I ask you a question? Did you vote for McCain/Palin? And would you vote for Sarah Palin if she had been running for president instead of VP as McCain's running mate? My guess is the answer is no. I'm right, am I not? And the reason you did not vote for her, and you would not vote for her, is because you differ with her on the issues. So why is it so hard to accept that people didn't vote for Hillary Clinton because of issues? I know a lot of conservative people, and they would vote for a woman in a heartbeat if that woman reflected their views.

 

No? Really? I don't want to call you a liar, but I'm left-wing of the Democrat Party, and even I watch FOX News sometimes. It's often aired in public arenas as "Real News".

 

I'm sorry, where exactly did FifthofNovember make that statement? Making up quotes again? Is this along the same lines of your saying "YOU are saying that women could've been elected if they were only as good as men." Please link to the quote where he said that, or my own "quote" for that matter. Spoiler Alert: You can't, because you're making them up.

Bye Felicia.

 

Yeah good for you I don't.

And it is still an evasion and evidence you know you are wrong to run to some unfounded and unsupported assertion of another person

 

Uh, yeah. Like most Americans, I DO know that. Which is why it's pretty dumb for you to talk about 200+ years ago, and wonder why women weren't being elected president back then.

Wow, I knew she was old, but I had no idea she was that old. Bathing in the blood of infants must really work.

Quit putting words in my mouth. I have seen you do the same to others. Most of us around here can recognize your strawmen, so you're wasting your time with that tactic.

Yeah, I said that I do know about the history. But sure, just act like you know all about what knowledge I have about history. I can see why you put "discussing" in quotes, because you're just arguing with strawmen of your own creation, not with what anybody actually says. FOR INSTANCE, you never even addressed my main point, which is that women are regularly elected to positions of power by the supposedly misogynistic electorate. I will ask you again: how do you square that fact with your narrative?

 

Maaaan, how did I miss THAT gem by FoxHastings! I mean, that beats THIS sparkling piece of wit in which Obama is proclaimed The First Black Democrat! And considering you have to be 35 to run, that must make Madame Hillary at least 285. No wonder Bill sleeps around! I would never have guessed he was the baby in that relationship!

Yeah, I already caught her on that one. I think logical fallacies are all she has.

Don't hold your breath waiting for her answer.

 

Just have a competent woman step up and run and things may change, so far Hillary, Carly were the only ones that stepped up. One was unqualified and one was unqualified and a criminal why would/should we elect them?

 

I should point out one other thing going on here: The OP was Hilla saying that misogyny cost her the election, which is patently false - so FoxHastings changed the argument into misogyny being the reason women have never been elected to the presidency or VP offices at all. Which is a near-impossible argument to prove. Now, there actually IS a way one can defend that statement, but it would involve slamming the Democrats quite a bit to do so and I'm certainly not going to do her work for her anyway, so she'll just have to find the answer on her own.

And hey, if Fox doesn't - then I figure Hillary maybe has another 250 years to get it right!

 

But do know for sure, they're up to no good?

Who told yea?

 

Dont know if they are or are not I just do not care

 

Fair enough. What's then - CNN? PMSNBC? Bar buddies? Where do you get your news?

 

I NEVER POSTED THAT "people didn't vote for Hillary Clinton because of issues"".....I never really said anything about Clinton at all except for one post where another poster brought up her name...


No doubt you do know conservatives who would vote for a woman, I NEVER mentioned whether Conservatives, Republicans, liberals, Democrats, Wiccans, Libertarians or anyone else would or wouldn't vote for a woman.

I said that sexism and misogyny have to play a part in the US lagging behind other countries in having a female leader and the proof is that we haven't had one in over 200 years...women weren't even allowed to vote until the 20th century and some "people" didn't find any sexism even with THAT!!!....


............anyone who says that sexism and misogyny did NOT play a part ARE saying that women were just too stupid to be President and that is the reason there hasn't been a female President....

 

SHOW WHERE I EVER "WONDERED" WHY WOMEN WEREN"T ELECTED TWO HUNDRED YEARS AGO OR ADMIT YOU JUST LIED....I NEVER SAID THAT.

So your 2nd sentence is totally wrong, why would I bother with the rest of that crap...

..."""bathing in the blood of infants """ Oh! The Emotion ! Oh , the Drama!!! Gee, after reading that who wouldn't value your opinion....

 

Well if you want to go back 200 years, or to the start of the 20th century, you may do that to try to prove your point. All I am saying is that the voting public in the present, including men, are ready and willing to vote in a woman as president. Misogyny was not a factor in this past election, and, when the right female candidate emerges, Americans will vote her in.

 

What's this then?

All you've been doing here is talking about why women haven't been elected in the entire history - that's 200+ years - of the US. We've even got the posts quoted and all.

 

I gather what you are saying here is that you are deeply disappointed that Hillary did not grope your gonads ... ?

 

Actually, a bit more pertinent might be a basis for comparison?

Such as elected/appointed female leaders of governments in modern history, here: Elected or Appointed Female Heads of Government.

Take your time, the list longggggggg ...

 

I'm not certain ovaries can be groped without some extremelly graphic occurence.

I'm also not certain you understood what I said.

 

SHOW WHERE I EVER "WONDERED" WHY WOMEN WEREN"T ELECTED TWO HUNDRED YEARS AGO OR ADMIT YOU JUST LIED....I NEVER SAID THAT.

YOU, Stuart : ""What's this then?""

↑
"""Is it a lie that in over 200 years there hasn't been a woman President? No, that is not a lie......it's not a baseless assertion."""


See, "elected in over 200 years"" is DIFFERENT than women weren't ""elected 200 years ago... "in over" and "ago" are different words....


Ancient proverb: Comprehension is much easier if not clouded by fear, sexism, and too much defensiveness

 

You have missed the point entirely.

Please DO tell me the "Magic Moment" when sexism and misogyny disappeared from America?

Are you proud of a country where it took over 200 years for a woman to even be considered ?
Over 200 hundred years and now you think someone waived a magic wand and now Americans are , FINALLY, ready to treat women as humans??
Wow! Was it something in the water ?

 

Quite right on that one ...

 

Would 300 years make a sufficiently sizable difference to convince you?

Careful, your ignorance is showing ....

 

No it is not yours is. It does not matter if it is 200 years or 2000 years.

What you seem to be missing is that constructing a government and granting the right to vote to exclusively men is not evidence of wide spread sexism or misogyny. Neither is the absence of an elected female president.

I am asking for evidence of this wide spread misogyny and sexism which neither you nor especially foxhastings has succeeded in providing any evidence for.