We Are Woman?
So much for the “monolithic women vote.” Hillary Rodham counted on it. And, since it does not exist, it did not come through for her in Iowa.
In fact, it appears that both John Edwards and Barrack Obama outpolled the nation’s leading gender feminist among Democratic women in Iowa. And these were DEMOCRATS. Translate that result to an entire country that includes a majority of independents and Republicans, and the outlook for the “we are women” strategy of Hillary Rodham is looking rather bleak. That won't stop Hillary's pals in the media, though, as they try to soil Obama any way they can.
A change in strategy is surely in the works. But maybe the pungent smell of victim oriented gender feminism will stick to Hillary no matter how hard she tries to morph into something she is not. Certainly, enough grown men realize that she is poison for men and fathers. And my guess is that there are plenty of mothers of sons out there who are appalled by the messages their little boys are getting in their public schools. They know where this misandrist philosophy comes from and who supports it.
So, the self-anointed heir apparent to the Democratic nomination – probably the White House in her own mind – must be loosing something of her sense of entitlement. Don’t count on it just yet though. The true nature of a candidate can often be seen in how they accept loss. Hillary’s speeches after getting trounced in Iowa not only did not concede defeat but sounded as if she had won. But I think New Hampshire will have a different view on the matter.
Truly, I am astounded. Over the years, I have found politics to be increasingly dismal. Particularly the entire election process for President. A long, drawn out 2 years of non-stop pundits and spin from the candidates in the rigged two party system, leading to an absurd “primary” season that keeps most of the country out of the process of choosing the ONLY two candidates, and finally the Presidential election with its virtually scripted debates. All that hot air when we may as well just auction off the White House since money raised is the best predictor of success.
My cynical view, indeed the view of anyone that has watched this process for at least a couple of decades, would be that Hillary Rodham pretty much had the entire thing wrapped up. Obviously not because she is the best person for the job, but because of the massive money supporting her, a husband who is arguably the best natural politician of the unfortunate (for us) baby boom generation, and just her sheer will to conform to the political winds and say pretty much anything in order to win at any cost. (Of course, what she says and what she would do in office are two completely different concepts). I pretty much expected Democrats to be brainwashed into mumbling “Hillary, Hillary” by now and robotically voting for her. Not so.
The corollary, of course, has Romney and his enormous chest of money winning as well. Huckabee – an honest guy with a positive outlook and a winning personality – proved that wrong. Meanwhile, while McCain is a big yawn, there is always Ron Paul to keep things interesting, especially in New Hampshire. Obama is well funded, but the money does not appear to be winning in, surprisingly, the party of money, the Republicans.
Could it be that people are actually thinking again? Could it be that someone as vile and full of hate as Hillary Rodham is not able to hide her true ugly nature despite the heroic status the mainstream media gives her?
Could be. In the meantime, it’s time to think about what to do in the Washington Primaries. Since the two party duopoly has rigged the system so that you must select a party in the primary vote (which leaves alternatives out of the picture), we should turn their system on its head and vote in a way that has the most impact. That means, of course, that you should vote within the party that you do not support and against the most vile, in your own view, of their candidates. Of course, what this means is that I will be voting among the Democrats and voting against Hillary Rodham and for Obama (who I kind of like anyway).
If you are a Republican and feel remiss about not voting for your candidate, think of it this way: your candidate will not win the Presidential election popular vote in the State of Washingon in November. Voting for a Republican in this state is a waste of time and a waste of your vote. My suggestion to all Republicans in the state is to vote in the primary election as a democrat and vote against Mrs. Entitlement. That will get the gender feminist dominated Democrats of this state all worked up and, hey, that is always a fun thing to do!
In fact, it appears that both John Edwards and Barrack Obama outpolled the nation’s leading gender feminist among Democratic women in Iowa. And these were DEMOCRATS. Translate that result to an entire country that includes a majority of independents and Republicans, and the outlook for the “we are women” strategy of Hillary Rodham is looking rather bleak. That won't stop Hillary's pals in the media, though, as they try to soil Obama any way they can.
A change in strategy is surely in the works. But maybe the pungent smell of victim oriented gender feminism will stick to Hillary no matter how hard she tries to morph into something she is not. Certainly, enough grown men realize that she is poison for men and fathers. And my guess is that there are plenty of mothers of sons out there who are appalled by the messages their little boys are getting in their public schools. They know where this misandrist philosophy comes from and who supports it.
So, the self-anointed heir apparent to the Democratic nomination – probably the White House in her own mind – must be loosing something of her sense of entitlement. Don’t count on it just yet though. The true nature of a candidate can often be seen in how they accept loss. Hillary’s speeches after getting trounced in Iowa not only did not concede defeat but sounded as if she had won. But I think New Hampshire will have a different view on the matter.
Truly, I am astounded. Over the years, I have found politics to be increasingly dismal. Particularly the entire election process for President. A long, drawn out 2 years of non-stop pundits and spin from the candidates in the rigged two party system, leading to an absurd “primary” season that keeps most of the country out of the process of choosing the ONLY two candidates, and finally the Presidential election with its virtually scripted debates. All that hot air when we may as well just auction off the White House since money raised is the best predictor of success.
My cynical view, indeed the view of anyone that has watched this process for at least a couple of decades, would be that Hillary Rodham pretty much had the entire thing wrapped up. Obviously not because she is the best person for the job, but because of the massive money supporting her, a husband who is arguably the best natural politician of the unfortunate (for us) baby boom generation, and just her sheer will to conform to the political winds and say pretty much anything in order to win at any cost. (Of course, what she says and what she would do in office are two completely different concepts). I pretty much expected Democrats to be brainwashed into mumbling “Hillary, Hillary” by now and robotically voting for her. Not so.
The corollary, of course, has Romney and his enormous chest of money winning as well. Huckabee – an honest guy with a positive outlook and a winning personality – proved that wrong. Meanwhile, while McCain is a big yawn, there is always Ron Paul to keep things interesting, especially in New Hampshire. Obama is well funded, but the money does not appear to be winning in, surprisingly, the party of money, the Republicans.
Could it be that people are actually thinking again? Could it be that someone as vile and full of hate as Hillary Rodham is not able to hide her true ugly nature despite the heroic status the mainstream media gives her?
Could be. In the meantime, it’s time to think about what to do in the Washington Primaries. Since the two party duopoly has rigged the system so that you must select a party in the primary vote (which leaves alternatives out of the picture), we should turn their system on its head and vote in a way that has the most impact. That means, of course, that you should vote within the party that you do not support and against the most vile, in your own view, of their candidates. Of course, what this means is that I will be voting among the Democrats and voting against Hillary Rodham and for Obama (who I kind of like anyway).
If you are a Republican and feel remiss about not voting for your candidate, think of it this way: your candidate will not win the Presidential election popular vote in the State of Washingon in November. Voting for a Republican in this state is a waste of time and a waste of your vote. My suggestion to all Republicans in the state is to vote in the primary election as a democrat and vote against Mrs. Entitlement. That will get the gender feminist dominated Democrats of this state all worked up and, hey, that is always a fun thing to do!
posted by Iguana at 2:41 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Main