Clinton's struggle vexes feminists

She is losing for the same reasons any other pol with 0 charisma loses elections: People vote with their hearts and not their minds. Any candidate that runs on issues over image will lose. 'Tis always been the case. Remember Mrs. Dole when she appeared just once at the opt-out speech that her husband gave when he dropped from the race? Everyone said, "Why isn't she running instead?" That is because she has charisma x 20. You NEED charisma to win in US elections. You NEED it. It's never a battle of ideologies, always of appeal to the masses on a gut level. And Sen. Clinton has even less charisma than John Kerry. What the actual issues are is utterly irrelevant.

Essentially these feminist groups have issues with the public's voting rights. They enjoy telling us if we don't support Hillary were wrong and sexist.

Its a personal insult.

I'm wrong because THEY believe Obama has no substance?

The voter has also been manipulated with there paranoid perception of a sexist media.

As for Hillarys experience:

Its based SOLEY on her husband. We would not know who she is if it were not for Bill Clinton.

Hillary's "so-called" experience as first lady:

She was not an elected official. She was not held accountable as all elected public officials are. She takes credit for positive aspects of the Clinton administration yet had nothing to do with the administrations failures.

Keep in mind the Clinton Presidency archives will not be realised until '09. What is she hiding? Probably her utter incompetence.

Kim Gandy and Company: Always Excuses!

........................................................

"Oh the gal I'm to marry
Is a bow-legged sow
I've been soaking' up drink like a sponge"

[Rolling Stones]

Hillary's biggest problem is that nobody -- male or female -- wants to be lectured by their Mom for eight years.

It has nothing to do with the feminists' imaginary glass ceiling.

If Hillary looked and sounded like a President, she would have a shot.

I love this election.

It will be 100 years before another female is considered credible as potential Commander-in-Chief.

That is what is pissing off all the aging feminists who see it all "slipping away."

(Keith Richards reference for my comrade Anthony with the Stone's sig... ;-)

one reason: the feminists have been getting just anything they wanted in washington for so long they got overconfident. if MRA's had not been questioning every bogus stat. and wild claim about "bad men" coming out of femcamp hitlery, this thing would have long ago been hers. laughing and making excuses for your actual privileged status in society while claiming the "victim" wildcard just ran outta gas. i heard one commentator the other day say that the "pimping" thing got her some more of her famous "victim status" coverage she draws so quickly out of her victim holster when needed. (the holster part was mine).

another reason: the internet. people are talking to each other and not waiting for some talking head to tell them what to think, as has happened much in the past.

if she had bulldozed her way into that top office while still spouting that hatred for men, i believe holding our MRA position would have become untenable. the onslaught from 1 sided laws and hate laws towards men, well...? could still happen.

Please, who didn't see this coming.
"The bar for women is so much higher"... please. If anything she got a huge boost because she's a woman.

Including media attention; as can be seen from articles like this one and the attention she got from that teary eye, that gave her a huge boost in votes, contrary to the scenario that this article tries to paint.
This article is planted by Hillary's team. It's no coincidence that it talks about the "have a beer" thing with Bush, and she just started making the same point in her rallies.

Why would men (or reasonable women) vote for someone that is openly sexist against men?
I always wondered how she expected to get a majority of votes by appealing to only 50% of the population.

I see Clinton towing a majority of the Bush-like policies as well as enacting a lot of things that would make us MRA's pull our hair out in frustration. From man-taxes taken directly out of a drafted male soldier's pockets to overfunded wasteful women's programs (Just a paranoid prediction). However, I think her personality (not her gender) is her downfall.

In Michigan, Obama was leading the polls. The female governor, an endorser of Clinton, decided to suicide her state's delegates by moving the primary date up. The state Republicans, eager for a Clinton win, went along with it. The Democrats, as predicted, protested by nullifying the delegates from Michigan. The candidates all pull their names off the ballot, except for...teehee...Clinton (Kucinich as well, but that's because he didn't get his paperwork in time). She wins obviously, but not that it matters because she won't get delegates. Fast-forward to now and now Clinton is wanting her delegates in Michigan to count.

Her constant swift-boating of Obama is pathetic because the Obama team has an easy retort for everything she says. Plagiarize a speech? Not only did the guy give him permission, Obama counter-punched with a video showing how CLINTON PLAGIARIZED OBAMA!

Clinton is pimping her daughter to a super-delegate (the undemocratic part of the nomination process, her favorite part I assume).

Clinton would lose to McCain, Obama wouldn't. A vote for Clinton is a vote for McCain.

These are the reasons why I would never vote for Clinton.

she would become an MRA after this fiasco of a Presidential run.

She would become an MRA because she is learning what men have known for a couple of thousand years now; women can not be counted on for the long haul. They will do what they think best for themselves when the chips are down.

The Hildabeast's entire campaign strategy was built on the premise that the women's voting block was hers by default and that was what she was going to sail into office on. The other half of the electorate, the male vote could go pound sand as far as she was concerned. In the end, a rather vacuous but charismatic male opponent took her female vote and possibly the nomination away from her. Thus the endless cycle of blindly counting on women always leads to downfall has again asserted itself but this time at the expense of another female. Even the self loathing masochistic mangina Mad Dog Biden was humiliated in his bid for the Presidency by not even getting a scintilla of support from women even though he was the a_hole that got VAWA on the books. However, in his case the humiliation was probably something he got off on.

PS: This from the article. A lame apology from the usual suspects concerning the sinking of the campaign.

"I do think at some level there is a Catch-22 for women" running for president, said Kim Gandy, president of the National Organization for Women and a Clinton supporter. "Showing your heart has never been a plus for high-achieving women."

Oh, now we know another reason she is fading; not that many people have access to an electron microscope to view the Hildebeast's heart!

I've always found it amusing that the feminists like the vapid Kim Gandy at NOW have nothing to say about how Hillary has allowed herself to be a doormat to her philandering husband while he insults her through continuous adultery.

Wouldn't that make Hillary the ideal target for feminist ridicule and scorn?

A women who "stands by her man" while he humiliates her?

By what feminist "logic" other than simple gynocology would Hillary be seen as a credible individual with Commander-in-Chief level integrity?

But she has that problem that most women tend to have; they don't know when to shut their mouths.

----------
Mr. Reality's new story - Sir Alan: Why I have to think twice before employing a woman

I'm not surprised. I knew this was going to happen. I agree her problem was that she assumed women would want to vote for her just because she's a woman. She failed to realize that some of the female voters want more than just two Xs in a president. It's also funny because Bill complained about how Obama won South Carolina, due to the large number of black voters. As if that really had much to do with it.

People, whether male or female, are smart enough to realize that to put a woman into the White House, who is famous only because of her husband, would not be good for the future of the United States. And yes, she does lack charisma. I was watching Obama debate her a few times, and his responses were so impressive, that I found I, a Canadian, standing up and applauding him while watching the debates. I disagree with his stance on a few issues, but we can write him with our concerns, right? I hope he wins.

Evan AKA X-TRNL
Real Men Don't Take Abuse!