General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: I didn't vote for a woman in 2016 [View all]mr_lebowski
(33,643 posts)This.
By the way, you forgot 8 years of being a very involved FLOTUS preceding her tenures as Senator & SoS. She was I believe *THE MOST* qualified candidate to ever run for the office.
And you know what folks? Despite those realities, and on top of all that, having the highest possible name recognition ... She did NOT 'win'.
Saying 'she won' because she won the popular vote is like saying your NFL team won because they scored 3TD/XP for 21 points, when the other team kicked 8 FG's for 24 points. You got more TD's, but you didn't WIN. Them's ain't the rules.
Yes she got f'd over by Donald and Russia and Comey and the Media and Facebook and all manner of other stuff, she deserved to win, should've won, but she factually ... did not win. Saying she won is silliness.
Point is, if any woman ever had the bona-fides and the smarts and the proven ability and the experience and the money and the organization TO WIN, it was Hillary, 2016.
Ergo, I don't really think we should 'assume' Hillary's 'level of success' in winning 3M more votes, somehow automatically transfers to the NEXT female candidate, just by virtue of gender, as some people seem inclined to do. Just because she did it, as a woman, doesn't mean ANY woman ... could accomplish the same. In fact, you sell her short when you imply that.
A woman, any woman, will face a steeper uphill climb than a man, all other things being equal. It sucks, it's unfair, but it's a reality we MUST practically consider, if for no other reason than the stakes are TOO HIGH this time.
I think I speak for a good many people here when I say ... Trump CANNOT win in 2020, and ALL else ... is de-facto ... Secondary.
Now, if the Pubbies drop Trump and magically nominate a, say, Jon Huntsman ... I may become bit more flexible on this subject.