Hillary has more than 200 economic advisors. Why doesn't Warren?

[SheilaT]

37. If it's Clinton vs any Republican she will probably lose.

What frightens me so very much about The Inevitability of Hillary is that those who think she's inevitable just don't get it. They absolutely do not get how very hated she is outside a relatively small circle of Democrats. I keep on hearing the argument that she's bullet-proof because everything that could hurt her was brought up in the 2008 campaign and has been dealt with, and so isn't important any more. To which I say, What about Benghazi? That was not brought up in 2008, and yes, I know it's complete and utter crap, but it will be used in a way that will make the Swift Boat thing look like a love fest.

Within the Democratic Party there is a very strong longing for a woman President. It's even stronger now that we've had our first African American President. To be hones, in any poll taken ten or more years ago, most people would have thought we'd have had a woman President well before an African American President, so in a way there's payback here. And as a woman, I'd love to see a woman President. At age 66 I'm old enough to remember how we women couldn't win, not ever. I saw women being systematically excluded from jobs or promotions just because of their gender. I saw women losing jobs in a layoff so that men could keep them. In an industry where seniority was EVERYTHING, I saw a woman furloughed because she was pregnant, and a woman with less seniority retained.

So yes, I'd love to see a woman President. But it can't be a woman just because she has the correct genitalia. She also needs to support the things I support. Women's issues. Very clear cut choice issues. And she needs to be on the side of working families, against the oligarchy, fully supportive of some sort of universal health care, free or very low cost higher education. She has to understand the choices that most women have to make regarding family and work. Jobs need to be structured so that parents, regardless of gender, can take care of their kids, not assume there's a stay-at-home mom who will handle everything.

It does not feel as though Hillary Clinton gets any of that. It feels as if she's a basic corporate man, the kind who always had a wife at home, who handled everything so that he could concentrate on work. It makes me wonder just what were the child care arrangements when Chelsea was growing up. I wonder if there were nannies, who are wonderful people in their own right, but it would mean that Hillary has no real clue what's involved in raising a child.

On a personal note, I was a stay at home mom. It was what I wanted and I'm very glad I got to do it. My own mother worked most of my life, and I spent my growing up years taking care of my younger brothers and sisters. I was very aware of the financial necessity, and the experience certainly gave me an independence that was invaluable. And I would NEVER suggest that all women should stay at home. Some simply don't like that situation. Others have careers they genuinely love, and would rather be at work than doing the (sometimes) boring tasks of child raising. All that said, I don't think Hillary Clinton has an actual connection to the real decisions and lives of most mothers, whether they get to stay home full time or are in the work force. The vast majority of mothers (again, whether at home or in the work force) have limited choices and very limited money in their lives.

The real shame, in the end, is that whoever is elected President is always a person of the 1%. Those in the 99%, and most especially all those below the 90%, are simply not represented at the upper levels.