USA Presidential Politics - 2008

[Jacko]

Originally Posted by melliedee

No, just a sarcastic reversal that if Obama were losing and (legitimately!) cited racism:
"I imagine such a view would rightly be laughed out of discussion from the get-go. It's so ridiculous that I cannot imagine Obama or his people even trying it."

Just go ahead and substitute that out for Clinton surrogates claim of sexism and I'm sure ryberg's meaning might emerge.

I did not write what you quote..who wrote that?

[Just Lucky]

Originally Posted by Jacko

I am not "sheeshing" your desire for a valid and worthy discussion, but rather your difficulty in seeing a balanced position on ryberg's part.

It does seem like there is some discounting of the role sexism played in the campaign going on. The disgusting photos Meliedee posted speak volumes.

I do question ,in a general sort of way, how much utterances of the candidates and their supporters which could be interpreted as sexist or racist have been played up by the press and most particularly conservative pundits and columnists. I certainly don't blame it all on the campaigns.

I do think a woman is more likely to be more aware of sexism. I don't think the opinions of the women quoted concerning sexism in the campaign should in any way be ignored or discounted. They are, I think, quite relevant.

[melliedee]

Originally Posted by Jacko

This quote is taken out of context to a much more sensitive and cautious post (at least I tried to do that..shall we quote the entire post and discuss it?)....I regret that you choose to argue in this fashion...and, I already told you that I was not "sheeshing" you for the reasons you state in this post.......

I think you should read that post that clarified my "sheesh". See post 13725 where I tried to clarify my "sheesh"..did you read that?

It wasn't out of context the first time I responded to it. Post 13712. Sexism being very "clear" at least to me.

No worries on the sheesh, it stuck in my craw in the heat of this discussion as the equivalent of "you're getting bent out of shape for no reason." I understand you did not mean that.

[roni]

Here is a link to the column I quoted on the last page

DEMOCRATIC WOMEN- OregonLive.com

[ryberg]

Originally Posted by melliedee

No, just a sarcastic reversal that if Obama were losing and (legitimately!) cited racism:
"I imagine such a view would rightly be laughed out of discussion from the get-go. It's so ridiculous that I cannot imagine Obama or his people even trying it."

Just go ahead and substitute that out for Clinton surrogates claim of sexism and I'm sure ryberg's meaning might emerge.

Not what I said. For the third time.

Steve

[Jacko]

Originally Posted by Just Lucky

It does seem like there is some discounting of the role sexism played in the campaign going on. The disgusting photos Meliedee posted speak volumes.

I do question ,in a general sort of way, how much utterances of the candidates and their supporters which could be interpreted as sexist or racist have been played up by the press and most particularly conservative pundits and columnists. I certainly don't blame it all on the campaigns.

I do think a woman is more likely to be more aware of sexism. I don't think the opinions of the women quoted concerning sexism in the campaign should in any way be ignored or discounted. They are, I think, quite relevant.

I agree....but who here has discounted sexism playinng a role in this campaign? I have posted the exact opposite of that.
The only proposition (clarified) was ryberg's where he was concerned that Hillary felt racism played NO part in this campaign and yet sexism played a significant part. This seems fallacious on the face of it and and even flys in the face of the strawperson arguments that melliedee is making and defending against.

[melliedee]

Originally Posted by Jacko

I agree....but who here has discounted sexism playinng a role in this campaign? I have posted the exact opposite of that.
The only proposition (clarified) was ryberg's where he was concerned that Hillary felt racism played NO part in this campaign and yet sexism played a significant part. This seems fallacious on the face of it and and even flies in the face of the strawperson arguments that melliedee is making and defending against.

Because we disagree on the degree to which racism and/or sexism may have impacted this campaign does not make me guilty of constructing a strawperson argument.

[ryberg]

Originally Posted by ryberg

I think it would be ridiculous for Obama in the reverse situation to have made all those campaign blunders and then say racism was the deciding factor and that that's what beat him, not Clinton, and I think him doing so would not only indicate that he was similarly trying to co-opt racism for personal and political gain, but would also constitute sexism on his part, in denying the presence of gender-related hurdles Clinton had overcome in winning the nomination due to hard work, intelligence, connecting with people and inspiring them to support her more than him.

Originally Posted by ryberg

As a parallel to the (again very valid) points about whether it would be tolerated if the kinds of references or jokes or whatever were made about a male candidate that were pointed out about Clinton, it may be interesting to consider whether it would be tolerated if Obama were losing and Clinton winning the nomination at this point and Obama claimed that sexism was not a factor in the campaign but racism, and if his people or other writers were claiming that racism, not Clinton, beat Obama, and there was no discussion of how foolish it was of the Obama campaign to assume they'd have everything all wrapped up by Super Tuesday and to blow all their money by that point and have no back-up plan in case they failed and how they really shouldn't have made all those remarks that upset women and made their campaign look sexist and how they should have taken caucuses and smaller states seriously and how they should have realized that it was a year when the voters wanted change and not ceded that mantle to Clinton while trying to paint themselves as the establishment folks.

I imagine such a view would rightly be laughed out of discussion from the get-go. It's so ridiculous that I cannot imagine Obama or his people even trying it.

Steve

[Jacko]

Originally Posted by melliedee

It wasn't out of context the first time I responded to it. Post 13712. Sexism being very "clear" at least to me.

No worries on the sheesh, it stuck in my craw in the heat of this discussion as the equivalent of "you're getting bent out of shape for no reason." I understand you did not mean that.

Okay, melliedee..so you are going to take this post that was purposely written to demonstrate doubt with my position and hammer away at it...go for it..I am done with it....when I said that sexism was more insidious because it was not so clear, I meant sexism in that context to be potentially more damaging than racism...but whatever .

Originally Posted by Jacko

Its a matter of degree melliedee imo...I don't think that ryberg was saying that it didn't play some role....sheesh...

This sexism vs. racism argument should have its own thread...an interesting discussion for sure...my belief is that while sexism is more insidious(?) because it is not so clear, the damage per event from racism is so much stronger that it trumps sexism in our society very easily....but this is without a great deal of thought on the subject which I agree is an amazingly arguable and complex discussion....

What I find interesting is that sexism and racism, imo, were more POSITIVE factors for each candidate....so far...that is, too many people are perhaps overly focused on Hillary just BECAUSE she is a woman...or positively on Barack just BECAUSE he is black.....the positive influence of women in this situation to overcome negative sexist bias may outweigh the ability for the minority blacks to overcome the potentially negative influence of white racism.

This would require agreement that the majority of reasonable white, black etc.. folks would both oppose sexism and racism.

Does any of that make sense?

[Jacko]

Originally Posted by melliedee

Because we disagree on the degree to which racism and/or sexism may have impacted this campaign does not make me guilty of constructing a strawperson argument.

That is not why I would call your argument a strawperson argument.

[roni]

Does anyone else see the ironic display of sexism in the last few pages of this exchange, or I am just warped as a feminist man?

[Just Lucky]

Originally Posted by Jacko

I agree....but who here has discounted sexism playinng a role in this campaign? I have posted the exact opposite of that.
The only proposition (clarified) was ryberg's where he was concerned that Hillary felt racism played NO part in this campaign and yet sexism played a significant part. This seems fallacious on the face of it and and even flies in the face of the strawperson arguments that melliedee is making and defending against.

I suppose it is a matter of interpretation and perhaps the difficulty of communication over the net. Nevertheless, she has very valid points as to how some women are seeing it. We must in my opinion reunite the party. Accepting criticism and examining why people feel the way they do should be part of that process. I think roni has also been saying something along that line in his last several posts.

I hope this provides some clarity. I fear I'm losing whatever skills I once had for communicating my thoughts.

[Jacko]

Originally Posted by roni

Does anyone else see the ironic display of sexism in the last few pages of this exchange, or I am just warped as a feminist man?

You are warped as a feminist man.

[roni]

Originally Posted by Jacko

You are warped as a feminist man.

I am unsure as to whether I should believe you or dismiss your view as a typical male ploy to maintain power over....

[melliedee]

Steve, I understand the context of your hypothetical. I thought it was clumsy, but I know you are not a sexist nor am I making that claim. I thought my original article, that the Obama campaign may themselves have been guilty of fanning the flames of race, might be met with some discussion of his campaign, and not the constant barrage on hers. I was wrong.

Jacko, I also know that you are not a sexist. I think I've spent enough time on this thread to realize that about the both of you. I also thought we might discuss something which could possibly lead to a sympathetic outcome for Clinton.

I have been trying for the last pages to understand the hearts and minds of Democratic women voters. We need them to win and a whole cohort of them are pissed. Critics of the election are not just co-opting the cause of sexism (oh, of course some are!) but just as many are very interested in effecting change for future generations of women and girls (as the quotes from feminists which everyone overlooked.)

Our nominee has all but won it. Let the healing begin...