Carly Fiorinas outrageous sexist attack on Hillary Clinton is the worst yet

[DS0816]

Carly Fiorina, and anyone siding with her, is making a fool of himself/herself.

People don't give a damn about that 1990s scandal.

We are in 2016. People are living in the present.

If Hillary Clinton does not win the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination, it's not because of the 1990s scandal.

Carly Fiorina, on the other hand, is definitely going nowhere. She is reaching for something—anything—that could make her feel like she could potentially come across as relevant.

At this point, people can have their fun guessing on what date Carly Fiorina drops out of the race (or, "suspends" her campaign). Let's give ourselves a five-day spread for guessing that date!

[DS0816]

Carly is not a pleasant person is my impression.

Whether or not this is accurate, for everyone else who also senses this while observing her party’s fellow candidates…it can definitely play a role in one’s decision for who to support for nomination.

[DS0816]

Fiorina is absolutely right with this

About what?

[DS0816]

People don't give a damn about that 1990s scandal.

True enough. I don't care where Billy stuck his winkie back in the '90s, and I don't care what the Clinton marriage is all about. However, when Hillary starts acting like she's some staunch feminist, the protector of women's rights, the one who gives aid to the downtrodden, somebody really needs to ask about her dismissal of the accusations leveled against her husband, where clearly she wasn't acting to protect those women in any way, shape, or form.

Are you saying that Hillary Clinton was required to choose to protect those women rather than believe her husband?

It sounds you are wanting this to be ammunition against Hillary Clinton which, in your mind, could be sufficient in sinking her presidential bid.

[DS0816]

Are you saying that Hillary Clinton was required to choose to protect those women rather than believe her husband?

It sounds you are wanting this to be ammunition against Hillary Clinton which, in your mind, could be sufficient in sinking her presidential bid.

Not at all. I'm saying that Hillary should either NOT be touting herself as the champion of women, or she should be ready to answer questions about why she chose not to believe those women who leveled charges against her husband. She can't claim to be a staunch feminist, and expect not to have to answer the obvious followup question.

It sounds like you're using the word "obvious" in place of the word logical.

What has you thinking this is logical?