Was Hillary Clinton a victim of sexism

[HagridOfTheDeep]

Sad state of affairs that this question needs a thread and that to answer "yes" is controversial.

I've got about 10 pages of quotes saved from asshats of all political stripes on this very forum spouting sexist drivel about Hillary Clinton. To say that gender has not played a significant role colouring perceptions of Hillary Clinton and increasing the intensity of the hatred levelled towards her is absolutely ridiculous. Talk to the blue-collar unions about their membership's feelings towards Hillary Clinton. The IAFF couldn't even be arsed to endorse her despite her strong record of supporting fire fighters and union rights because its insecure male membership was going ballistic about a shrill woman leading the liberal culture wars.

No one has asked robot Corey Booker about likability.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

If Hillary was a straight white male and Trump was a black transgender pansexual, I'd still support Trump over Hillary and a lot of people feel the same way. Sexism is just an excuse for a terrible candidate who ran a terrible campaign 

Lol, you and your cohort would never support a black transgender pansexual, and to suggest otherwise is totally disingenuous.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

The point is, no one will say, and few will even realize, that gendered perceptions played a major role in how they viewed Hillary Clinton and responded to her candidacy. Progressives make an effort to engage in considering how the intersection of identity influenced things whereas people on the right tend not to want to have that conversation—Venice Italy does it himself when he throws out a pretty unlikely example just for theatrics and then asserts, basically, that people wouldn’t see or care about these differences and that invoking the “isms” is “an excuse.” That’s total willful blindness.

And since, as I’ve said, people don’t tend to knowingly act out of discriminatory instincts, by the time the rough and tumble was over, these folks would just “have a bad feeling” about this person and stay home. VeniceItaly could very well be an exception, but when you cast your lot in with ignorant bigots and racists, you reap what you sow.

Call it a bubble, but I do not choose to surround myself with people who support politicians who debase and put down groups of marginalized people. If you vote GOP, that’s what you are doing whether it’s your intention or not. And it’s way too common that these people make excuses for themselves and others for the side effects of “what ends up happening” to minorities than actually taking responsibility and making a change. “The people I’d otherwise have” don’t stick around when you actually demand what is required for equitability. My aunt isn’t a racist until someone gently asks her to reconsider using the term “cotton pickin’.” Then she’s a victim and how dare anybody suggest that she’s ever done anything unthoughtful towards people of colour! I’ve lost interest—they don’t want change because they frankly don’t care. They’d rather be comfortable.

Which brings me to the actual point. The idea that the Republican Party would ever nominate a black trans pansexual is in itself totally disingenuous—that is more what I was getting at. I don’t apologize for making that claim. I don’t hang around people who think sexism is an imaginary “excuse.” Sue me.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

Yes and no. As Sanchez said her "bitchy" personality was the main reason but a bitchy man can get away with it. A bitchy or crazy women does horrible in US Politics. See bachmann and Tenney .

Name a woman who does not get called “bitchy” when they enter politics.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

Bump

Now that we have primary results in comparison to 2016, raising this question again is fair. Let this sink in: Biden won tons of voters, who backed Sanders last time in protest. Biden carried many rural and suburban counties in MI, MO, IL and WA, that HRC badly lost in 2016. A significant junk of these voters went over to Trump in November, giving him the election. I wonder why? It can't be about ideology, because Biden is politically pretty close to Clinton and both are considered "establishment career politicians". Their biggest difference seems to be foreign policy, with Biden being less hawkish. For sure, HRC had problems of her own like 25 years of GOP smears, but comparing her 2016 primary results and voter coalition to Biden makes me wonder how much sexism indeed played a role in her loss.

You also can't discount that the 25 years of GOP smears were theselves a product of sexism.