Women voters, women candidates and Hillary Clinton. (Part I of a never ending series.) In theory Hillary’s candidacy provides a great jumping off point for an in-depth conversation on the “women’s vote.” In reality, not so much. Instead we get things like the frustrating Linda Hirshman op-ed in the WaPo. I have been trying to put my finger on why this piece was so infuriating for weeks now. (Thus the belated musings seen here.) Could it be that she makes sweeping pronouncements about women voters after talking to only 6 white, married, stay-at-home moms in MD. Could it be her implication that women are not rational political actors or that only women consider “character” when picking a candidate to support/oppose or that women have never single-handedly elected a presidential candidate (and therefore are irrelevant) or the fact that she found the least politically informed women on the planet to interview. Ok, it is all of those things and the fact that this article came and went and no conversation ensued.
Future topics include – women are all the same, Real Simple is an untapped political resource and what is so fucking great about being rational.
Wednesday, February 7
:: Vote Like A Girl
Labels: Hillary Clinton, Washington Post, women's vote
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment