The latest installment of “The Internet Explodes with Hatred for Hillary Clinton” happened earlier this month. The Democratic presidential candidate, whose own record on AIDS research and funding is better than any other candidate, mistakenly said that former US first lady Nancy Reagan was a key supporter of AIDS research. Reagan was, in reality,
(
Read more... )
I don't think *anything* can be blamed entirely on any one person. I also hope that, ultimately, most states will swing to Clinton or Sanders regardless of which gets the nomination. But I don't think the sentiment of Clinton being the devil (or Sanders being the devil) is particularly productive, again, considering the alternatives.
And I do think that at least a percentage of the criticism leveled at Clinton clearly is misogynistic and that there's another chunk that is perhaps not overtly misogynistic, but that does hold her accountable in ways male candidates clearly haven't been held accountable that should be examined.
Reply
And I do think that at least a percentage of the criticism leveled at Clinton clearly is misogynistic and that there's another chunk that is perhaps not overtly misogynistic, but that does hold her accountable in ways male candidates clearly haven't been held accountable that should be examined.
It just KILLS me how many people who are constantly bashing her don't seem to see this. KILLS ME.
Reply
I don't hate either of them for it. People are allowed to change their opinions. Also, they're politicians, so it's to be expected.
Reply
Leave a comment