• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

2020 Democratic Presidential Nominees

BiffTannen said:
How so ? And even if it is a double standard that doesn't mean the dems should just hold their nose and nominate a woman who is going to lose the general (again). And I'll point out again that male candidates are discarded all of the time with a roll of the eyes and a chuckle.
Click to expand...

There have been 44 male Presidents and 0 female Presidents. If there have been any male candidates discarded with a roll of the eyes and a chuckle, there was subsequently a President elected who was male and not female. I just want the double standard acknowledged. If dems have to put up a male candidate to appease the double standard and get someone elected to take the place of one of the most unlikeable humans in history, so be it.
 
Shooshmoo said:
I don't disagree with you, but it doesn't make her unlikeable. And I agree it will take an exceptional female candidate -- in fact, a perfect, mistake free one, which is a sad indictment of the different standard and some of the men on this board.
Click to expand...

This is rich considering the democrats absolutely ruthlessly destroyed and attacked on all fronts the first women vice president candidate. Doesn't count through because it is not your team.

Interestingly enough for all her faults Hillary was one of the few dems who refused to get in mud and attack Palin on personal sexist level, and was critical of the party for doing so.
 
Last edited:
Well this is timely.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/a...it-depends-who-you-ask/579247/?utm_source=twb


But that equation is misleading. The better explanation for why Warren attracts disproportionate conservative criticism, and has disproportionately high disapproval ratings, has nothing to do with her progressive economic views or her dalliance with DNA testing. It’s that she’s a woman.

As I’ve noted before, women’s ambition provokes a far more negative reaction than men’s. For a 2010 article in the Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, two Yale professors, Victoria Brescoll and Tyler Okimoto, showed identical fictional biographies of two state senators—one male and one female—to participants in a study. When they added quotations to the biographies that characterized each as “ambitious” and possessing “a strong will to power,” the male state senator grew more popular. But the female state senator not only lost support among both women and men, but also provoked “moral outrage.”
Click to expand...
 
WFcatamount22 said:
This is rich considering the democrats absolutely ruthlessly destroyed and attacked on all fronts the first women vice president candidate. Doesn't count through because it is not your team.
Click to expand...

she received the same treatment as trump b/c she was the precursor - and ignorant and boorish populist
 
Shooshmoo said:
There have been 44 male Presidents and 0 female Presidents. If there have been any male candidates discarded with a roll of the eyes and a chuckle, there was subsequently a President elected who was male and not female. I just want the double standard acknowledged. If dems have to put up a male candidate to appease the double standard and get someone elected to take the place of one of the most unlikeable humans in history, so be it.
Click to expand...

What double standard are you talking about? It’s not likability. That’s the same standard.

Sarah Palin is a train wreck of a person, whatabout.
 
WFcatamount22 said:
This is rich considering the democrats absolutely ruthlessly destroyed and attacked on all fronts the first women vice president candidate. Doesn't count through because it is not your team.
Click to expand...

First of all, your ignorance of American history is showing. Geraldine Ferraro was the first female nominated by one of the major parties. Secondly, Palin provided all the ammo anyone needed herself. She is a moron and proved it over and over and over and over again.
 
BiffTannen said:
Yeah, but hardly anybody likes Hillary, even most of the people who voted for her don't like her and a lot of people don't show up when they're asked to vote for someone they don't like.
Click to expand...
Its weird how polarizing Hillary is. She is so well known that virtually everyone has an opinion about her, and they either respect her for being a powerful woman or they hate her guts. I don't think we'll have another Dem candidate like that for a long time.
 
Shooshmoo said:
Jesus -- don't you teach sociology?
Click to expand...

And you never learned it. There are double standards. Likability isn’t one. This is a popularity contest and there are structural reasons why this is the case. Plenty of men don’t win because of likability. Hell plenty don’t even make it to the starting line.

To make your case you need to come up with extremely likable capable women who ran for office and lost simply because they were women.
 
myDeaconmyhand said:
Its weird how polarizing Hillary is. She is so well known that virtually everyone has an opinion about her, and they either respect her for being a powerful woman or they hate her guts. I don't think we'll have another Dem candidate like that for a long time.
Click to expand...

I would argue that plenty of Dems believe both.
 
PhDeac said:
There are double standards. Likability isn’t one. This is a popularity contest and there are structural reasons why this is the case. Plenty of men don’t win because of likability. Hell plenty don’t even make it to the starting line.

To make your case you need to come up with extremely likable capable women who ran for office and lost simply because they were women.
Click to expand...

Do you really believe this? Or maybe it's a weird semantic thing? Put another way, do you think the same action or behavior is likely to result in a male or female candidate to be viewed as equally "unlikable" in the public eye? Lots of data to prove otherwise, no?
 
myDeaconmyhand said:
Its weird how polarizing Hillary is. She is so well known that virtually everyone has an opinion about her, and they either respect her for being a powerful woman or they hate her guts. I don't think we'll have another Dem candidate like that for a long time.
Click to expand...

Pocahontas is trying to steal her undisputed position as Ms Inauthenticity, and she's making headway.
 
myDeaconmyhand said:
Its weird how polarizing Hillary is. She is so well known that virtually everyone has an opinion about her, and they either respect her for being a powerful woman or they hate her guts. I don't think we'll have another Dem candidate like that for a long time.
Click to expand...

She was immediately polarizing when Bill was running and got elected. They tried selling themselves as a 2 for 1, but that really didn't fly in conservative circles, and she's been roundly despised by Pubs ever since. I think they both miscalculated the temperature of the country at first. But she was later fine as a senator and later as SOS. That said, she and her tin eared campaign advisors ran 2 lousy campaigns in 2008 and 2016.
 
PhDeac said:
And you never learned it. There are double standards. Likability isn’t one. This is a popularity contest and there are structural reasons why this is the case. Plenty of men don’t win because of likability. Hell plenty don’t even make it to the starting line.

To make your case you need to come up with extremely likable capable women who ran for office and lost simply because they were women.
Click to expand...

Of course likability is a double standard -- you need to read the article above and then incorporate it into your classes. I will give you the case of Hillary, who was eminently more likeable than her counterpart and lost because she was held to a much higher double standard.
Outside of that, serious women candidates (before Hillary) haven't run for President because they know they couldn't win because of the double standard. It took a once-in-a-generation likeable Obama to get a black man elected over that double standard and we now see the repercussions from those who didn't like the fact that a black man was elected.
 
Yeah just because the president is a despicable, trash human, racist doesn’t mean you need to emulate him and also be a despicable, trash l, racist.
 
sailordeac said:
Pocahontas is trying to steal her undisputed position as Ms Inauthenticity, and she's making headway.
Click to expand...
I think you are overestimating how many people such as yourself are expected or needed to support her. No one being spoon fed hateful Fox News propaganda is a target vote. Reverse mortgages and WW2 commemorative coins, thats what you're the target for. 10 compact disc Time Life oldies music collections - Also for you.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top