Bi-Polar Bear wrote:FreeDuck wrote:Care to expand on that, bear?
no... it is so obvious it requires no expansion.
Actually, it isn't at all clear what you meant; I was going to ask for an explanation before I saw FD's post.
Cycloptichorn
Thanks soz, I was looking for that. My memory said it was at the end of the debate but I couldn't find it there.
revel wrote:For something which scored big; I haven't heard a word about Edwards saying the same thing first. If he did; then it does change things. What exactly did he say and when did he say he say it?
Edwards didn't tear up, so no news coverage. Also, it was Edwards, so no news coverage.
Quote:Also, it was Edwards, so no news coverage.
Yea; I know Edwards is kind of blah. Dull of dishwater in my opinion.
But anyway; to compare the two other than the "personal to me" the conversations were not really alike. Shrugs; it really don't matter that much to me; but I think she is getting bashed underserved this time.
previously left transcript
engineer wrote:revel wrote:I am not saying the reason she is loosing to Obama is because of sexism; but the reaction to her emotionalism is; IMO. And also it appears to sexism is alive and well to some voters.
OK, picture Edwards crying in frustration because he has so much to offer, but just can't get the press to pay attention. He's done. Period. Romney tearing up because no one respects all he did in Mass? Would it be all over the press? Absolutely. Howard Dean was crucified for yelling at a rally. That Clinton has been given some sympathy in this respect is due to her gender. Still, I think this is a net loss for her.
Romney has teared up (twice?) and it was just a blip on the radar screen. Male politicians are seen as sensitive when they show emotion. There is clearly a double standard as Steinem pointed out, women can't win, either we are an Ice Queen bitch or too emotional to be trusted as the "most powerful person" on earth.
Roxxxanne wrote:Romney has teared up (twice?) and it was just a blip on the radar screen. Male politicians are seen as sensitive when they show emotion. There is clearly a double standard as Steinem pointed out, women can't win, either we are an Ice Queen bitch or too emotional to be trusted as the "most powerful person" on earth.
I haven't heard of Romney tearing up. Perhaps that shows your point, but if he did, I'm sure Rush or one of those other Fox types would be all over it. Male politicians are NOT seen as sensitive when they tear up. They are seen as wusses. Perhaps that is a gender stereotype. Women may see them as sensitive. Men see them as wusses.
...and Bill Clinton bashing Obama is not helping Hillary one iota, au contraire,
it is perceived in very poor taste, when a former president is bashing another fellow candidate in this manner.
I can't wait for tonight - it will be so exciting to watch NH!!
issues are mopre important to discuss than the emotional outpouring.
Ramafuchs wrote:issues are mopre important to discuss than the emotional outpouring.
I think we can handle doing both.
CalamityJane wrote:...and Bill Clinton bashing Obama is not helping Hillary one iota, au contraire,
it is perceived in very poor taste, when a former president is bashing another fellow candidate in this manner.
I can't wait for tonight - it will be so exciting to watch NH!!
I haven't heard Bill "bashing" Obama....
please tell me what this refers to?
I think they are wussies too. Blokes weeping!! The women will be digging the ditches next. "That'll larn 'em."
Thank you, engineer! I'm watching CNN, so I have heard Bill Clinton's
bashing Obama numerous times already. Even the press thinks it's
in very poor taste!
Thanks engineer... I missed that.
In a well-run campaign, I don't know how the Clintons would think that there could be any benefit to having Bill say things like that.
What was he thinking?
The Clintons are desperate, ebrown.
Dems are not matured to satisfy the people of their views .
Money -power with judicial acceptance accompanied by lobby group will decide the fate of the election.
I am quite sure that neither of the two leading personalities will be allowed to ushapr the post of BUSH
CalamityJane wrote:The Clintons are desperate, ebrown.
I hope they don't do anything really embarrassing.
I just saw Donna Brazile saying that as an African-American she took issue with Bill Clinton's tone.
Whew, crazy race going on. I'm loving it so far, and I want Obama to win, obviously, but that's much more about how much I LIKE him than about how much I DISLIKE anyone else (on the Dem side). Like ebrown, I'd hate to see Bill or Hillary do anything that permanently tarnishes them.
ebrown, if (I should say when) Obama wins tonight, they probably will.
ebrown_p wrote:Thanks engineer... I missed that.
In a well-run campaign, I don't know how the Clintons would think that there could be any benefit to having Bill say things like that.
What was he thinking?
I think both Clintons tend to get snippy when things aren't going their way. Nothing wrong with a little passion now and then, but this is not his finest moment. His comments have
caused some media introspection though, so maybe it will work to change media behavior by the time SC and MI role around.
