When will Hillary Clinton give up her candidacy ?

I'm here for the issues, for the debates, for the knowledge part, and only for that.

Set is just losing his marbles. I was not talking about him, and yet he jumped at my throat. Like he jumps at pretty much everybody's throat now and then. It's beyond his control.

This morning he had his answers well rehearsed when Mika asked him the very same questions on MSNBC. A stark difference from when he was asked before.

Without them Bernie wouldent be as close to Hillary as he us. Are you sure you want them removed and closed primaries returned.

The Iran hostage crisis did him in. I have always wondered how much Ronny Raygun and his people had to do with Iran holding onto the hostages until after the election.

Why Young Women Aren’t for Hillary ... Yet
Young female voters may not regard Hillary Clinton as revolutionary because 20th century feminist struggles don't resonate with them.

By Colleen Butler-Sweet Feb. 22, 2016, at 2:00 p.m.

As the first votes of the 2016 primary season are counted, much has been made of the trouble Hillary Clinton has had reaching young, democratic women. Many are not answering the battle cry of 20th century feminists, instead pledging allegiance to Clinton's 74-year-old male opponent Bernie Sanders.

I've witnessed this disconnect firsthand as a sociology professor, listening to my students ask time and again, "Why should I vote for a woman just because she's a woman?" I often play the role of feminist "big sister" as I listen to my female students and urge them to explain their positions to their mothers, grandmothers and aunts who can't understand their resistance. As it turns out, these young women aren't distracted by flashy slogans, ignorant to the issues or in it to meet boys. They are thoughtful, attentive and want to engage more. We just need to consider their social and historical context to better understand what drives them.

Today's college freshmen were born in 1997. As adolescents, they bore witness to the 2008 economic collapse and watched their parents' frightened response to the crashing stock market. This economic unrest made college affordability especially relevant, as many families simply couldn't shoulder the burden of soaring tuition costs, leading many students to compile thousands of dollars in educational debt while fighting over the few jobs available to them upon graduation. All of these challenges borne from the 2008 economic collapse directly impact them and collectively represent one of the most profound stories of injustice in their lifetime.

This is one of the primary reasons Sen. Sanders' passionate critique of the millionaires and billionaires who wrecked the economy resonates so viscerally with young people. The problem is, even if every one of Sanders' economic goals were met, gender inequality would persist, and sexism would still matter. So why does Sanders' message resonate so much with young women who aren't fully served by it?

The college women of today were born in an era when a woman's right to work, right to choose, right to birth control were all "settled law." They simply didn't witness the battle. Despite the immediate relevance to their lives, lecturing them on how many legislators are threatening their reproductive rights is like telling them someone wants to take away their right to vote – it doesn't sound plausible or realistic, so it's easy to dismiss such threats as fringe and immaterial.

The gender wage gap and glass ceiling also don't quite hit home. As college students, young women have not yet navigated the workforce or confronted inadequate family leave policies. Moreover, college represents a stage in their lives where they are, in many ways, equal to the men on campus, even outnumbering them in many classes. In effect, young women haven't yet faced the full scope of institutional sexism and don't have a complete frame of reference for gender inequality. Since they don't have this firsthand experience of sexism, it's perfectly reasonable for them to ask, "Why should I vote for a woman just because she's a woman?"

While this aversion to identity politics is well-intended, Hillary Clinton isn't just any woman.

Virtually every young woman I've taught plans to have a family and a career. In 1980, when Clinton was an attorney and about to become a first-time mother, her law firm had no maternity leave plan until she informed them she would take four months off to care for her newborn. This bold step effectively established the firm's first family leave policy. Clinton didn't just advocate for maternity leave, she created it at a time when women were expected to give up their careers when they became mothers. During her time as senator, Clinton introduced eight pieces of legislation with the explicit goal of expanding and protecting women's reproductive rights and fought hard for a woman's right to emergency contraception. Many college women are familiar with the Plan-B pill. What they don't know is they largely have Hillary Clinton to thank for it. As a candidate, she isn't scared to talk about issues like sexual violence on campus, something particularly relevant to female co-eds today, when 1 in 5 college women are sexually assaulted. There's also no candidate with a more long-standing and authentic passion for shattering the glass ceiling and closing the gender wage gap. While there's no question that Sanders should be applauded for voting for gender equality legislation, Clinton has written many bills personally, lived through and overcome the challenges firsthand and has the battle scars to prove it.

Perhaps these concerns aren't on young women's radar, but have we even told them about this history? Have their feminist mothers, grandmothers, aunts and big sisters shared their stories, their struggles and their victories? Have they talked and listened to these young women who so badly want to be a part of a movement and make a difference? Have we taken the time and care to explain why Hillary Clinton is revolutionary? If we haven't, we should. The truth is Hillary Clinton has been fighting for the young women of today since before they were born. They just don't realize it ... yet.

It’s not news that women earn less than men. But a soon-to-be-released report illustrates a particularly disappointing trend: women earn less than men even in popular woman-dominated jobs.

The Institute for Women’s Policy Research crunched government data and found that in each of the 20 most common occupations for women in 2013, women’s median weekly earnings for full-time work were less than weekly earnings for men. Within those top 20 jobs, that relationship holds true for occupations with the largest shares of women.

Take elementary- and middle-school teachers, for example. Women in these full-time spots made median weekly earnings of $937 in 2013, compared with $1,025 for men. Those figures translate to women making 91.4 cents for each dollar earned by men – a gap of 8.6 cents. That gap widened to as much as 16.4 cents for social workers.

“To improve women’s earnings and reduce the gender earnings gap, women and their families need enhanced efforts to ensure non-discriminatory hiring and pay practices, better training and career counseling, and improved work-family supports,” IWPR concluded.

Looking more broadly at the labor market, median weekly earnings for full-time women workers were $706 last year, 82.1% of men’s weekly earnings of $860, translating to a gap of 17.9%, according to the report. Woman-dominated jobs tend to pay less than fields made up primarily by men, IWPR noted.

“Thus, tackling occupational segregation is an important part of eliminating the gender wage gap,” IWPR’s report noted.

Looking to gain female support in its push to raise the federal minimum wage, the White House recently released a report showing that women would disproportionately benefit from such a hike. While women constitute just under half of the overall labor force, they are about three-quarters of the workers in the 10 largest low-wage jobs, dominating occupations such as childcare workers, home health aides and waitstaff, according to recent analysis from the National Women’s Law Center.

Democrats support raising the minimum wage to $10.10 per hour from its current level of $7.25, but may be willing to compromise with Republicans on a smaller hike.