Flawed: Perfect Is The Enemy Of The Good If Youre A Female Presidential Candidate

[synergie]

27. So you STILL have not read the post, as you attack her to illustrate how it's not about

Clinton hate with you. Still not a politically poor decision, for literally anyone BUT her, you'd realize this if you bothered to read the article I posted, but you seem to wish to ignore that to engage in the double standards it points out. What I'm saying is that, the money she received from the speeches that literally EVERYONE gives was not an issue for anyone BUT her, despite the fact that she didn't keep it.

My point is that had you read the article, you'd understand that there was no carelessness, just a lot of people holding her to standards that don't apply to anyone else, given that literally everything she did and did not do is converted to "baggage" for no reason at all.

You clearly did not, and sure you could have made pedantic points, while ignoring the entire content of what you claim to have read, your agreement is not required, but some indication that you processed the point would have been good, instead you exemplify the flaws in those who continue to ignore the misogyny here.

It's pretty rude to pretend that someone explaining how you missed the point, when you plainly did is simply "disagreeing".

3 million popular vote difference is actually a landslide, since it's a rather historic number, pretending it did not happen is kind of dishonest. We're not talking electoral college here, which she lost by 70,000 in states where MORE than that margin went uncounted, that we know of.

You don't get to do what the RW is doing by pretending CA shouldn't exist or that is the ONLY place where she won. You also don't get to ignore what actually happened in WI, or MI, or pretend that Californian votes are somehow being applied elsewhere, I mean what is that bit of utterly confused nonsense anyway?

It's not Obama's job to do that, and had people bothered to show up in the midterms, perhaps that might have been done, but they did not.

There is actually a stronger case that this election would have been won by the Dems, had the issues KNOWN by the intelligence agencies and noticed by anyone paying attention been acknowledged in 2016, but people are too busy blaming the "flawed" candidate by engaging in some pretty low attacks, and denying the root of the hatred that abounds here, where every fact is rejected while you basically assail the candidate for imagined wrongs and admonish her for daring to forget that rules don't apply to her, and that everything she says and does will be wrong, by the mere virtue of the person herself.