A few weeks ago, a woman I know who lives in Indiana had a phone call from Hillary Clinton’s camp in the run-up to the state Democratic primary.
“I realise folks say it would be great to have an African-American president, but wouldn’t it be neat to have the first woman president in our lifetime?”
So it’s not just a racist and misogynist media who are running the woman versus black man theme, but Hillary’s camp itself. Of course, for quite awhile it stayed as woman versus black man – recently, in a disturbing turn of events, Hillary has taken on the full mantle of white versus black. Yet, as Zillah Eisenstein points out in this hard-headed and strongly argued piece, Clinton doesn’t really own up to being white woman, ie. black women never quite enter the picture. For the Hillary camp, gender is white.
It’s an understatement to say that feelings are running high in the Democrat campaign – they seem positively volcanic.
I think that who the candidates are has played a stronger role in fuelling this dynamic – instead of just black man vs/ white woman, it’s strong, charismatic, high-quality black male candidate with shitloads of supporter vs strong, charismatic, high quality white female candidate with shitloads of impassioned supporters. The racial polarisation angle grew out of the (unexpected, remember?) tightness of the race and some ill-considered remarks on Bill Clinton’s part.
And I wouldn’t worry too much about the vulcanism, it peaked a month or so back and is winding down.
Clinton can’t win because of sexism, Obama can’t win because of racism and McCain can’t win because of ageism. How about we just leave George in the White House, at least until he cleans up that big mess he made in Iraq?
I’m not going to give Bill (or Hillary!) a pass on this one, but I think it was always gonna happen. And Obama was always going to be competitive, despite what Mark Penn and Bill Clinton might have assumed!
There was a bit of flak flying around about this a while back too, with Clintonistas claiming or insinuating that black women were gender traitors by ostensibly privileging their race over their gender. Not exactly a smart move given all the various cans of worms around race in the States and indeed the huge fissure lines within the feminist movement. I’d provide some links but this sort of thing started making me really depressed when it started happening so I didn’t save any of the posts or articles!
Kim , on one Public Broadcasting TV report the reaction from some Hiliary supporters and campaign workers when questioned about who they would vote for if Obama won the nomination was that they would vote for McCain .
How much is this likely to impact on his final vote ? With the nomination race being so close does Obama risk winning the battle to lose the war?
murph, there’s a bit of polling around that shows that it’s more likely to be a (relatively small) proportion of Hillary’s male blue collar demographic that might not vote for Obama in the general election. I think some of the women and groups talking about this are genuinely trying to make a point about the misogyny that has been directed at her in massive amounts, but I think part of it is just the crazy endgame Hillary is playing. I’d be surprised if there really were that many women who’d vote for McCain over Obama if they’re reasonably strong Democratic identifiers. I think this is partly some sort of weird way of suggesting that Hillary’s got appeal to voters outside the core Democratic demographics, which Obama obviously does.
I think the whole dynamic of the campaign will change pretty quickly as soon as Obama wraps up the nomination, and that’s likely to be well before the convention. It’s starting to change now.
Hillary, I think, is playing an endgame largely designed to maintain the Clintonistas’ influence in the Democratic Party – hence all the leaks about her wanting to be offered the V-P slot (and suggestions that she would decline but it’s about respect), aspiring to be Majority Leader in the Senate, etc. I think at the top level most of what is happening now is about carving up the expected fruits of victory. So many of the establishment Democrats tied themselves to Hillary so early they can’t credibly back away now and things like Cabinet slots, involvement in the general election campaign etc. might be the price to be paid for “unifying the party”.
I was surprised the Hiliary campaign workers said they would vote Republican!
When pressed to answer ‘Why ?’ they muttered about dark goings on and the vilification Hiliary has been subjected to by the Obama campaign’s dirty trick’s department.
Thanks for the background info.
Well, I think there’s a bit of projection there – a lot of dark goings on from the Clinton camp and right from the top not just the dirty tricks dep’t!
Wouldn’t Operation Chaos skew the Clintonistas for McCain a little?
While I welcome the notion of a non-white and/or non-male president it’s not a basis for election is it. The idea is that race and gender should not be a factor in such aspiration. Saying vote for me because I’m a woman isn’t much better than saying don’t vote for her likewise.
>
Also I think the Clintons like the Blairs are moral vacuums who’d sell their children for the primary. There’s just something sinister about ‘em.
Hello Albert J Gore at [1]
Look, if it stays deadlocked, can they draft you?
Down and Out, it might well skew things a little. Hard to know how many of those crossover votes were really caused by it but!
an election process between a black man and a white woman has come down to questions of race and gender?
inconceivable!
Tiny
you’d be amazed, mate! By the way, if the populace ever had the temerity to demand that YOU face an election, I bet your diminuitive stature would become an issue. People are so cruel.
Sham and the Evil Dwarf would erect whole mighty columns devoted to the SIZE issue: their column inches would expand. Even without using those nifty column enlargers or Niagra Pills. Size would matter.
So sad, so demeaning, so infantile. Your flashy scarlet Tyrant-mobile wouldn’t save you. The upwardly mobile would leave you deflated: from impo’tant to impotent.
So, eschew elections, is my advice, Tiny.
Kim, Jill Singer, who’s normally the only reasonably good thing in the Herald Sun had a terrible article way back before the primaries got under way about Oprah endorsing Obama. It never occurred to her that Oprah might actually think he was the best candidate, prefer him because he opposed the Iraq war etc. The entire article was about the choice black women had to make between siding with men of their race or with white women and how Oprah had done the former and we shouldn’t blame her but it was dissappointing to white feminists etc etc. The only time in the whole article she indicated that factors other than colour and race might matter was a passing line about how Oprah had done this despite Clinton being “better qualified”.
Personally I think electing a white woman would be more of a step forward than electing a black man, but that’s just one factor to consider and most of the others favour Obama.
Camille Paglia says that she’s happy to vote for a woman President – so long as it isn’t Hillary Clinton. In the past decade there have been a number of female politicians (many of them Democrats) who’ve made it within striking distance of the Presidency but who have a stronger personal back story and political record than HRC. She should seek to replace Ted Kennedy as the Great Liberal Legislator.
A victory for Obama – or even McCain – doesn’t count out a female President for all time, or even “our lifetime”. Your friend sounds like the victim of a last-ditch effort: while you’re at it, ask her if she’s interested in some ABC Learning shares.