Uh oh here we fucking go

it was because I'm corrupt as hell
it was definitely hatred of women

ironic shitposting is still shitposting

You really expect her to say she was fucked over by the crappy voting system?

Lack of reading comprehension is lack of reading comprehension.

I don't expect anything from her.
The issue with these statements is that they're made because people will accept them.
She'll say what her base wants to hear and that's the problem. I don't give two shits about what she says, but the moment people actually relay this shit to me (which has happened like the day after the election and i don't even live in the us) it gets on my nerves.

This coddling bullshit is more harmful to women than the spooky hatred of women/patriarchy ghost these people are chasing even if you assumed it was real.

How dumb can you be?

Yep, all twelve of them.

She won by losing. :^)

How do people write this shit with a straight face?

When Hillary finally does fall over dead liberals will rewrite history and paint her as a great national hero.
Fucking kill me.

really makes me feel better about my self.

This is the time we live in.

I've never seen it described better

...

...

I think she recently did an interview where she said Russia and wikilieaks where the main reasons why she lost, I don't know if she's pretending or dems actually believe their own bullshit.

Tbh this is probably at least kind of true. No email leaks would probably give her the edge

Why does she even say anything? She's almost 70 and just suffered the most embarassing defeat. Why won't she just die in dignity?

She ran out of dignity somewhere between being a Goldwater Girl and laughing about getting a child rapist acquitted. All she has left is ego.

I don't want to sound reactionary but 90% of the time Women complain about soggy knees it basically comes down to them not wanting to be judged for their appearance/behaviour. As if thats something Women exclusively have to deal with.

APOLOGISE

Archive everything and don't let them get away with it.

The "research" cited in this article is just random conjecture. There is no statistics it is just experts say this, experts say that totally meaningless. Liberals fetishize research and experts because they always just tell them what they want to hear.

Yeah we better keep blowing that horn. There may yet be some hunter-gatherer societies that haven't heard yet.

What's the difference between Hillary, and Hitler? At least Hitler killed himself when he lost.

...

...

Good. Let her go down with that sinking ship.

Is that shooped?

...

This. In the first ever televised debate (Kennedy vs Nixon) radio listeners overwhelmingly said Nixon won, but people who saw it on TV said that Kennedy won, obviously indicating that Kennedy's appearance and mannerisms affected the way people saw him.

This is a good point, and it's worth adding that women's appearances vary a lot more than men's. Which is why it's more common to have the press talk about what a woman was wearing than what a man was wearing. A man's going to wear a suit. The end.

But Trump still manages to make it look spectacularly retarded

what the fuck is that a clown's tie?

Yeah, and he catches shit for it. One of the Bush/Kerry debates people were speculating about a weird bulge in Dubya's coat.

am i a bad person if i wish genuine hatred of women would make a comeback after all the crying wolf?

i thought it was partially just the quiet desire most people my age have to be the knight in shining armour that liberated people from oppression that stopped being overt decades ago (i.e. the fact every tumblrite secretly wishes to be part of, or perhaps more accurately to consume the civil rights movement.) but it's possibly just that i'm an asshole who doesn't care either way about women (and would prefer a society where their legitimate complaints are ignored to one where they whine and make poor analogies for real, if smaller issues.) without any desire to be a hero.

Tbh, it's probably true.

Saying it "played a role" isn't the same as saying it was the only thing. I've known female Democrat voters who wouldn't vote for a woman presidential candidate because they believed women were weak leaders - and this was a religious background contributing to her reasoning. Switch over to the Republican voter side and it's not even slightly subtle. They were selling shirts with "Trump the bitch" on them at his rallies, and Trump fans were absolutely nuts about that one clip where Hillary says something like "You may be wondering why I don't have a 100% lead," and it was pretty plain they were mostly pissed off by the tone of her voice. And Trump himself spent time in the debates going after her Husband's conduct, and time before the fall video going after her health and weakness. The overarching message blatantly took advantage of gender bias - so they got the best of both worlds: an evil, warmongering bitch and a weak old lady.

...

Clintonism really is dying the slowest most painful death possible my god

This seems like a promising strategy for the Democratic Party to regain its footing.

You're just a dumbfuck who spends too much time on the Internet.

It's actually real world experience of a left-wing party's local meetings that tipped me over into thinking that way.

We spent zero time talking about economic issues and a huge amount of time on women's issues, ensuring the committees were gender balanced, etc. While not remotely nice, we'd have gotten a lot more done if we'd locked all the women in the cupboards and went out to deal with things ourselves.

(Plus we'd immediately have tipped the balance from a liberal group to a mostly socialist group, meaning a multi-racial, multi-income-distribution group of socialists could purge the remaining liberal men.)

That's even sadder, really.

What can I say? While objectively it's not fair to generalize, doing so would make subjective experience infinitely easier.

Dumb. We haven't ignored class because of women's issues, we've engaged with women's issues because and only in so far as it didn't threaten exiting class structures. If not that, Porky would have kept us busy with something else. The sudden surge of women focused idpol was an effect, not a cause of Porky's machinations.

I know it's idpol, but idpol is a thing in the Real. I personally met many people who said, straight up, "i ain't gunna vote for no women, women r dumb".

Our party branch may have been irrelevant, but within it's own structures it would have been focused on class.
(And then broken down into infighting, as is traditional.)
It's not a "big" question as to the implementation of socialism, simply that my small corner of the earth would be much more enjoyable without women and the situations their presence creates.

(Though perhaps an even better solution would be to just cut out the middleman and become a hermit.)

Never generalize from too small a sample user, it will ruin your life.
Becoming a recluse is bad for you. But when activism fails, it's not a bad idea to withdraw and go back to theory for a while.

Mister, you got COINTELPRO'd six ways through Thursday. Why do you think these useless ID-pol assholes all became so fucking loud right after OWS? Because it's a nice big distraction from Wallstreet, that's why.

Basically, stop eating the bait.

She's probably right, people not voting for her because she's a woman likely cost her a few points. Regardless, she should have had an absolute landslide victory against Trump, so clearly there's many more relevant factors.

liberalism