Tag Archives: Hillary Clinton

The Feminist Gap

11 Feb 2016 By in Candidates and Campaigns Tags: , , , , , , , 2 Comments

There was something poignant (and grotesque) about the ‘scolding’ that Madeleine Albright and Gloria Steinem gave younger American women this week.  The subject was Hillary and the support that female voters—as women—supposedly owe her.  The tone was dire yet dismissive.  Madeleine Albright, revered for her achievements as a diplomat, essentially threatened wayward women with punishment, warning that if they didn’t ‘help’ Hillary they would go to hell.  Gloria Steinem, now a shocking 81, relied on sexual stereotyping to explain why some young women have chosen to vote for Bernie.  These women, she claimed, care only about ‘where the boys are’—lemming-like, they have gravitated to Sanders because ‘the boys are with Bernie.’  In other words, young women in Sanders’ camp suffer from an out-of-control sex drive!  Both Albright and Steinem asserted in different ways that young women had forgotten their rightful duty, which, in the eyes of older feminists, is to practice sex solidarity.  This tenet, so central to first-generation feminism, is outmoded and deeply unpalatable.

The desperate awkwardness of these protests points up a problem that Hillary is having.  How does her sex, how does the women’s movement, figure in her campaign?  Hillary never was much of a bra-burner; she never wasted much time railing against society’s constraints or male tyranny.  Instead, she crossed over early, believing that doors were open and assuming that full equality and freedom were hers.  She carved out a remarkable path, relying more on her own grit and talents than on the dictates of feminist ideology.

In some profound sense, Hillary is not free to tell her story, which is that of a woman who has been more in the public eye for more of her life than any other woman in American history.  Contrary to Steinem’s assumption about the fate of women, Hillary has not ‘lost power’ as she’s aged.  Instead, Clinton is one of the most well-known and powerful women on the face of the globe.

As Clinton has grown more unusual, more distinguished, and more famous, her capacity to pass as a representative woman has inevitably waned.  The fact is one to reckon with in the remaining campaign.

Why Hillary Should Declare, “I’m Worth It”

5 Feb 2016 By in Candidates and Campaigns Tags: , , , , , , 7 Comments

Who can stand the sexist attacks on Hillary’s speaking fees?

The questions aim to make voters aware that, while not in office, Hillary accepted huge fees for speaking to audiences that included big banks.  Like many effective campaign tactics, however, questioning the legitimacy of her fees also serves other, less-than-creditable ends.  The questions implicitly cast aspersions on Hillary Clinton’s essential worth, on her value as a veteran stateswoman, and on the integrity of the speaking engagements themselves.  The issue is a classic ‘dog-whistle’ tuned to the frequency of the envious and chauvinistic.

The underlying assumption?  Something must be wrong because Hillary couldn’t possibly be worth that kind of money.  Thank god Hillary is running for office!  She’s giving us an opportunity to express our resentment toward women who defy social norms and out-perform men.  How dare she make that kind of money in one day?

What’s clear from Secretary Clinton’s responses is that she doesn’t feel guilty.  She doesn’t feel implicated in the banks’ decision to pay up to hear what’s in her heart and brain.  Thank goodness she isn’t apologizing for the very legitimate demand within the business community to learn from one of the nation’s most experienced leaders.

But Hillary, for the sake of all women struggling against their own glass ceilings, you must go a step further.  You must assert that your experience and perspective on American politics are unique, and that, in the eyes of the market, you deserve your fees.

You might lose the anti-capitalist vote, but you’d win the gratitude of millions of American women who are tired of being treated as though they can’t possibly be worth as much as a man.

Scenarios of a possible presidential run

9 Jan 2015 By in Candidates and Campaigns Tags: , , , , , 4 Comments

The watery, icy expanse of Lake Michigan under a sunset sky. A pink building glows on the horizon.
At dinner the other night, a friend told me she’d read that if Hillary says nothing this month, that means she’s running.

Ah, yes; Hillary, who by dragging her feet is not doing any favors to her party.  If she doesn’t run, the decrepit condition of the Democratic party—with respect to both leadership and ideology—will become obvious, handing the Republicans a win.

If Hillary does run, the Republicans with the best shot at defeating her are Jeb Bush or Rand Paul.  Some people recoil from the prospect of another Bush presidency.  Yet others view Jeb as his own man, someone who’s competent and familiar, yet refreshingly new as a national figure. He would pull masses of moderates—both Republican and unaligned—back to his party.  Rand Paul could poll well with both wings of his party, while drawing off disaffected liberals whose concern for certain forms of freedom and whose desire to rein in an overactive and over-militarized state the Democratic Party has ignored for decades.

While many older Democratic ‘skirts and suits’ consider Hillary unbeatable, at this point the idea of a Hillary presidency has gone very stale. We’re tired of it already, and she hasn’t started running.  She is great presidential material, but the timing for a run is unpropitious indeed.

Hillary will be particularly vulnerable if she goes unchallenged in the primary.  I’ve seen articles seeking to discourage Elizabeth Warren from throwing her hat in the ring.  Observers fear that Warren will weaken Hillary’s support while exposing Hillary’s vulnerabilities.  Warren’s sudden (and I believe short-lived) ascendancy exposes the strength of popular frustrations that the prevailing centrist brand of Democracy has been ignoring.  For that very reason, Warren’s candidacy would strengthen the party and Hillary’s chances, by triggering a much-needed internal dialogue and influencing the positions that Hillary would carry into the general campaign.

Hillary merits the admiration and respect she enjoys today.  Can she kindle within herself the fresh ideological vision and spark of political genius that the country needs?

A Talent Gap That Favors the GOP

24 Jun 2014 By in The Parties Tags: , , , , , , ,

THE REPUBLICAN PARTY, no matter how retrograde its ideas, has long outshone Democrats in its ability to attract galvanizing up-and-comers.  Eric Cantor’s startling fall is just the latest instance of a conservative “star” self-destructing, but one that underscores the Party’s uncanny ability to spot and exploit a long string of controversial media darlings: Sarah Palin, Michele Bachmann, Rick Santorum, Rick Perry, Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Paul Ryan . . . the length of the list is downright alarming.

Cantor, though departing the House under a cloud, had become a nationally known leader at an impressively young age.  Figures like Cantor, Paul Ryan, and Rand Paul have few Democratic counterparts.  Rising Democrats like Kristen Gillibrand and Elizabeth Warren have yet to be given leading roles that would signal their stature within their party, and Warren, a latecomer to politics, is only now beginning to hit her stride.  Only the GOP has a cadre of young iconoclastic lieutenants with big responsibilities and long resumes.

The GOP’s leadership advantage derives not just from personality but from the very ideological conflict that has threatened to weaken it as a party.  In the last presidential election, outsized but deeply flawed figures like Palin or Herman Cain held our attention because they stood for something, because they were staking their claim to the soul of their party, and because something dramatically different was going to happen if they gained enough popularity.  Even as we despised them, they contributed paradoxically to the political system’s health, energizing the opposition and re-establishing the voting public’s unwillingness to tolerate meanness, character flaws, or dangerous ideas.

Only when President Obama leaves office will it be clear how decrepit the Democratic Party has become.  His youth and charisma have tended to compensate for the Democrats’ bland leadership and ideology, concealing how staid and, well, conservative, its major figures are.  Figures like Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, Nancy Pelosi, and Joe Biden are wonderful public servants, but they can hardly be said to represent a vanguard.

Disarray in the Republican Party has given the Democrats an opportunity to dominate and prevail.  Instead, the Democratic Party is languishing.  Democratic leaders have grown unaccustomed to risk-taking, and they have lacked the energy required to consolidate their power in the states, win back the South, or expand the breadth and fervor of their support among voters nationally.  Meanwhile, their inability to cultivate young talent leaves them poorly positioned to weather the generational change at hand.

A feather in her cap, or a fire in her belly?

12 Jun 2014 By in Candidates and Campaigns Tags: , , , , , 7 Comments

hard-choices

A feather in her cap, or a fire in her belly:

Such are the twin engines of a possible Hillary run.

They won’t both fire, though; only one.

If appetite consumed her, she’d have made her decision.

If a feather is her motive, she’ll surely lose.

 

Mrs Clinton is on tour promoting her book Hard Choices
published by Simon and Schuster.