Here’s another thing that boggles my mind: Almost nobody seems to be talking about WHERE the candidates are doing well. Can anybody who actually understands the electoral college system in America honestly look at this map and still think that HRC is “more electable” than Sanders against a Republican?

I want a competent, ethical president of either gender. But Elizabeth Warren would make a far better president than a moderate (hopefully) Republican like Hillary.

Unlike a lot (I mean A LOT) of voters, I have no shame in saying that HRC’s being a woman is part of the reason I want her to be president. There’s nothing wrong with that! We’re half the freaking population! I (and other HRC supporters) wouldn’t ever vote for Michele Bachmann, or Sarah Palin, or Carly Fiorina. But in…

It’s like you didn’t read a word I said.

I know that if all 125k disenfranchised primary voters had been able to vote it probably would have split at best 50/50. That said.

If experience were a meaningful metric for electability and performance, explain Obama. The entire point of a cabinet is that the president is not omnicompetent.

Women come into the game with a lack of military experience?

You want foreign policy experience?

No woman has the experience in regime change failure quite like Warhawk Hillary. This is not exactly the foreign policy “experience” voters see as a positive.

Yea... I don’t like her “foreign policy experience”

What a bullshit question. There is a wealth of women in politics with the experience to be leaders besides Clinton. But you specifically want “experience at war”. Welp, our hands our tied.

As a woman and a feminist I will not elect someone based solely on their gender. It would be nice to have a female president, but I will take a male president with whom I agree with on issues over a female president I do not.

I think a major issue here is that a big sticking point in the pro-Hillary camp is her “foreign policy experience,” yet, as an anti-war progressive, I’m looking for people who’s idea of foreign policy isn’t a broken record of regime change and US intervention. As we’ve seen with Libya, Honduras, the drone wars in…

It has nothing to do with her gender; it has everything to do with how “unlikable” she is. I get that this may be bullshit but you cannot argue with the polls and the fact that Bernie shows better against both Trump and Cruz than Hillary does. While it is high time we have a woman President, it is far more important…

I assume you threw foreign policy experience in there because you want the answer to be “no one but Hillary”? None of our last three presidents had extensive foreign policy experience prior to taking office.

How about you just accept that having an ethical president with good judgment is more important than having a female president? If there are no candidates in the pipeline (which I don’t accept) lets address that. But don’t use “Hillary is our only shot” as a step up to the bully pulpit.

agreed, it’s not like “this is our last chance!” and “she’s the best we got!” are making me want to vote for her.

Name something that’s factually incorrect.

She needs to be made out to be somehow responsible because she is famous, female, (and Black), I guess? Like, since she hasn’t called a press conference and denounced her brother as no longer her family (because that’s apparently the only proper reaction) that must mean she condones child rape. Or something like that.

Are you that.... whatever? You deserve any shit you get for your comment.