They’re not correct that the rest of the country bounced back, though. They just don’t care about or stop to consider all the other people who also didn’t—poor and middle class people of every variety, not just their own.

She was not nominated just because she’s a woman. God, do people not realize how sexist that is? It’s possible to be angry that she was the candidate without perpetuating that nonsense.

You didn’t actually read the comments if you think people were primarily taking issue with their lack of enthusiasm.

Or, it’s possible that the person who wrote this thinks voting for the first major-party candidate who is both a woman and the better choice out of the two people who could win is...the right time, even if she’s not perfect?

“Other people do better than me, which is somehow still proof that I’m better than them.”

Yeah, pretty sure it’s not the opinions themselves she found navel-gazing, but the way they chose to word/present them.

Yeah, you did do a bad job. You’re also reacting in a very telling way to a comment that seems to mostly take issue with the navel-gazing in many of the explanations in the article.

Exactly. People think they’re being extra progressive when they claim Hillary is a Republican/far right/whatever, but what they’re actually doing is erasing the existence/experiences of the tens (heck, hundreds) of millions of people whose lives and circumstances prove that’s not true.

The comment I replied to is a list you wrote of how many of them are voting Clinton. Because you thought that fact disproved the initial commenter’s point.

I wanted to be like...center-right of what? You, the object around which the rest of the universe orbits? Because while I too would like the left to shift lefter in this country, I’m not such an egomaniac as to pretend the ideal universe that exists in my head is everyone else’s reality.

It’s amazing how many people seem to think that they, specifically, are noteworthy for having misgivings about both candidates in a presidential election. As if most people haven’t felt that way in most elections for all of time. Especially since most people in this country, prior to the past 8 years or so, haven’t…

There probably hasn’t been, but ask ‘em if they’ve ever spent this much time talking about the inadequacy of the two-party system or how both candidates are bad, and the answer to that one would definitely be no.

Can you read? That comment didn’t say none of the dudes are voting for Clinton.

Better than who, though? Because it kind of seems like you just want to feel like you’re better than these people. Nobody’s stopping you from “being better,” however that may look for you.

LOL. I agree with plenty of people—just not sexist dudes on the internet who think they have important takes on women and misogyny.

My mother spent her college years fighting to get her school to allow women to wear pants to dinner, have no “curfew” like the men, and smoke cigarettes standing up (the reasons for that rule still escape me). I’m so excited that she got to vote for a woman today, and I know she’s over the moon that I got that chance,…

Maybe next time do your part by resisting the urge to comment, “I bet it was the ugly ones who were pissed” on an article like this.

Nah, still works. You’re denying existence of institutionalized sexism and its consequences. Not acknowledging how sexism shapes events that otherwise seem the same, and claiming that the real sexism comes from those who do so, is...exactly what I said.

I don’t know what you’re saying “exactly” to. I’m disputing your notion that attractive women conveniently love being disrespected, and it’s only the ugly ones who are killing the guys’ good time.

It’s a good thing I wasn’t surprised, and that it being surprising wasn’t the issue I raised, then.