Feminists Melt Down Over Unlikable Hillary Clinton
After months of polls, pontification, and fevered speculation, the Iowa caucuses—and with them, the first official votes of the 2016 presidential primary—are finally in America’s taillights. The biggest loser, at least according to conventional wisdom, might be Donald Trump, who came in second to Ted Cruz, almost lost to Marco Rubio, and eventually erupted in an epic Twitter meltdown, complete with accusations of foul play and a dramatic demand to redo the entire Iowa vote.
But there’s another loser here, one who has long been overshadowed by the media’s love affair with the frenetic Mr. Trump. That would be Hillary Clinton, America’s supposed feminist icon who barely squeaked past wild-eyed, tufty-haired socialist Bernie Sanders. According to the latest counts in Iowa—counts that may yet be challenged by the Sanders camp—Clinton “won” by fewer than four delegates, with the help of at least six coin tosses.
Poor Hillary. She just can’t seem to catch a break. Recall that in 2008, Hillary lost Iowa not only to a young, fresh, and charming Barack Obama. She also lost, albeit by one point, to the very smarmy John Edwards. This time around, when the stars were allegedly cast her way, a whopping 84 percent of Democratic voters under the age of 30 “Felt the Bern,” pulling for Sanders; Hillary, for her part, dominated the senior demographic.
This has led certain feminists to the verge of a nervous breakdown. Why, the chorus goes, is Bernie cast as the future, while Hillary gets painted as “the establishment”? Hillary Clinton is a woman, didn’t you notice? She is by her very nature oppressed; by definition, she cannot be the establishment. Never mind her questionable treatment of the many women who accused her husband of sexual assault; never mind her current classified e-mail quagmire, in which she may have put national security at risk. She is a woman, America. Everything else is chump change.
On Tuesday, Wendy Davis, another national “feminist icon,” sent out a completely crazed pro-Hillary/post-Iowa tweet. You might remember Davis as the Democratic media darling who got creamed in the last Texas gubernatorial race, and who now serves as a slightly unhinged full-time abortion enthusiast, because today’s feminists don’t seem to choose their icons very well. I won't quote Davis’s tweet because it contains the f-bomb, but please know it was written in all capital letters, as most rational thoughts are. It also praises a now-viral feminist Internet rant, which includes the following quote:
“I'M NOT SAYING THERE AREN'T REASONS SOMEONE SHOULD DISLIKE HILLARY OR PREFER BERNIE. THAT IS FINE. THAT IS YOUR JOURNEY. BUT LET'S NOT PRETEND FOR A SECOND THAT THERE WOULD BE *THIS MANY* ISSUES WITH HILLARY IF SHE WAS A [SWEAR WORD] MAN….AND THE THING IS--I LIKE BERNIE! EVERYONE LIKES BERNIE! BECAUSE CRAZY GRANDPA IS TOTALLY ELECTABLE BUT CRAZY GRANDMA NEVER COULD BE. BUT WHY DO WE HAVE TO HATE HER TO SHOW HOW MUCH WE LOVE HIM? SOCIALIST JESUS TAKE THE [F-WORD] WHEEL.”
Well. That seems reasonable. Lest you think we’re lost in the wilds of Political Fringeville, population 2, let’s move to a more mainstream outlet. Here’s Rebecca Traister, writing in New York magazine. The title is indicative: “In Iowa, Hillary Shows She’s Learned Something About Running While Female.”
Hillary’s critics, Traister argues, fall into “a very old, very well-worn gendered pattern,” where women are seen as “know-it-all bores” and “wet blankets.” Bernie, on the other hand, can get away with anything: “The bigger truth is that what Bernie does, to great acclaim, that Hillary Clinton could never do is make big promises of institutional overthrow, tug on our imaginative heartstrings by laying out a future that might not be grounded in reality, and urge a revolution,” she writes. “Here is a truth about America: No one likes a woman who yells loudly about revolution.”
Ah, I see. The problem with Bernie Sanders isn’t that he’s too far left, or that he often miscalculates the cost of his proposals to the tune of billions of dollars, or that he thinks we can somehow provide “free” public college to everyone who wants it, and that people seem to actually think these are good ideas. No, no. Socialism is just grand. It tugs on “our imaginative heartstrings”! The real problem with Bernie Sanders, you see, is that he says things that Hillary can’t get away with, because he’s a man.
Well, hope springs eternal. Perhaps one day, women will throw off their shackles and join men in thrilling young hearts with their calls for socializing the energy sector and full-scale, fiscally unsustainable political revolution. Oh, and while we’re waiting, remind me: Which one is the crazy political party again?