It's only been three hundred and something years... we can't be precipitous about these things.
More seriously, though, on reflection I'm not sure that Hilary would have been as good as Obama, either on electability nor on desirability grounds. Just because she has ovaries does not necessarily mean she would have as progressive as is needed.
And I think you would agree that Sarah Palin's ovaries in the Oval Office chair would have been an unmitigated disaster.
Palin's ovaries would have been just as big a disaster as Bush's dick and other dicks before his. But as for Hilary..did you study her website when she was still running? She's actually FAR more progressive than Obama on many matters. Barack is a centrist Democrat, leaning slightly to the conservative side of center.
Don't get me wrong, I wanted him to win, but I think your evaluation on Hilary is only right on one matter, which is electability, Obama has always been far more electable than Clinton.
Hilary had her name (rightfully) and her gender (wrongfully) against her, and that, with the "help" of an inferior campaign (compared to Obama's) was just a tad bit too much.
if you check her out for real, not just the media buzz, you'll notice that she is one of the more leftist and progressive politicians that America of today could present, her health care package was for instance a lot better than Barack's. I do hope he gives her a nice position in the administration, not because of her gender, but because she's actually that good. Personally I'd love to see her in the Supreme Court. She'd shake up those old mummies in there right and good.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2008-11-05 09:36 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-11-05 10:14 am (UTC)Indeed. But They Were Terrible Presidents!
Date: 2008-11-05 10:39 am (UTC)I'm happy it happened, but
Date: 2008-11-05 01:14 pm (UTC)Re: I'm happy it happened, but
Date: 2008-11-05 07:41 pm (UTC)More seriously, though, on reflection I'm not sure that Hilary would have been as good as Obama, either on electability nor on desirability grounds. Just because she has ovaries does not necessarily mean she would have as progressive as is needed.
And I think you would agree that Sarah Palin's ovaries in the Oval Office chair would have been an unmitigated disaster.
2012, 2016?
did you ever read up on her?
Date: 2008-11-05 08:04 pm (UTC)Don't get me wrong, I wanted him to win, but I think your evaluation on Hilary is only right on one matter, which is electability, Obama has always been far more electable than Clinton.
Hilary had her name (rightfully) and her gender (wrongfully) against her, and that, with the "help" of an inferior campaign (compared to Obama's) was just a tad bit too much.
if you check her out for real, not just the media buzz, you'll notice that she is one of the more leftist and progressive politicians that America of today could present, her health care package was for instance a lot better than Barack's. I do hope he gives her a nice position in the administration, not because of her gender, but because she's actually that good. Personally I'd love to see her in the Supreme Court. She'd shake up those old mummies in there right and good.
(no subject)
Date: 2008-11-06 01:00 am (UTC)But yes. Good to see. Here's hoping he lives up to at least half of the hope that's being thrown in his direction.