Maybe it would be better to ask this other question, my question: When will we ever get to evaluate a female presidential candidate as just another presidential candidate? We've been nudged too many times to pick the woman because she is a woman. It makes people wary. I mean, really, why was Kamala Harris foisted on us?
So, yeah, she got "whomped." I'm collecting these colorful words that make losing seem violent but also fun. I'm thinking of George W. Bush taking what he called a "thumping" in the 2006 midterms, and Obama, after the 2010 midterms, saying he'd experienced "a shellacking."
Gail Collins is talking about whomping and squashing. Brutal words, but still polite. Euphemisms.
What's the etymology of "whomp"? It's the sound. A heavy, low sound. From the OED, quoting a 1960 issue of New Scientist: "The Sunday edition of the New York Times..whomped to the floor outside my apartment door."
Mga Post
198 komento:
"I mean, really, why was Kamala Harris foisted on us?"
Well, really, it's because she is semi-black and female. To those who say she was unaccomplished: those are accomplishments in leftist-world.
How? By choosing a woman who can handle herself on the world stage. One who doesn’t dance like a teenager when she gets on the stage. Think Margaret Thatcher.
I'm open to the possibility of a female president, but why do we especially need one?
Man up, women!
How do we squash the prejudice against really stupid presidential nominees? I hope we never find a way.
Nominate better candidates and not airheads who accomplished nothing.
The Left has to see everything through the lens of identity.
Nebraska just appointed its first Black Supreme Court Justice. He was well-qualified. Graduate of Omaha's Jesuit high school, deputy county attorney, county court judge and district court judge. Black had nothing to do with his appointment.
Going to post this again.
How about a female candidate who isn't creepy, corrupt or merely a puppet?
i don't know?
Maybe try nominating a woman that ISN'T a cocksucking WHORE?
or one that isn't a criminal that "suicides" people?
A: When we get better candidates? My money’s on the first female President coming from the Republican party. The complainers can’t/won’t even consider it. Want to support a Noem or a Gabbard? Didn’t think so…
"I mean, really, why was Kamala Harris foisted on us?"
Please note: I'm not asking for an explanation. I'm saying Obviously, that's why Kamala Harris was foisted on us.
No need for explanations!
here's a Fun Thought Experiment!
imagine that the Dems had nominated Tulsi Gabbard in 2016?
and again in 2020?
…continuing the wager: to place I choose a dumber, nastier AOC. Think Evita. Gets in under suspicious circumstances…
Tulsi!!
When will the left admit that biological "nature" plays some role instead of prejudice, and that one cannot "nurture" so-called blank slate females to be identical to males? No one today blocks females from being mechanical engineers, construction workers, or locomotive repair staff either. Females tend to choose stereotypically female roles.
Per the military and defense basis of most cultures, a majority of rulers throughout history have been male. Females have been placed in authority per a royal lineage (e.g., Queens Elizabeth I, II, and Victoria), or when they have atypical political skills that go beyond physical strength (e.g., Margaret Thatcher).
When democrats start voting for black women like winsome sears. Until then, their bigotry and racism will stop it.
Simplest answer, 'Nominate a candidate who doesn't suck.'
If that needs more specificity: Try nominating someone who has some actual accomplishments EARNED on her own merit, rather than just credentials.Try nominating someone whose rise was based on successfully performing lower-level jobs rather than someone who was parachuted in at the top because of her relationship with a powerful man. Try someone who can defend her actual positions on political issues in her own words, not reading from a script, and without playing race- or gender-cards.
I just realized that I'm describing Tulsi Gabbard.
Amazing, I actually remember living in a Brooklyn brownstone and the whomp of the Sunday Times hitting the front door. Good times.
Yes tulsi was the only dem primary candidate with grit
Uhhh. Nominate a conservative woman?
"How do we squash the prejudice against female presidential nominees, which has always been with us, but became even worse after Kamala Harris got whomped by Donald Trump?"
What's her evidence that "prejudice against female presidential nominees" is the reason they haven't won yet? A whole lot of men have been nominated who haven't won either.
It reminds me of the tendency of some "feminists" to complain about the fact that there aren't more female CEOs, as if they are entirely unaware that there's only one CEO per company and therefore every man who is not CEO of a company has also been passed over for the job.
Be extraordinary, be excellent, by the metrics that (in this case) the most voters in the right states value, and you'll win. Be noteworthy only for being female and - in the case of Clinton - married to a former president, or - in the case of Harris - starkly manufactured "vibes," and you'll lose. Also, be excellent at things the most voters in the right states don't value, and male or female, you'll also lose, no matter how great you are at the things you're great at.
It’s the policies…
I used to love the Sunday edition. There was so much stuff to peruse.
I’d vote for that economist Larry Summers wants to “bang”
Soviet-Dem Media rules:
All conservative women --> trashed.
All Moronic Puppets who dutifully obey the leftwing machine --> Promoted.
Stop nominating really terrible candidates that are women just because it is "Their turn".
If they wanted a woman they would support Sarah Palin.
They don’t want a woman. They want a corrupt tool that supports predatory men.
And furthermore! I hate it when people go conspiratorial in literally impossible ways - this thing. for instance, where The Patriarchy is to blame for Keeping Women Down in every way including (as referenced above) what professions are considered "stereotypically female." Was there a giant Meeting of Men at some point in the past that determined that being a nurse was insufficiently manly (even though it used to be a majority male profession) but they still needed nurses so they needed to convince (or force) women to take on that role? Where did they meet? Did they elect representative first so things wouldn't get unwieldy? Do they have a newsletter?
Or teachers - same questions.
Or law students, heading toward lawyers (if we're not already at majority-female in the profession of law yet).
Will the only acceptable evidence of anti-female candidate prejudice be when the majority of candidates are female? Because as we see from the Lightbringer and, especially, his wife's harangues, electing a (professed) Black person to the presidency is not enough to prove that anti-Black prejudice has been sufficiently put down.
Easy. If you want to get rid of the supposed "prejudice" against female Presidential candidates, stop running such lousy female candidates. Hillary and Kamala have poisoned the well on that score for a long time.
"How do we squash the prejudice against female presidential nominees
Translation: how do we get the plebs to accept our stupid puppet.
Kristi Noem now has a real shot at the nomination. It's not going to be easy and it will require other favorites dropping out, but it's possible. Assuming she doesn't take a far easier path.
How to make an unqualified woman President? The last shot for that was Hillary Clinton. Now all I have to do is say "she's a woman, she'll get crushed" to dismiss any marginal candidate.
When we stop playing identity politics
that favor: Jews, women, blacks, minorities, etc.
We're not even close... Now we are elevating incompetent white men (Duffy, Hegseth, Vance) because we had a dearth of THEM in past years.
We are nowhere near to a close competition. The people with skills and merit (who refuse to play the game) are sitting on the sidelines laughing and being independent.
You played that game for years, professor. Don't decry it now. Competition will not return until all the Boomers, and their offspring, have left the stage and we demand competence again over "connections."
Ask grok to explain it to you?
"Think Margaret Thatcher."
This is the beginning and the end of this topic, IMO.
Say no more.
I oppose all candidates or appointees who are touted as being gay, Black or female. If that is their selling point, then the person can't be criticized, investigated or removed, as long as they remain gay, Black or female.
I have no problem with candidates or appointees who are gay, Black or female as long as that is incidental to their quality and competence.
We will get a female president when we have a great presidential candidate who is a woman. Does the author have anyone to suggest?
I liked Sarah Palin more than I liked John McCain. Tulsi Gabbard makes so much sense. Condi Rice was very accomplished. I had a crush on Jeanne Kirkpatrick.
Don't offer Hillary Clinton or Kackle-la Harris, then chastise us for being sexist when we aren't impressed.
The real question isn't whether there is prejudice against women candidates; it is "why is this meme suddenly being pushed so hard?" I fear the answer is battleground preparation for an AOC presidential run - the dems really have no one else (male or female) to put up.
Squash is another great word. You can play it, you can eat it, you can do it. Makes me think "casserole". "Squa" is a superb syllable.
How do we squash the prejudice against female presidential nominees
Nominate a candidate who has all the virtues that used to be celebrated as "manly", and are still celebrated by the NYT as long as they can say a woman has them. Nominate someone bold, decisive, courageous; someone with a background as a successful CEO or fighter pilot.
Nominate a guy in a dress. You know they want to.
The first female president will most likely be a Republican.
Kamala was the worst candidate for president in my lifetime. She is a vapid whore who sucked her way to the top. I would happily vote for a woman, if she was the best choice available. That hasn’t happened in my lifetime. Hillary had the background and intellect for the job, but in that case I couldn’t vote for her because I disagreed with her policy positions, so I held my nose and voted for Trump. When Kamala ran I didn’t even need to hold my nose when giving Trump my vote.
In 2008 an acquaintance told me with a straight face that the ONLY reason a person wouldn’t vote for Obama was racism. That anyone might disagree with his proposals and policies was unfathomable.
The more things change the more they stay the same.
"How do we squash the prejudice against female presidential nominees ..."
What does she mean by "we"? Has she got a mouse in her vagina?
Because sex and gender (e.g. sexual orientation, breasts, penis) are qualifying metrics for equity and inclusion, or merit and performance? Trans, perhaps, a homo or sim.
Kamala took a knee to massa Willey's willy. Very Clintonsque. How many women-women... men, perhaps, will follow? #NoJudgment #NoLabels #SomethingSomething
The first woman president will be a male with simulated feminine gender attributes, heterophiliacs.
“How do we squash the prejudice?” It’s always revealing (and damning) when people use words of force when words of persuasion are required.
"I mean, really, why was Kamala Harris foisted on us?"
Or that really, really pathetic female masquerading as a SC justice.
I looked for it, but it wasn't there.
Onomatopoeia 😊
It's not the patriarchy keeping women down. It's just that men are the only alternative to women, so you keep electing men.
"Smash the prejudice." I see no evidence there is a prejudice against female candidates, except for the severely toxic feminist habit of dehumanizing and denying "womanhood" to Republican candidates. But that is Gail's side with the highly prejudicial attitude towards some women candidates.
Look at who the Dems keep talking about. Micchelle Obama, who is both lazy and stupid. And a scold. She is though black and female (maybe). Fucking Dems never learn.
How did "it" (whatever "it" is) get "worse" after Kamala? Just last month two women won governorships, and one ran against another woman to do it. Does recoiling in horror from Kamala's horrible, giggling, fakejoy campaign count as "prejudice" in Ms. Collins' view? If so, what is her evidence that things are worse now than last year?
Oops. Sorry.
To answer her BIG question: The NYT will be last to know where the first woman President will come from because they have trouble even knowing what a woman is.
"How do we squash the prejudice against female presidential nominees, which has always been with us, but became even worse after Kamala Harris got whomped by Donald Trump?"
Asks Gail Collins in a column with a title that asks a different question, "Where, oh Where, Will the First Female President Come From?"
First, define your terms, Gail. What does “Female” mean? But be careful how you answer that at the NYT.
Gail Collins, a world class dingbat, can't understand that Kamala Harris was also a world class dingbat.
@Shoeless Joe: In 2008 an acquaintance told me with a straight face that the ONLY reason a person wouldn’t vote for Obama was racism.
This sort of thinking is common in (simple-minded) bubble communities. I once heard a college student say to a class of 200 that "Everyone earning less than $50K per year must vote Democrat or they are undermining their own interests."
Democrats demand that women reject tradition and fight their own biological tendencies or "biases" --> the simple reason why mental illness is so high among young lefty women.
Kamala and Biden were not very smart. and scary.
I get Gail Collins mixed up with My Little Margie.
Look at who the Dems keep talking about. Micchelle Obama
No dumbass, it is Republicans who keep talking about Michelle Obama. What part of she doesn't want to run don't you understand?
The first female president will most likely be a Republican.
I'm pretty sure it was a Bloom County strip, back in the day, when Jesse Jackson was running for president one of the times. He didn't get nominated, and one of the young liberal characters was bemoaning that fact to a black character. The black character said something along the lines of, "I know, I know, but the first black president is going to be a Republican."
There is no predjudice against women. We simply look around at all the women who have been given some power and see how goddamn awful they are as human beings and we want no part of a country run by one.
You people are lucky we even let you vote, and that's only recently. We should return to how it's ALWAYS been, where women are not allowed to vote because we see what they do when they vote and what they do if one gets even the slightest bit of power.
To wit: Hillary Clinton
There are probably at least 100 million American women who meet the Constitutional requirements to be president. Out of all those women, are Hillary Clinton and Kamala Harris the best we can do? Seriously, Hillary is vile and corrupt, and Harris is an idiot.
Nominate a woman who isn’t vile, corrupt, and/or an idiot who has policies I can support and I’ll give her serious consideration for my vote. Voting for someone just because she’s a woman is just as foolish as voting against someone because she’s a woman.
Leftists are notoriously Diversitist in character. #HateLovesAbortion
How do we squash the prejudice against women in math or chess? Stuff the deep study of which doesn't leave much room for a social life.
Look on the bright side, Gail- when the first woman president is a Republican, you also get the first female Hitler.
Usha Vance 2036
No dumbass, it is Republicans who keep talking about Michelle Obama. What part of she doesn't want to run don't you understand
You might be right* but I seem to recall an internecine Democrat fight over "She's perfect!" and "She doesn't want to run!" Could be a Mandela situation on my part, though.
* Certainly there were highly placed Republicans (of the old guard) who expressed great fear that she would run because she would self-evidently be "unbeatable." I wonder whether, given her podcast and her book and her press tour, they still believe that.
"How do we squash the prejudice against female presidential nominees,"
Well, you need to get an actually worthwhile nominee who get the position because of her ability, NOT because she provided sex to a male politician, or just because she's female.
IOW, you need a Republican female, because Democrats lack even the concept of indiviudal merit
doctrev said...
Kristi Noem now has a real shot at the nomination.
No, she doesn't. She flunked out on keeping men out of women's sports, and completely killed her ability to get voted upwards, ever again
Yancey Ward said...
Gail Collins, a world class dingbat, can't understand that Kamala Harris was also a world class dingbat.
Good point, hat I hadn't considered. Perhaps Gail Collins really is too stupid to understand the problem with Harris's candidacy
Wasn't Kamala expressly nominated as VP candidate because she was brown and female? They got Democrats to believe that bullsh*t, apparently, but after 4 under-achieving disappointing years, the country wasn't ready to vote decisively for a brown female that had proven to have no other redeeming qualities. Yet quite a few voted for her - and Tim.
Trust the disingenuous to paint this as a prejudice against female candidates. I suppose it makes sense, as long as you accept the outrageous presupposition that one should vote for a Presidential candidate only because she's brown and female. That's the real issue here: We didn't do as we were told.
Duh. Condoleezza Rice.
Fredo rewriting history again. Many, many Democrats wanted Michelle to get the nomination last year when Joe Biden's cadaver was kicked off the ticket- it was her's for the taking but she disappointed all those Democrats who, like Freder, are probably saying it was just sour grapes anyway.
More fun metaphors for political defeat:
Booty-judge: Man, I really took it up the ass on that one!
Kommie-lay: Wow, that was a hell of a pounding.
Newscum/American Psycho: Holy crap, that congressional election was a serial killing!
JD Vance: Jeez, that one just left me on the couch for a while.
Bill Clinton: Man, that election just blew.
Vivek: I don't know what went wrong. I'm calling tech support.
Biden: Huh?
CC, JSM
One who doesn’t dance like a teenager when she gets on the stage.
It's not the dancing. Trump dances. It's that he can switch it off and speak seriously while Harris did not seem able to. Her attempts to speak seriously all came off as role playing to me. Perhaps it is due to bias on my part (her nasally voice is off-putting), but I really think it's that while she looked serious and her tone was serious, her words were repetitions and rewordings of half-formed ideas - the nonsensical utterings of someone trying to sound smart and informed but not succeeding.
Why in the hell should we yearn for a woman president?
Doesn’t make any difference to me.
The first female president will be Donetta Trump in 2029. She will defeat any Constitutional arguments against a third term with "don't deadname me! Who's Donald?" She will keep the same hair, makeup and clothes - if anyone complains, she will hold up a picture of Rachel Maddow. Then as a Sapphic predator, she will fill the WH with beauty pageant contestants shamed out of rejecting her advances. There will be much rejoicing. CC, JSM
Select candidates that aren't obnoxious jerks.That would help too. Just saying.
Hillary is simply horrible at retail politics. She is a perfect example of anti-charisma. And outside of being the most corrupt first lady in US history she has no accomplishments. And she was the one who wanted to run against Trump. A Wiley E., Coyote move right there. And Kamala was just ridiculous.
What part of she doesn't want to run don't you understand?
Tell 'em, Fredo! It doesn't get any clearer than this:
Meet the Press: "So you will not run for President or Vice President?"
Obama: "I will not."
Simple, clear, concise, - and oh hold on said by Barack Obama in 2006.
Why wasn't Kamala Harris the first female President? Because Joe Biden didn't resign after deciding to bail out of the 2024 election (or even earlier…).
We’ll get a woman President when they stop campaigning “as a woman.”
In the meantime, perhaps they should employ biologists to review past Presidents to see if we’ve already had one.
After Biden, Collins thinks any ol’ woman could do the job just as competently. And she’s right about that.
"Freder Frederson said...
Look at who the Dems keep talking about. Micchelle Obama
No dumbass, it is Republicans who keep talking about Michelle Obama. What part of she doesn't want to run don't you understand?"
I understand Feder. I gave you the fucking reasons. She's lazy (main reason) and stupid (she may be too stupid to understand how stupid she is.)
"ObeliskToucher said...
Why wasn't Kamala Harris the first female President? Because Joe Biden didn't resign after deciding to bail out of the 2024 election (or even earlier…)."
Joe Biden didn't decide to bail it. It was a coup.
Give us better candidates than Hillary Clinton and Kamala Harris, both fundamentally unelectable candidates with grating personalities, amoral characters, and a whole lot of political baggage. Expect both Hillary and Kamala to pop-up in Epstein email dumps, Hillary as a primary player, Kamala as mere arm-candy for Epstein buddies.
You're going to get whomped when someone opens up a can of whoop ass.
“Quiet Piggy” ~ Donald Trump
Sounds like a man who really cares about women…
There are two ways sexism in voters would present itself - an increased motive to vote when the OTHER party nominates a woman, and a decreased motive to vote when YOUR party nominates a woman.
There was not a significant increase in votes for Trump when his opponent was a woman. However, there was a noticable DECREASE in Democratic votes when their candidate was a woman.
Conclusion: To whatever extent voter sexism played a role in the outcomes of the last three elections, it was sexism among Democratic party voters, NOT Republicans.
kak-a-troll
Trump's family - including his grand-daughters - all adore him.
but you can't see that from inside your retard bubble.
There is something incongruous about 'a first' that has next to nothing to do with the job. The more we focus on it, the more the elephant grows.
It makes less sense than the now defamed 'affirmative action'. At least with 'affirmative action' it was something meant to advantage an entire race of people. The 'affirmative action' towards one woman, because she's a woman, seems less than fair. What about all the other women that are not going to be first?
It's a mockery. Not to be taken seriously.
Condi Rice???
I guess if you think of the POTUS as a person who takes orders from whatever cabal is really running the country, then you may as well pick any pretty woman with decent people skills, who knows how not to piss people off unnecessarily, as anybody else.
italics! oh no
If you want a woman to win pick a nominee who got there without getting on her back to advance her political career. It's Hilary who? If she didn't put up with Bill's philandering, and it's Kamala who? if she didn't get busy with Willie Brown.
"No dumbass, it is Republicans who keep talking about Michelle Obama."
Actually it seems to be mainly Michelle Obama who keeps talking about Michelle Obama. The poor oppressed mega-millionaire.
robother said...
Amazing, I actually remember living in a Brooklyn brownstone and the whomp of the Sunday Times hitting the front door. Good times.
**************
I'm reminded of the Times every time my trousers slip off their hanger in the closet, which humorist Russell Baker described as "the soft plop of falling clothes."
Race and gender it's not suppose to matter so much, until it is everything, apparently.
We are supposedly so advanced, we are creating "artificial intelligence".
Maybe that's why we need AI. WE ARE STUCK ON... I hate the s word.
Turn off the italics! I'm starting to lean right every time I try to read a comment.
italics are off!
The first woman who will be elected president will (a) have a similar mien to Margaret Thatcher, (b) will eschew vocal fry, and (c) will have a record of accomplishment in something that matters. I would wager this person is already out there.
Doesn’t “whomp” hav some military origin?
Dems chose as female candidates a criminal and a nitwit. Top to bottom that’s what they have. Credit where it’s due, TDS exacerbates pre-existing lunacy, but my gosh, look at them. Republican women in politics and elsewhere seem less daffy and crooked.
"From the OED, quoting a 1960 issue of New Scientist: 'The Sunday edition of the New York Times..whomped to the floor outside my apartment door.'"
1960? More like 1860, or 1760 from the backwoods of colonial Pennsylvania. What's up with the OED? It's like they're not even trying anymore. Have they gone woke? What they need is another paranoid schizophrenic in the research department.
Where, oh where, are you tonight?
Why did you leave me here all alone?
I searched the world over and I thought I'd found true love.
But you met another and pthhp! You was gone.
Ladies, good news is someday soon we'll have a female president. Bad news is she'll have a penis and a five-o'clock shadow.
Mr D: "The first woman who will be elected president will (a) have a similar mien to Margaret Thatcher, (b) will eschew vocal fry, and (c) will have a record of accomplishment in something that matters."
Sarah Huckabee Sanders? CC, JSM
When tulsi gave up the quixotic nomination ahe did something useful like train with kopassus commandos
When Michael Dukakis ran for president, I read that a lot of Greek-Americans gave him money so he could erase the memory of the previous highest-ranked Greek-American politician, Spiro Agnew. As if any non-Greek gave a damn about Agnew’s ethnicity! The first woman president will be the first woman who runs and is qualified to win, in character, experience, and political-ethical principles. No one except her opponents will care about her gender. Like Thatcher.
"The first woman who will be elected president will (a) have a similar mien to Margaret Thatcher, (b) will eschew vocal fry, and (c) will have a record of accomplishment in something that matters. I would wager this person is already out there."
Whoever she is, she's probably too smart to want the job.
Try running a personable, qualified woman. Condi Rice could have won if she had been willing to put up with the aggravation.
Howard said...
You're going to get whomped when someone opens up a can of whoop ass.
11/18/25, 12:04 PM
"LOIS WHY DID YOU EVEN BUY THIS?"
"IT WAS ON SALE!"
Here is a long shot suggestion - Joni Ernst becomes JD Vance’s VP in 2029. They lose the re-election in 2032. After a disastrous four year term by Cory Booker and Pete Buttiboy, Ernst runs at the top of the ticket and wins in 2036.
Margaret Thatcher ("Attila the Hen") took voice lessons to lower her voice pitch.
whomp: "Artillery Lends Dignity to What Otherwise Would Be a Common Brawl"
“Sounds like a man who really cares about women…”
Stick a cigar in that oozing gob of yours, kak.
Quiet, Kaki
Hitler never called a female journalist a pig to her face. It’s time for these fascist comparisons to stop.
Dems think reptilians like witch hochul or gruesome gretchen are the answer to what question
@Kaki --- correction "Democrats working with Jeffrey Epstein are now trying to say..."
After years of asking "What is a woman?" it seems the Right needs to be asked "What is a child?"
MAGA supporters are now trying to say Ephebophilia isn't bad.
"How do we squash the prejudice against female presidential nominees, which has always been with us, but became even worse after Kamala Harris got whomped by Donald Trump?"
Rather than assume prejudice, why not notice the obvious reason the two women who were nominated lost?
Hillary Clinton has some talent, but she had three very large barriers to overcome:
1. She is the most polarizing and evil politician in a generation, or two.
2. It's not impossible, but it is rare for one party to win three presidencies in a row and she came on the heels of two Obama terms.
3. It's a bad look for the first woman president to have gained her fame by being married to a man who was elected to that office.
For Harris, you don't need much of a list--she simply has never demonstrated any talent (salient to the job).
Cleanup aisle 12
Try diversity of individuals, minority of one. Men and women are equal in rights and complementary in Nature. Lose your progressive prejudice, your liberal bigotry, your Pro-Choice religion. #HateLovesAbortion
Maybe Gail Collins should be promoting Nikki Haley if she wants a female president. Though somehow I doubt she ever would.
Pig is not dignified - I agree. I wish Trump would cut it out.
But it's name-calling. so what? Considering all the horrible things you Democratic-leftists call Trump - Like 'Fascist" and "Hitler" - the types of things that inspire violence - you may STFU.
Epstein is progressives' #MeTooTwo, the pedo leg of the liberal triad.
Summer chomski after a while you should give up the chase
Sex is not a disqualifier, but, ironically, gender (i.e. sex-correlated attributes) may be a qualifier.
Y'all be patient. Alexandria's coming.
King outranks queen, Kamala got trumped by Donald. Diversitist? Maybe, baby, not.
Anyone who does not recognize that Harris received far more votes because of her sex and ethnicity than she lost because of those qualities is as dumb as Gail Colins.
I would have voted for Condoleeza Rice in a heart beat. Same goes for Sarah Palin and Tulsi Gabbard. If you ran any one of those against Joe Biden or John Kerry they'd have walked over him in a heart beat.
For decades, I really tried to (and still mostly do try to) read the current day paper version of the NYT once a week. Just because! The drift over the past couple of years to centering in the Op/Ed page the discussion commentary between Gail Collins and Bret Stephens as THE lead content for that page has really, really diminished the value of the whole paper.
First of all, neither of them is really that interesting and secondly, even if they were, you couldn't even take the time to actually write up the lead Op/Ed article?
Its like the kirkpatrick/alexander mock debate in airplane but worse
What's the evidence of bias against women presidential nominees? Sure there are some people who won't vote for a woman, but there are also people that will explicitly for a female candidate. Which way does it go on net? Beats me. Was Obama helped or hurt by being black? I bet it helped him on net.
The big fight within the Democratic Party going back decades has been a lot less about message and more about organizational structure and control.
Is the party rooted in local communities and does its policy program come from its voters, or is the party simply a middle manager for wealthy donor interests who set the policy agenda?
The realm of choice in U.S. elections is usually reduced to social policy, because the same group of rich donors tend to dictate the terms of the debate on economic and foreign policy for both major parties. On economic issues and foreign policy voters only tend to have marginal influence.
Only on very rare occasions are candidates able to break through and force the party to at least publicly re-calibrate its position on issues of critical importance to voters. e.g. U.S. support for Israel, or universal health care -- two major issues in recent years.
It is worth recalling 20+ years ago that there was an overwhelming bipartisan consensus that we needed to invade Iraq in order to find "WMDs". At that time there was majority support for the policy at the level of public opinion, but overwhelming support by federal elected officials. The national media was also willing to torch its credibility at the time, effectively serving as a propaganda arm of the state, rather than critically examining the case for war.
Clinton and Harris both lost on merit, not because they were women.
This a positive development for women and society.
Dems prefer kompromat candidates as hillary would have been same with kamala
You just want to be known as the one who put the "whomp" in the "thumping, shellacking, whomping and squashing."
The first woman president would have to be one who has little in common with the current female Democratic Congressional delegations. For the foreseeable future, people will vote for change if it's put in a more reliable and traditional package. The doesn't mean that a Democrat or Republican woman couldn't break with the mold of current AWFL Democrat women.
They want a figurehead like sheinbaum someone useless to the average citizens concerns
Is the theory of getting a female President based on pussy or brain wiring?
“Whomping,” “Squashing,” Thumping,” “Shellacking.” Now we see the violence inherent in the system!
Palin proved her mettle as governor, and had the spirit, energy, and charisma to lead. She did not indulge or languish in Diversity (i.e. class-disordered ideologies).
AI for President.
Chinese Spy Forged New York Governor’s Signature to Cozy Up to Beijing — And the Media Is Silent – Twitchy https://share.google/Vv6rpBXeDjBA2JeE5 exhibit a
https://x.com/mattdizwhitlock/status/1990884468274389357
They hang together
Our first female president is likely to be a Republican. First, it has a better bench. But just as importantly she would get the nomination because the party thinks she’s best, not because she’s a woman, which invariably is a critical part of the Dem calculus.
""How do we squash the prejudice against female presidential nominees, which has always been with us..."
"Us"? Why are you prejudiced against female presidential nominees, Gail? You could start there...
Lazarus said...
You just want to be known as the one who put the "whomp" in the "thumping, shellacking, whomping and squashing."
************
What I wanna know is, "Who put the bomp in the bomp-she bomp-she bomp, who put the ram in the ramalama dingdang?"
Never agree to talk to hack Katie Couric(D) - she dined with Epstein.
"So, yeah, she got 'whomped.'"
Better descriptor is Schlonged - that's what happened to Hillary way back in November 2016. Donald said so.
That was nicolle wallaces doing speaking of slithy toves
No dumbass, it is Republicans who keep talking about Michelle Obama.
It wasn't Republicans who ran that snarling bitch out there to complain about why she has to straighten her hair. Dumbass.
Or why we're not good enough for a woman president. Dumbass.
Or how those poor Obamas never received the grace other first couples were granted. Dumbass.
Or why she felt so put off having to purchase her own food while spending eight years in the White House. Dumbass.
It was her. Hawking another worthless book.
Dumbass.
Tulsi would get my vote in a heartbeat. It takes courage to stand up to your party and tell them they are wrong. She is more centrist, which aligns with my beliefs. Sadly a pro-choice candidate will never get the republican nod. Single issue politics sucks.
Hitler never called a female journalist a pig to her face. It’s time for these fascist comparisons to stop.
Gotta give you credit Kak. That’s a TDS, “He’s literally Hitler!” sweepstakes winner. Facial comparisons are clearly the work of fascists. Er… Nazi’s. Nice how you got both in there.
I've never heard of a "whomping." I have heard of a whooping.
Biden: “Listen, fat”
Trump: “Quiet, piggy”
Just following the established norms. CC, JSM
"Peachy said...
Never agree to talk to hack Katie Couric(D) - she dined withEpstein."
Maybe she wanted some young lesbo snatch.
Interesting that resident Althouse lefties won’t address the issue and use namecalling.
lKevin said...
We’ll get a woman President when they stop campaigning “as a woman.”
@Kevin, very well put. It will help Gail Collins and other arrogant elitists of that ilk to realize that conservative and independent female voters are not stupid and have absolutely noticed that calls for female solidarity only come when the female on the ticket is a Democrat. Otherwise it’s “Not our kind, dear.”
Sort of like a certain former President who scolded black men that they needed to vote for the black woman during the 2024 election, but the same former President was telling the same black men to vote against the black woman in Virginia in 2025.
Methinks WHOMP is the sound of takedown on a wrestling mat. Human bodies are full of water with some bones for structural reasons. They go whomp when encountering the floor.
And Dems are back to “knowing what a woman is”.
I will never be too cynical or disgusted by the contemptible, manipulative people leading the Democrat party.
Spurred by these comments, I looked into this 'Quiet Piggie' tempest-in-a-teapot. There are lots of breathless stories in all the usual hair-on-fire sites - in print. There are also 2 things that aren't easy to find. A video clip of the actual exchange, and the reporter's name. There's a curious anonymous cover being provided. I wanted to know, in case her name is really Peggy, because if there's one thing I know for certain, there is no depths to which our beloved press won't stoop. The reporter's name is Catherine Lucey, AP Whitehouse correspondent. She was being obnoxious. I'm glad Trump put her in her place and hope he continues. Riding on AF1 is a privilege, not a right.
Excellent Sleuthing, Aggie.
Epstein bill passes 427-1 in the House and with unanimous consent in the Senate.
The Jewish woman who restores New York after the Mamdani destruction
or
The woman, a veteran, who takes Portland from the crazies
or
The woman who ends homelessness in California
If McCain hadn't decided to ignore his VP candidate and instead had run with her, we might have had our first female president.
The people pushing for a woman president because she's a woman won't be satisfied with a woman who is a Republican.
The huntress as roger kimball dubbed her, did not have the guile to succeed in higher office look who does rise from the briny debts
"How do we squash the prejudice against female presidential nominees”
Should we not say quash instead of squash? Wouldn’t that be the Ivy League thing to say? As well as proper usage. I find myself surrounded by illiterates.
I always figured that Condoleeza Rice could have made a good run at the Presidency.
Harris, a woman who had few qualifications and who completely failed in her 2016 attempt for the Democratic nomination, was clearly picked by Biden for VP to pander for the female and black votes. She was then shoehorned into the 2024 Democratic nomination through a terribly undemocratic process; Biden having bowed out, he essentially appointed her as his successor. He short-circuited any possibility of using an actual democratically representative process in an open Democrat convention. The first time anyone got to cast a vote for her was in the actual general election. That hasn't happened for decades. Maybe if she'd had to go through the convention process it would have been different.
If the Democrats want to get a female candidate elected President, they could try not telling people they were sexist and racist (depending on her skin color) if they don't vote for her and instead have her run on the policies she proposes and her experience in public office.
I believe the word you are looking for is onomatopoeia.
Merriam-Webster says first know use was 1926.
The next woman the Democrats nominate will be able to write their name in the snow.
The more important question is how did someone of such limited ability and intellect ever get so close to the job?
Answer: Democrats have no standards, and if they did, they would happily abandon them anyway.
I used to bullseye whomp-rats in my T-16 back home.
They're not much bigger than two meters.
Use your "insect politics" twice in one day. "Shellac" is the resin from the lac insect.
“I believe the word you are looking for is onomatopoeia.
Merriam-Webster says first know use was 1926.”
I said the Ivy League sense, quash is to suppress, squash is a physical act.
Quash means (1) to set aside or annul by judicial action, and (2) to suppress forcibly and completely.
As a verb, squash means to beat, squeeze, press, or crush something into a flattened mass. As a noun it denotes the family of tendril-bearing plants with leathery rinds and edible fruit, while squash is also racket game played in a closed-walled court with a rubber ball.
He serious voter cares about the sex of the candidate. I voted for Winsome Sears, even though I knew she'd lose.
I think our first female president will be a Republican.
If the media actually gave a shit about the importance of a woman president, they would have been a lot nicer to Sarah Palin and her family.
If the media is in an introspective mood, it might take a look at all the sexism and hatred that was heaped upon Palin, and which party produced all that sexism and hatred.
Our society discriminates when we only require men to register for the draft, and we never require women to do so.
On some level, we want to protect women from warfare and keep them out of combat roles.
The president of the USA is commander-in-chief of the military. You can't really have a woman in charge of our military, while protecting women from combat and saying that is something they can't handle.
Schumerd.
"How" you ask?
Get someone smart and not obviously a crook (the last two did not pass those requirements).
I'd also get someone who was chosen through democratic means rather than "appointed" by the Uniparty. It just looks better that way.
bagoh20 said...
"The next woman the Democrats nominate will be able to write their name in the snow."
Thread winner!
"How do we squash the prejudice against female presidential nominees”
Find one who can walk and chew gum at the same time
Throughout history, for better or worse, wives have greatly influenced presidents and quietly served as their proxies. I think Kelly Loeffler would be a great president and also a few other women. Not panderer Condoleeza Rice. We should be done with the Bush cabal.
I also think many male presidents have sucked, and the male-only commenters have to acknowledge that. I think Melania Trump, though technically disqualified by birth, would be quite interesting.
Stick with me here, but maybe... just maybe she got "whomped" because her ideas were bad and she was a bad candidate.
Meanwhile, the dullest woman at the NYT really has only one task: convincing David Brooks that it is 1825 as she loads him and his vestjacket into the carriage for his daily ride through Central Park. Maureen Dowd has the crueler task of convincing him that cars and the internet don't exist.
Schlonged … that’s the word.
Had Condi Rice run as VP or even for President I would have crawled a mile over broken glass to vote for her. Compare and contrast Condi Rice with US Communist Party member Angela Davis, a 1980s candidate. I find it odd that this recent female candidate is ignored in this report despite her obvious ideological comparisons with both Hillary! and Kamala!.
In short, don't run hoes like the batshit crazy wife of a serial adulterer politician, or a lifelong, serial diversity selection of only one proven skill, who started her serial-sinecure career in politics on her knees servicing Willie Brown.
President Sydney Sweeney.
rhhardin notes that the Iron Maiden, a politician, took lessons to modulate her voice to a lower pitch, for better public speaking. I got the same advice a week ago from YouTube on a short video about salesmanship and speaking with customers. Next up, what commenter will note that water is wet?
President Sydney Sweeney
She does wear her genes well.
"I also think many male presidents have sucked, and the male-only commenters have to acknowledge that."
I don't think anybody would deny that's true.
On the other hand, did any of those male presidents that sucked have supporters saying that people should vote for them anyway, because they're men?
Kakistocracy said...
Hitler never called a female journalist a pig to her face.
No one gives a shit, Kak.
VA Dem AG called for a Republican legislator to be murdered for the crime of disagreeing with him, and wanted his kids murdered too.
Dem voters didn't have a problem with that, and neither did even ONE VA Dem politician.
No one gives a shit if Trump calls some POS left wing female (how do you know she's female, are you a biologist?) "journalist" a "pig".
Did he murder her? No? Then no one cares.
BTW, Hitler murdered them, which was the problem. Not any name calling.
Mag-post ng isang Komento
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 2 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith.