Could someone provide a psychological profile of the Obama-hating/McCain-neutral women who refuse to concede Obama's victory? Does it have to do with his race? Does it involve the fact that his wife is attractive and successful? These women seem to forget the fact that McCain laughed with a female supporter who called HRC the "B" word. They seem to forget that the Obamas clearly have the kind of personal and political partnership that we hoped at one point that the Clintons had. They forget that his feminist aspirations are firmly tied to his hopes for his young daughters.

Obama is the candidate that they are looking for!

No, I think everyone just hates to lose. What I don't understand is why the angry Clintonites don't see how getting a minority into the Whitehouse for the first time in history opens the door for other minorities. Many Western Democracies have elected women leaders and it will happen when the right woman comes along. I can't think of any that have elected a black President/Prime Minister. As such this is a bigger step for equal rights then electing a woman.

I also think the "sexist" accusations against Barack do not ring true. Maybe his staff or the pundits brought that into a discussion but I think Obama did a good job of downplaying the race and sex issues across the board. He won on his charisma, which is what it takes in this country. Hopefully he'll win and excel as a President.

You don't get it and that is precisely why Obama is having problems with some women.

Obama is not the candidate they are looking for. In fact he is their recurring nightmare; Obama represents the guy who was promoted over them because he was smooth, cool, etc. not because he did the hard work, paid his dues, and yes, waited his turn.

A lot of women had to live through that and, rightly or wrongly, they actually empathize with Clinton and feel what she is going through.

These women did the work for their daughters, they don't need Obama to do it for them.

You don't get it either. HRC didn't do that much 'hard work'.

Yes, HRC Clinton is well known BUT mostly because of her association with the former President. She was only the WIFE of a President.

Your entire point appears to be that HRC paid her dues and thus she deserved to head the ticket. There are OTHER WOMEN that have paid more dues than HRC. Did you complain about these women getting passed by? NO!

I do agree with you on one thing; I sure many Dem pols from all genders are wondering 'how in the hell did that Obama guy pass us by'. You know people like Edwards, Kerry, Pelosi, etc.....

So it is understandable why many Dem pols would feel Obama leap froged them and that isn't fair,, the Dem party should of supported them.

BUT HRC is just another one of these Dem Pols. She was any MORE deserving than any of these others based on paying ones dues.

Its nobody's "turn" to be president, and the fact that Hillary and her supporters think it was her "turn" underscores why she lost, and deserved to lose.


And being married to the president isn't "paying dues." Having a senate seat handed to you because you're married to the president isn't doing the hard work. And sending 4000 servicemen and women to die has consequences.


But I love how you just assume that anytime a woman loses to a man its because he's "smooth" and not because he is a better candidate. Obama (and his supporters) out-planned, out-fought, and out-WORKED Hillary and beat her fair and square.

I am not speaking for myself, I am speaking of what I have heard from a lot of other women, especially those who are seniors. These women would have had the same reaction to any qualified woman who had done so well in the campaign, though at this time there aren't any Democratic women on the national stage who could have pulled off what she did.

I think Obama is an empty suit but I will vote for him before I vote for McCain.

I believe there are many Dem women that are most qualified than HRC but they were ignored because their HUSBAND wasn't the former President.

In other words HRC 'pulled off what she did' mainly because of her HUSBAND. These other Dem women have a lot more expereince and abilty than HRC (and Obama also).

In other words the most qualified PERSON is NOT heading the ticket but it is silly to say that HRC was the most qualified and she isn't heading the ticket because she is a women (what these senior women are saying, but not you, I guess).

You are on target here! On target! The only somewhat legit beef one can make about Obama is that he passed by many Dem pols that HAD really paid their dues (Richardson, Biden, Edwards, etc....) but HRC is NOT one of these Pols.

In other words Obama did jump ahead of the line, big time! But the Dem voters have spoken. Time to beat McBush!

Give it up - I preferred Clinton based on my judgement of the candidates, you preferred Obama based on yours. It's OK that we don't agree, but I wish this blog didn't treat Clinton supporters like MORONS.

This is politics - think Change is a Concept invented by Obama? Even television lampooned change politics: There’s a scene in an episode of Cheers where Frasier, who has conned Woody into running for City Council, gives advice to Woody about his upcoming performance in a televised debate. It goes something like this: “Just tell one of those farm stories that everyone is so fond of and if that doesn’t work, just mention CHANGE about 100 times.”

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

@female_engineer:

Enjoy your tea party with Harriet Christian and Geraldine Ferraro! And by tea party, I mean week-long Crown royal binge complaining about how luck Barack Obama is to have been born a black male.

Funny, I guess being snarky and nasty is so much better than beating McCain. Guess my Ivy League degree and membership in the NAACP is no match for your cruel wit.

I just spent 10 mintues on the phone with the Obama campaign, when I told them I couldn't financially support them but they had my vote, they were very gracious and thanked me for my support.

"In fact he is their recurring nightmare; Obama represents the guy who was promoted over them because he was smooth, cool, etc. not because he did the hard work, paid his dues, and yes, waited his turn."

Again, this shows how delusional the Hillary women are, how little attention they've paid to the details and verifiable truths—not the hype, symbols and soundbytes—of the campaign and these candidates.
Sure, Obama is smooth. But he won precisely because he did the hard work. He and his advisors studied the Democratic nomination rules, understood its intricacies, understood that it wasn't a winner-take-all system, focused on caucuses and even the states he'd likely lose.
Hillary did just the opposite—she overlooked these enormously significant details, presumably because of her 2-1 lead in the polls before the first primaries, because she was the "inevitable nominee" and because, hey, remember, she was the first lady.
Seems like you have your symbolic characters mixed up.
To say that Obama represents the cool guy who skated through the election because of his smoothness and perhaps his maleness is so absurd it's hardly worth commenting on. Except that so many women 55 and older have somehow bought it. They've fantasized that Clinton—the Wal Mart corporate lawyer, First Lady who betrayed health care, who lied about Bosnia, is their champion. That she endured the hardship of American women.
That the next four, or eight years of our country could be decided by such emotional foolishness makes me so sick. Feminists, this is the time to prove everything you've been saying. This is your time to bury those stereotypes, those distorted generalizations. This is your time to prove that you are rational and logical, that you aren't just emotional and spiteful.
Listen, women: Obama didn't break up with you. He didn't cheat on you. He didn't pass legislation that takes away your right to vote, to abort, to work, to get pay raises. He just beat another candidate.
Quit being so damn spiteful.

"this shows how delusional the Hillary women are"....."Quit being so damn spiteful."

Guess I am not as sane as you.......but I still get to vote. Funny how we are going to vote for the same guy. Maybe you would be happier if I didn't vote, or threw my support to McCain?

If Obama is a hard sell to Hillary women, or working class Dems, or Seniors or Hispanics, is it because we are all deluded? If you believe that, your candidate is doomed. When Obama supporters treat Clinton supporters like MORONS, you are hurting your candidate.

Most of us over the age of 50 have held our noses and voted for candidates that weren't our preference. Many will do it again, but don't expect us to be thrilled about it.

There are a lot of hard feelings going around.

But doing the tough stuff and getting over it is best for all of us.

I would have done the same thing - talked to Hillary's campaign and voted for her.

I understand disappointment - even without an Ivy League education. I sure do want one for my kids though!

Since hillary supporters have been telling Obama supporters that they were morons, members of a personality cult, that we had mommy issues, etc. for months, I think we're entitled to a little snark.

And where are we treating you like a moron? By disagreeing with you?If you can't take disagreement, maybe you shouldn't be on slate's discussion forum. Ivy League diploma or not, reacting to somebody criticizing something you've said by throwing a temper tantrum is pretty childish, EVEN IF YOU PUT IT IN CAPS!! No matter how much you stomp your feet, we are entitled to disagree with you in a public forum.