I can’t wait until November, when the claim of racism for those who decided to vote against Obama turns into cries of sexism for those who didn’t vote for Hillary. My vote won’t go to Hillary, a female who expects her kind to join with the other gals in a sort of nauseating groupthink. I will not “get in line” and support a fake conservative, Trump, nor will I “get in line” and support a woman, Hillary, who, among other dastardly things, uses gender as a crutch.
Yes, Clinton is ahead in the delegate race against Sanders, and will be the Democratic nominee. But the results of her recent primary victories have caused angst among some on the Left as they look toward a general election and her head-to-head battle with a Republican challenger. And the reason for concern – lack of support among white men – might do a lot to fuel even more claims of sexism.
As reported by The New York Times:
While Mrs. Clinton swept the five major primaries on Tuesday, she lost white men in all of them, and by double-digit margins in Missouri, North Carolina and Ohio, exit polls showed — a sharp turnabout from 2008, when she won double-digit victories among white male voters in all three states.
To be sure, the rhetoric of her 2008 campaign is vastly different from her 2016 offering. In 2008 she was contending against the younger, charismatic African-American, Barack Obama. Her support from white men was much higher then, and for a much different reason.
She explicitly appealed to them in 2008, extolling the Second Amendment, mocking Barack Obama’s comment that working-class voters “cling to guns or religion” and even needling him at one point over his difficulties with “working, hard-working Americans, white Americans.”
She could not sound more different today, aggressively campaigning to toughen gun-control laws and especially courting black and Hispanic voters.
But it’s more than that. In between 2008 and now, much has happened to cause voters of all kinds to reject a Madam Hillary Clinton presidency. Her much maligned tenure as Secretary of State, which involved both Benghazi and her ongoing email scandal, her cozy ties to Wall Street, and the absolute lack of sincerity as she appeals to regular folk while branding herself as a “champion for all”.
Beyond her own failed attempt to court white male voters, the draw of Donald Trump is pushing some white men, who may have voted for Hillary previously, to his side. The contrast between Hillary and Trump, in terms of style, could not be more different. (Don’t get me wrong – they’re both liberals, though.). While Donald parades a faux masculinity, with zero substance to back it up, and attempts to strong-arm his way to a nomination, Hillary exhibits a strategy of love & kindness, which is about as far from her true self as possible.
The thing is, we all know that Donald Trump is a braggadocious blowhard. But with Hillary, a kinder, gentler, let’s-bring-everyone-to-the-fold schitck is dead on arrival, because it’s so disingenuous, at least to us who don’t subscribe to the gooey social justice warrior mentality. Add to that her scandals, failures to communicate, and complete lack of honesty, and people turn away.
This time, white men are turning away from Hillary, but not because she’s a female. And Hillary’s loss in the primaries among that group may turn out to be Trump’s gain in the general.