|
![]() ![]() ![]() |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) |
![]() |
hedgehog
![]() |
Sun Jan-21-07 05:57 PM Original message |
Is Hillary's candidacy really a step forward for women? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Olney Blue
![]() |
Sun Jan-21-07 06:01 PM Response to Original message |
1. Yes, it is a step forward. There are many "power couples"- not unusual. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
niyad
![]() |
Sun Jan-21-07 06:01 PM Response to Original message |
2. how about turning it around to say that BILL wouldn't have gotten where he did without hillary? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
hedgehog
![]() |
Sun Jan-21-07 06:06 PM Response to Reply #2 |
6. I agree that Bill would have gotten nowhere without her. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
niyad
![]() |
Sun Jan-21-07 06:21 PM Response to Reply #6 |
21. hillary didn't "step into" a senate seat, she ran and WON that senate seat., and won relection |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
hedgehog
![]() |
Sun Jan-21-07 06:28 PM Response to Reply #21 |
24. Would Hillary have been able to move to New York and run |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
niyad
![]() |
Sun Jan-21-07 06:34 PM Response to Reply #24 |
28. based on what, exactly? she wasn't capable of moving to NY on her own? gee, countless women each |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DemExpat
![]() |
Sun Jan-21-07 06:35 PM Response to Reply #24 |
29. We all take advantage |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
oasis
![]() |
Sun Jan-21-07 06:25 PM Response to Reply #6 |
23. Do you have someone in mind who doesn't remind you of Lurleen Wallace? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
aquart
![]() |
Mon Jan-22-07 03:11 AM Response to Reply #6 |
38. Bill Clinton was never a New York senator. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LeftyMom
![]() |
Sun Jan-21-07 06:12 PM Response to Reply #2 |
14. Nobody's saying she's nothing without him |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BleedingHeartPatriot
![]() |
Sun Jan-21-07 06:01 PM Response to Original message |
3. She has worked along side and independently of him their whole marriage. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
xultar
![]() |
Sun Jan-21-07 06:04 PM Response to Original message |
4. Yes. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
kentuck
![]() |
Sun Jan-21-07 06:05 PM Response to Original message |
5. Regardless, she had to win the race... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
William769
![]() |
Sun Jan-21-07 06:08 PM Response to Original message |
7. Damn! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
hedgehog
![]() |
Sun Jan-21-07 06:10 PM Response to Reply #7 |
9. Oh come on - not everyone who disagrees with you is a freeper! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
William769
![]() |
Sun Jan-21-07 06:19 PM Response to Reply #9 |
19. It's not the disagreement, it's not even what you say... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
aquart
![]() |
Mon Jan-22-07 03:13 AM Response to Reply #19 |
39. And the charming intent behind it. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LeftyMom
![]() |
Sun Jan-21-07 06:09 PM Response to Original message |
8. Agreed. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
hedgehog
![]() |
Sun Jan-21-07 06:13 PM Response to Reply #8 |
16. I guess I'm asking if she were Hillary Johnson, a close advisor to |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LeftyMom
![]() |
Sun Jan-21-07 06:34 PM Response to Reply #16 |
27. No. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
niyad
![]() |
Sun Jan-21-07 06:48 PM Response to Reply #8 |
31. why should a WOMAN have to demonstrate any more competence than a MAN when it comes to the oval |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LeftyMom
![]() |
Sun Jan-21-07 07:26 PM Response to Reply #31 |
33. Hey, I think Bush is unqualified too. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
aquart
![]() |
Mon Jan-22-07 03:17 AM Response to Reply #33 |
40. You're implying that a hardworking intelligent woman equals a Bush? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
originalpckelly
![]() |
Sun Jan-21-07 06:10 PM Response to Original message |
10. I think the question we should be asking is: |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Rosemary2205
![]() |
Sun Jan-21-07 06:11 PM Response to Original message |
11. Don't sell Hillary short |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
kentuck
![]() |
Sun Jan-21-07 06:12 PM Response to Original message |
12. Well, she was on the Watergate committee... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DemExpat
![]() |
Sun Jan-21-07 06:12 PM Response to Original message |
13. Yes! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
tblue
![]() |
Sun Jan-21-07 06:13 PM Response to Original message |
15. Not really. Shirley Chisholm's candidacy — that was a step forward for women. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mdmc
![]() |
Sun Jan-21-07 06:14 PM Response to Original message |
17. YES |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
jobycom
![]() |
Sun Jan-21-07 06:16 PM Response to Original message |
18. This is a disgustingly sexist post. I hope it is due to your ignorance |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
against all enemies
![]() |
Sun Jan-21-07 06:21 PM Response to Original message |
20. Was Ronald Reagan's candidacy really a step forward for women? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LeftyMom
![]() |
Sun Jan-21-07 06:36 PM Response to Reply #20 |
30. He got where he was due to GE. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
illinoisprogressive
![]() |
Sun Jan-21-07 06:25 PM Response to Original message |
22. But, she has done no major legislation in 6 years. Wish it was Nancy Pelosi running |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
cynatnite
![]() |
Sun Jan-21-07 06:29 PM Response to Original message |
25. Other women have ran for president before... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
rodeodance
![]() |
Sun Jan-21-07 06:30 PM Response to Original message |
26. Yes yes yes yes yes------- |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Withywindle
![]() |
Sun Jan-21-07 07:01 PM Response to Original message |
32. Yes, of course it is! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
niyad
![]() |
Mon Jan-22-07 01:46 AM Response to Original message |
34. was victoria woodhull's candidacy a step forward when SHE ran for the presidency? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Raksha
![]() |
Mon Jan-22-07 02:27 AM Response to Original message |
35. Nancy Pelosi, first woman Speaker of the House ever, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Matariki
![]() |
Mon Jan-22-07 02:49 AM Response to Original message |
36. One of the reasons Hillary Clinton is the front runner of the party |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
aquart
![]() |
Mon Jan-22-07 03:07 AM Response to Original message |
37. Right. All First Ladies have become two-term senators. It's no biggie. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
AtomicKitten
![]() |
Mon Jan-22-07 03:35 AM Response to Original message |
41. who knows |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Sat Sep 07th 2024, 06:48 PM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) |
![]() |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC