[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
(s)Elections See other (s)Elections Articles Title: Women Threaten Obama Boycott I've posted a few times in the last two days about female supporters of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton who are angry -- at the Democratic Party, at the Obama campaign, or at the general situation that sees their candidate facing tough times, in their view, in part because of sexism. Just talked to a 55-year-old Columbus, Ohio resident named Cynthia Ruccia, a spokesperson and organizer for a group calling itself "Clinton Supporters Count Too." She said the group -- numbering in the hundreds, and organized in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Florida, and Michigan -- stands ready to boycott the Democratic Party if Clinton doesn't win the nomination, and will work against superdelegates who support Obama over Clinton as a means of registering their displeasure with the party. "We have a plan to campaign against the Democratic nominee," the group said in a press release Thursday. "We have the (wo)manpower and the money to make our threat real. And there are millions of supporters who will back us up in the swing states. If you don’t listen to our voice now, you will hear from us later." Ruccia tells ABC News that she believes "millions" of women share her group's views, though they have only begun to make contact with like-minded women. They're disgusted, she said, that Democratic Party leaders haven't more aggressively denounced sexist media comments and coverage in the campaign, and are angry at the drumbeat for Clinton to get out of the race. "We're just at the boiling point," Ruccia said. "Women will sit back and be quiet about things for a while, but we've had enough. Unless Hillary Clinton is our nominee, we are not going to support the nominee." Part of their plan, she said, is a primary-night boycott of NBC and MSNBC during next Tuesday's primaries in Kentucky and Oregon, particularly to protest comments made by Chris Matthews and David Shuster that her group feels were sexist. Ruccia said she doesn't necessarily view the disqualifying of delegates from Florida and Michigan as sexist in itself, but added: "I do believe the people there will not forget that Sen. Obama stood in the way of having their vote counted." This is one group, and not a very large one at this point. But in gauging the fallout among female voters of this divisive campaign, it's also worth keeping in mind what's going on in the wake of NARAL Pro-Choice America's decision to endorse Obama on Wednesday. As documented by the Huffington Post's Sam Stein, NARAL blogs are being overwhelmed, and many state affiliates are angry at the national group's decision. Emily's List is furious. And Martha Burke, former chair of the National Council of Women's Organizations, tells Stein she is "disappointed": "It feels like they are abandoning a known ally for a less committed candidate because they want to jump on a bandwagon. I think the pro-choice community should stick by a woman who has stuck by them." It's impossible to know at this point how big an issue this would be for Obama if he's the nominee. But clearly he would have some major work to repair rifts inside the party -- even if little of it is his fault, directly. I confess to being a man who has not always seen what his female friends and colleagues see as sexist in this race. What do you think? Has Sen. Clinton faced particular (unfair) challenges because of her gender? More than Sen. Obama has faced because of his race?
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 1.
#1. To: RickyJ (#0)
Those sweeties need to take a Xanax or four.
There are no replies to Comment # 1. End Trace Mode for Comment # 1.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest |
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||