Is voting against Clinton sexist?
Elton John said some of Hillary Clinton's critics are misogynists, said Christopher Orr in a New Republic blog. That's "not quite 'God damn America,'" but "the technical sentiment is the same." People who would be "livid" abo
Elton John helped raise $2.5 million at a Radio City Music Hall fund-raiser for Hillary Clinton. The 5,000 tickets sold for between $250 and $2,300. (The Wall Street Journal’s Washington Wire blog) “I’ve always been a Hillary supporter,” John said, adding later, “I never cease to be amazed by the misogynistic attitudes of some of the people in this country, and I say to hell with them.” (Reuters)
What the commentators said
OK, it’s “not quite ‘God damn America,’” said Christopher Orr in The New Republic’s The Plank blog. But “the technical sentiment is the same” as the inflammatory line from Barack Obama’s former pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, even if it singles out “people (or perhaps states) who declined to vote for Hillary Clinton.” Maybe Clinton will give “a major address on the role of pop in America.”
Bloggers “screaming that not wanting to vote for Hillary does not equal misogyny” are missing John’s point, said Diane Elayne Dees in The Democratic Daily blog. Clinton is the target of “misogynistic attacks,” and people who would be “livid” about racial attacks against Obama don’t seem to care that Clinton is “treated like trash” for having “the wrong genitalia.” “You don’t like Clinton’s policies? Fine.” But you don’t have to vote for her to acknowledge that she’s been subject to “some of the ugliest bigotry this country has seen.”
Well, Elton John has no right to have “lashed out at the USA,” said Michael Harkins in his NASAMike’s Echo blog. It’s “ridiculous” that a foreigner like John is even “actively participating” in the U.S. election—and if he took any money for the gig, it’s illegal. “There are about 300 million people born here who have more of a right to adore or trash the New York Senator than him.”
To be fair, said Matthew Yglesias in The Atlantic, “some provocative evidence” suggests that a quarter of Americans “have a strong implicit bias against the idea of putting a woman in the White House.” If true, that’s “sobering information,” but with “limited” political implications. While voters may have “some subconscious bias against female politicians,” many also have “a large very conscious bias against Republican politicians” and extending President Bush’s policies.
THE WEEK'S AUDIOPHILE PODCASTS: LISTEN SMARTER
MOST POPULAR ON THE WEEK
- 5 legitimate scientific controversies
- How to be the most productive person in your office — and still get home by 5:30 p.m.
- 43 TV shows to watch in 2014
- How liberals are unwittingly paving the way for the legalization of adult incest
- Libertarianism's terrible, horrible, no good, very bad idea
- Why I got married — without a wedding
- Why the Rubio-Lee tax plan is great politics — and great policy
- 10 things you need to know today: October 2, 2014
- How to improve your workplace culture
- Ted Cruz is the new Sarah Palin
Subscribe to the Week