Feminists for Clinton?

To hear the media tell it, a schism has emerged in feminist circles in the wake of last week's Democratic presidential debate. The source of the controversy surrounds Hillary Clinton and whether or not she "played the gender card" to explain away what many deemed a classic display of political parsing. After Clinton turned in her less-than-stellar night in Philadelphia, the spin-room narrative was put this way by one of her advisers: "Ultimately, it was six guys against her, and she came off as one strong woman." Team Hillary slapped together a rapid-response sound bite, "The Politics of Pile On," a crafty phrase (and video) meant to elicit sympathy from female voters. In a subsequent speech at Wellesley College, Clinton's alma matter, Mrs. Clinton observed, "In so many ways, this all-women's college prepared me to compete in the all boys' club of presidential politics."



Well, perhaps not every self-described feminist in the audience is shouting out "You go, Girl!" in response. For women like Kate Michelman, the former president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, Mrs. Clinton's alibi is a bit too much to take. From the LA Times:

"When unchallenged, in a comfortable, controlled situation, Sen. Clinton embraces her political elevation into the 'boys club.' But when she's challenged, when legitimate questions are asked, questions she should be prepared to answer and discuss, she is just as quick to raise the white flag and look for a change in the rules. It's trying to have it both ways."

Reuters and The Politico also offer stories today about the feminist debate, both pieces citing Ms. Michelman as evidence of the rift. Naomi Wolf is added to the mix, as well, saying of the Clinton team's decision to deal the gender card,

"They are being very, very strategic," by playing to the sympathies that virtually every woman in a male-dominated professional world can relate to, feminist writer Naomi Wolf said of the Clinton campaign. At the same time, she said, "They are yielding to gender stereotypes."

Of course, there are plenty of women out there who feel differently. The sight of six competitors and two aggressive moderators, all of them men, interrogating Mrs. Clinton before the cameras illustrated just how far we have to go in terms of gender equality. According to Rasmussen, in fact, if you just go on what happened at the Philadelphia debate, minus the spin, Hillary actually increased her lead over her rivals.

The problem for Mrs. Clinton, it seems to me, is the spin itself. Yes, she didn't do all that well for portions of the debate. But by claiming she was a victim, then rescinding that sentiment, only to let it slip back in to her speeches, she has fostered the impression that you cannot trust what she says. And that, for anyone whose memory hasn't deteriorated to the point where John Kerry doesn't ring a bell, is the death knell for a presidential candidate.

For further reading, there's a stellar piece from the New York Times on the topic.


For more information on David Knowles, please visit his website.

---

---