• kreskin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 hours ago

    I feel like blaming her loss on others takes away her agency. Seems sexist to me. We dont reassign blame like this with male failed candidates, but with Hillary and Harris everyone wants to paint them as purely victims.

    • Hugin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 hours ago

      I blame her loss on her being a bad candidate who wouldn’t push popular positions. Harris was a week candidate from the start. She dropped out of the primary in 2020 with only 3% support and then got the VP nom.

    • AFaithfulNihilist@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      6 hours ago

      They were both extremely bad candidates who should not have been in a position to run. If the party had been allowed to speak they would not have been allowed to run.

      They weren’t really candidates that failed on their own merits, they were set up to fail by being put into a position they should never have been in.

      Neither Hillary nor Kamala could have won a primary that wasn’t rigged in their favor. Since they didn’t get to their position as candidate based on their own merits, it’s reasonable to describe their failure in similar terms.

      That said, there is such a thing as more than 100% blame, and this is a situation where A lot of people have a lot of blame. Those two women are 100% responsible for the stupid decisions they made. No one can take that failure away from them, but because of the nature of the mistake, there were a lot more people who should also be blamed and similarly excommunicated from politics.

      There are elements of sexism here, but that’s just endemic to politics. They didn’t fail because of sexism, they got to where they were because of it and were set up to fail by it, but there are a lot of problems here beyond and before sexism.