Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Disliking Hillary and Huckabee

As we're nearing the home stretch of the first presidential candidate popularity test, a couple of items this morning captured the attention of our Readers Who Comment. First, it seems that some men -- including Democrat and independent men -- don't like Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton just because she is a woman. Second, columnist Robert Novak asserts, not all Republican Baptists like Baptist minister Mike Huckabee. My goodness, what is the world coming to? Does this mean that labels aren't always accurate? That an individual's response to a candidate may not coordinate perfectly with other labels that individual carries? And we still have almost a year to go.

Lois Romano's article on Clinton says, "Women's rights advocates attribute male skepticism about Clinton to long-ingrained sexism -- and a sense that men, no matter what they say, just aren't ready for a female president...But in several interviews with Democratic men across the country, the stated reasons for their aversion to Clinton seem more complicated, and in many cases, far more visceral than substantive."

And Novak says of Huckabee, "More than personality explains why not all his Baptist brethren have signed on the dotted line for Huckabee. He did not join the 'conservative resurgence' that successfully rebelled against liberals in the Southern Baptist Convention a generation ago."

We'll start with the comments on the Clinton story.

graced8669 asked, "Why are we discussing gender? I don't see any articles about women not voting for a male president... Men still feel challenged by a strong woman. And women just continue to 'eat their own young'."

And csdiego said, "I'm so tired of hearing about a gender gap in Hillary's support. See, I'm a woman, and a Democrat... I just resent the idea that as a woman I'm supposed to support Hillary. I don't, anymore than I would support Margaret Thatcher or Condi Rice."

llawrence9 wrote, "We haven't had candidate so strongly disliked since George Wallace. She will bring the haters out, and their cousins too. Others will just sit it out. The vitriol and lies will be unbelievable. Yet believed... With Billary do nothing Dems will again snatch defeat from the jaws of victory..."

ihave4ducks said, "I have a somewhat different take on the gender gap by virtue of what I observe here at work. Women don't ssem to have a problem working for a male boss, but make the boss a woman and it's a different matter. I wonder if this mindset might not come into play when it's time for women to cast their vote for a female president."

buzzm1 wrote, "Sorry Hillary, I will never vote for you. When it comes to being domineering and head strong, Hillary makes GWB look like a wimp. We don't need another President who won't listen to the people."

hcsubbarao suggested that "Lois Romano must be a paid agent of the Obama camp. Otherwise, I can not understand how a woman can talk so disparagingly of another woman..."

aztecterp said, "For me it has nothing to do with her being a woman but her past actions when her husband was president. I'd be more than happy to vote for a woman, just not this one."

We'll close on this topic with johnycheng1, who wrote, "...Let's face it,you guys only know how to watch football and play power tools, when it comes to anything involving intelligence, politics, diplomcy, you guys knows nothing. So do your country a favor, read more,study more, and have a open mind... how long you can treat women as inferior species."

And now to Novak's column on Huckabee.

freedom41 said, "so some evangelicals don't like Huck because he's not some mindless tool? because he's not 100% conservative? All the more reason for normal people to like him."

garbage1 was one of several who thought they saw Novak carrying water for someone not named Huckabee in writing, "The reason Novak is doing this whack job is that Huckabee might actually believe in that eye of the needle stuff. At the church of mammon, however, we all know that tax cuts for the wealthy is the only dogma, and any apostate must be cast out. Get thee behind me!"

OldProgessivefromWisconsin said, "The fact that Huckabee isn't endorsed by the fanatical right-wing of the SBC [Southern Baptist Convention] makes me like him better all of the time... I can't immagine where thinking SBC's would go if they don't support Huckabee. A Mormon cultist, two multiple divorcees, an actor mostly from California and two politicians from New York and Massachusetts..."

R49Thomas suggested, "...Pastor Mike might not believe in the sacrament of Tax Cuts and may even question the most sacred doctrines (a) the legitimacy of American corporate entities and (b) unfettered free markets... When it comes down to God or Mammon, the choice is pretty easy: profit over prophet. Get thee behind me, Huckabee!"

Last word today goes to dyinglikeflies said, "You faux-conservatives have sowed the 'religious' wind all these years, so now reap the whirlwind. Most truly faithful people ultimately fall back on the concept of right and wrong, not guaranteed tax cuts for the rich... This just proves that ultimately the alliance that Rove relied upon between economic 'conservatives (they are really anything but) and the 'religious right' was doomed to fail, because the term 'religious right' is a contradiction in itself."

All comments on the Clinton story are here.

All comments on the Novak column are here.

By Doug Feaver  |  December 20, 2007; 9:35 AM ET
Categories:  Presidential Politics  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Does This Mean a Draft?
Next: Time Out

Comments

Good grief! Maybe if the press would cover candidates stand on issues, reasearch backgrounds, and report real news...instead of talking about likability...voters in the rest of the country would have an opportunity to vote for some of the candidates the press has frozen out. Likablity as a key issue...only when we're hungry for real substance!

Posted by: lasinva | January 12, 2008 6:08 PM | Report abuse

Why do you continue to ignore the most riveting story in Washington: the Post's readers recognition of the decline in the Post's journalistic standards and their near unanimous recognition that Deborah Howell's role as Ombudsman has become a joke. See the comments on her current column on the Post's coverage of cultural events, as symptomatic of the broader problems. See the number of readers who, like me, view the recent article on Obama's Muulim links and Ms. Howell's feckless "review" of it as pluperfect examples of what we're talking about. It's all a festering sore that will not go away.

Posted by: Tbarksdl | December 24, 2007 6:59 AM | Report abuse

qumsldh bxmgklw ucwvakxi dsmhb eighnpxqb lojcxb nciy http://www.qbdy.hpmnfg.com

Posted by: qkvh tgyu | December 24, 2007 6:07 AM | Report abuse

sgejdn xlrusofvz pbygmxuj loerkqmh ufznr srlpcyg dqwcp

Posted by: yotnsgh plqnjeb | December 24, 2007 6:07 AM | Report abuse

I am interested in several responses to Hillary Clinton: Why margaret Thatcher and Condi Rice? While they have a passing similarity in ideology to each other, they could not be further removed From clinton. One who thinks otherwise is so ill informed I can only guess you are a GWB adherent. As for much of the the rest, I think most of it is an ill disguised fear and aversion to any strong and competent woman. I see it in the workplace, they speak nicely when the woman is present but behind her back, they make exactly the same comments. Not so much about male superiors who act the same way. They may not classify it as gender based opinion, but it is and it is for men and women. The comments such as domineering and headstrong, billary, etc. have essentially no basis in fact, but are based solely on the unfounded talking points of republican opposition while Bill was president. One would wish that people would at least make a small effort to learn about people they oppose (and fear?)

Posted by: samson | December 21, 2007 3:35 PM | Report abuse

Giant Robot, while I recognize Huckabee's honorable intentions, I've written him off as dishonest, for one, for palming off his pardoning of a serial rapist on that cliche of a GOP scapegoat, Bill Clinton, as reported by WaPo's "Fact Checker". I don't want another president too cowardly to admit mistakes. Also, his position on creationism is intellectually dishonest, assuming it's informed. Otherwise it's ignorance dishonestly posing as informed. Either way, it has grave policy implications. Does he, for example, believe God just created MRSA? Or does he think MRSA resulted from bacteria having mutated to resist antibiotics, which, btw, is clear evidence of evolution?

Posted by: jhbyer | December 21, 2007 3:14 PM | Report abuse

All eyes and ears are on Mike Huckabee now. Mike has taken a commanding lead now in Iowa at 57%! That's right, 57%! Just two months ago he was in single digits and now he's cranking up the speed to the finish line. Everybody and their brother is now jumping on the Huck-a-Bus. With Mike's charming personality, humbleness and down to earth personality, people are flooding into his campaign. Mike is not casting stones at everyone else, he is leading this campaign and the American people up like he has always been talking about. Americans are so excited to see a candidate with so much honor and respect. If you haven't jumped on the Huck-a-Bus yet, Mike is waiting for you and waving his hand saying "All Aboard"!

Posted by: Giant Robot | December 21, 2007 8:05 AM | Report abuse

I repeat to you a message I sent December 20 to Ombudsman Deborah Howell. I pose to all the same question I posed to her:

"Do you believe that the label 'liberal' accurately describes the group in the Southern Baptist Convention and/or the Arkansas Baptist State Convention that supported Mike Huckabee, in the incident reported by Mr. Novak?"

Dear Ms. Howell:

I realize that any so-called "ombudsman" who could blow right past the torrents of legitimate criticism leveled against the Post over the Obama-is-a-Muslim article and then against you for how you responded to the original criticism, without so much as batting an eyelash or even attempting to respond to the criticism, has abandoned any pretense of fulfilling a watchdog role at the Post. So be it. That you know and do not care that thousands of readers are on to you and to Mr. Graham over your contempt for basic standards of journalistic standards and that neither of you cares about those opinions or those standards tells us all we need to know about the current sorry state of the Washington Post.

Some of us can only continue to note for the record the Post's failings, knowing that our reasoned criticism will enter the ombudsman's black hole, never to be seen or heard from again. So I forward to you my comment on Robert Novak's most recent column on Gov. Huckabee. I have only one specific question for you, Ms. Howell.

"Do you, Deborah Howell, believe that the label "liberal" accurately describes the group in the Southern Baptist Convention and/or the Arkansas Baptist State Convention that supported Mike Huckabee, in the incident reported by Mr. Novak?"

Here is my comment on Novak:

Once more, the Washington Post shows its contempt for basic standards of journalistic integrity. It does so when it publishes Robert Novak's words that Mike Huckabee "embraced the liberal church establishment to become president of the Arkansas Baptist State Convention." The idea that any faction within the Southern Baptist Convention could be described as "liberal" is, on the face of it, so wrong and facetious, one would demean oneself to even attempt to explain why. Which, of course, is exactly the dilemma Robert Novak and the owners, publishers, and editors of the Washington Post--aided and abetted by its putative Ombudsman--know will arise when they print propaganda like this. It's why they are confident they can get away with it.

For the record: The Washington Post, in publishing the above words by Robert Novak, has engaged in the Big Lie technique. We are obviously one goose-step away from the Post and Novak labeling as liberal anyone who disagrees with them. Or have we long ago passed that point?

Posted by: Tbarksdl | December 21, 2007 7:04 AM | Report abuse

Anyone interested in what Huckabee is really like face to face should try this funny (but it actually happened) column:
http://goupstate.us/index.php/lanefiller/2007/11/02/title_14

Posted by: lanefiller | December 20, 2007 3:22 PM | Report abuse

More on Romney's Leadership check out these links:
www.massresistance.org and http://rightsmart.blogspot.com/

See this video for Mitt Romney caught lying!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6DJO_XuM4eM


all this rhetoric is follishnes and an intent denial to dismiss truth. The Demo-wacks have had control over congress for 2 years now and have done NOTHING but fund pork barrel projects and have not come close to making any kind of real progress that the promised their poor demo-wack supporters. There credibility is SHOT! and as for Huckabee... People fear that he will win, which he is... At this point I will vote for anybody other than a Demowack. i am so frustrated that I have changed party position and will vote Repub this year.

christmas is the celebration of the birth of jesus christ and if anyone do not want to celebrate it then don't but remember, each time you give a gift to someone else, you are mimicking the 3 wise men that gave gifts to jesus at his birth and most importantly, you are mimicking the giving factor that God gave his only begotten son to the world. So whether you formally ccelebrate or deny it, each gift given is a reflection of God Giving Christ to the earth as a gift. and i am happy to have received a merry christmas wish from a governmental official.. which that does not happen at all now a days! I am so proud of Huckabee i do not know what to do. He is a man of principle and he surely just sealed the deal with my vote. He will win and big he will, and while the pundits try to demise him, or his other political rivals try to make him look bad. They may want to look at the mirror at themselves. You got flip flopping mitt, dead fred, pimped out guiliani , no brain mccain, and PAUL IS DEAD!

And as for the Dems: you got Hell-ary that have sold her soul to the left party lobbyist in america, and you got chronic smoking Obama? which neither one has ANY experience in foreign policy. If it was not for Hell-ary having bill clinton last name, she would not even be known.

Huckabee is the sure winner and will win big. I can not wait for romney to get out of the race. i bet he will go back to hiring illegals to work in his yard. check more out about him at www.massresistance.org he is the biggest flake since kellogs!

Posted by: in-God-I-Trust | December 20, 2007 1:19 PM | Report abuse

I can identify most with buzzm1 and with csdiego, who says "I'm a woman, and a Democrat... I just resent the idea that as a woman I'm supposed to support Hillary. I don't, anymore than I would support Margaret Thatcher or Condi Rice."

Posted by: ET | December 20, 2007 12:08 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company