“Waiting for Warren!” Until she didn’t do what they wanted.

I’ve been skeptical of the claim by many Sanders supporters that they are not down on Hillary Clinton at all because she’s a woman, oh no, it’s because she’s a terrible woman, for a while now. Clinton detractors on the left have insisted that they do want a woman to be President! But it has to be the right woman! And they have such a woman in mind: Elizabeth Warren! They’re #WaitingForWarren

I agree that Massachusetts Senator Warren is wonderful. And here she is being her terrific self on her Facebook page on February 22nd:

original warren fb post

So this was a very non-controversial posting on Warren’s part but, alas, we’re in the midst of a Democratic primary and Super Tuesday was looming at the time so, of the hundreds of comments to the status, few were about music. Instead, there were a pile of them about how Senator Elizabeth Warren needed to be endorsing Bernie Sanders in the primary.

Samples include:

warren fb posts

And:

warren more fb posts

This a rather startling reversal from “Elizabeth Warren is perfect!” to “She has betrayed us!” But it goes to show how quickly women are scorned when they don’t conform to imagined expectations.

5 Responses to “Waiting for Warren!” Until she didn’t do what they wanted.

  1. I’ve liked Warren from the beginning. My dream team is Sanders/Warren and not necessarily in that order. I understand that that team exists only in my dreams. Cutting through the chaff in these posts: if, and likely when, Hillary Clinton is the Dem nominee, I will happily vote for her and not because of gender. The alternative, of staying home and electing Donald Trump, is too horrible to contemplate.

  2. Why the hell does everything have to be about gender? I preferred Warren over Sanders a year ago because I felt she was the more capable messenger of what really was the same cause. I’ve expressed disappointment in her recently because I feel her non-endorsement of Sanders reflected a subordination of her principles to concerns about her position in the D caucus. But I am disappointed in Ruben Gallego for the precise same reason. Of course, Warren has far more influence than does Gallego (and others), so the disappointment towards her is more likely to be voiced, but the disappointment is gender-neutral nonetheless.

    It seems, from this post and others, that you’re hell bent on “proving” that men who support Sanders and are opposed to Clinton are sexist. There are millions of men in that category. Many probably are sexist. Many are not. So what’s your point? And why the obsession? The best you’re going to be able to do is show that some men are sexist and some of those sexist men support Sanders. But we’re all very well aware of that.

    And, by the way, even those male Sanders supporters who truly are sexist may legitimately have gender-neutral reasons for opposing Clinton.

    Here’s my take: We all have our hot button issues. We all experience frustration when others have different hot button issues. So, if one’s hot button issues happen to be gender-related or gender-centric, that frustration makes sexism loom bigger than it really does.

  3. captain*arizona

    This reminds me of the old communists defending stalin. As eddie edwards said when he ran against david duke hold your nose and vote for me. This is the best hilary clinton can hope for from the rest of us.

    • Seriously. It’s insulting to me to claim I care at all about the gender of the candidate.

      I have a mother, sister, daughter, and wife. I vote for women all the time, and I even voted for Kyrsten Sinema (I didn’t know at the time she was a Republican).

      Bernie is now and always has been my idea of what a Democrat is supposed to be. Why does that make my motives suspect?

      Instead of insulting Bernie supporters, how about explaining to me why I should overlook HRC’s personal war in Libya, which turned out very bad and really was her very own war, her support for the war criminal Henry Kissinger, and her ties to Goldman Sachs and the rest of Wall Street.

      I see HRC and I see war and banks. Tell me why I’m wrong?

      And as far as people turning on Warren, how about the little bit of sleaze that Wassermann Schultz is pulling with the payday loan restrictions and the CFPB.

      Washerman Schultz is HRC’s BFF. Is this what we can expect from HRC as POTUS?

      I will hold my nose and vote for her, but I do not have high hopes for a Clinton presidency.

      War and banks. Great.

  4. So now we’re just complaining about internet commenters?

    As an internet commenter myself, I’m glad to see we’re finally getting the headline treatment we so richly deserve.