Totem wrote:
I wouldn't be so sanguine about how these ladies are going to come crawling back to the Dem party come this summer. I suspect each of you are underestimating the female rancor and bile that is building up as this nomination process merrily stews along. And as every husband and child knows, if Mama ain't happy, nobody is happy.
Word to the wise, my myopic liberal Asylumite friends.
Totem
I think you're wrong.
I should fall under the fairly hard-core feminist camp. I was of age during the movements height. I've always worked in a male-dominated field. My husband was my 'house-wife' through most of our marriage, while I was the main earner. And I'm not even backing Clinton.
Feminist's have softened considerably, and I just don't think that the Hillary for President is a feminist movement, or by-in-large even a feminist cause.
If anything, I suspect the 'won't vote for a black man' camp is a more prevalent attitude than the 'won't vote for a man' sentiment.
...or, I think that racism will be a stronger driving force than sexism.
Still, as others have mentioned, while who becomes the parties candidate may cause some to stay home on general election day, I think that's just as much a factor in the republican camp...probably even more so, seeing who the pubbies candidate is. The only thing that might skew the disenfranchised in favor of the republicans is that there will be less time for the dems to forget the primary battle.