The New York senator’s failed campaign was an increasingly transparent woker-than-thou contest."Yesterday evening, New York senator Kirsten Gillibrand ended her presidential bid after nine months of futile campaigning, failing ever to crest 3 percent in major polls. Her decision to bow out was precipitated by her failure to qualify for the third Democratic debate, slated for September 12. “Without it, I just didn’t see our path,” she said yesterday.
"The senator has a point. From the beginning, her upstart campaign was characterized by an enormous amount of virtue-mongering, insisting not only that her progressive bona fides made her superior to you, but that only she could help you comprehend exactly how backwards you are. In the last debate, for instance, she promised to traverse the suburbs explaining “institutional racism” and white privilege to white women."It was an interesting tactic from a candidate attempting to distinguish herself as a female candidate running for women, and it’s easy to see why the effort failed to gain much traction. The major policy centerpiece of her campaign was called “Fighting for women and families” and focused exclusively on issues like unlimited abortion rights, universal paid family leave, public education, and sexual harassment. Perhaps the most news attention she got all campaign came when she compared being pro-life to being racist. Light on substance, she needed a forum to peddle her platitudes, and without the debate stage, she had little hope of convincing Democrats to listen to her at all.
"The news that she had terminated her campaign came just a few days after a former Gillibrand staffer told the New York Post, “I don’t know that anyone even wants to see her on the debate stage. Everyone I have talked to finds her performative and obnoxious.' ” . . .
Monica Showalter: Gillibrand: Phony candidate for fake 'women's issue' problems packs it in . . . "Good riddance, because never was there are more useless candidate. She positioned herself as the candidate of women's issues, but she had no real foils to charge at. Her yellings about abortion, women's workplace equality, and #MeToo only proved she was out of tune with the times. Worse still, these issues tended to be problems of Democratic, not Republican, origin, which made her a nuisance to both sides."
Even this pander looks contrived. What are "gay rights" anyway? TD
No comments:
Post a Comment