Quote:
Originally Posted by innerSpaceman
And I'm sure for a great many others who, at this point in time, look back wistfully on the Clinton presidency as a comparative paradise of bliss.
|
Yes, Clinton was a much better president than George Bush. But it is still a horrible idea, in my opinion, to put a former president that close to the office again.
There were a lot of people 8 years ago who derided the idea of a hereditary presidency but they seem to be quiet this time around. I was uncomfortable with it but viewed it as a historical curiosity, but doing it two times in a row begins to feel more like a trend and at least with the Bushes the former president wasn't wandering the halls (and there were 25 years between the Adams administrations and the first was dead for most of the second's; and 48 between the Harrisons and the first could barely be said to have been president).
Snowflake: Yes, I'd be more likely to vote for her then. But I'm not saying it is directly sexist any more than a policy of sterilizing any person sent to prison would be directly racist. It is, however, a discriminatory viewpoint that at this point in time can impact
only women. In 9 years (not 11 like I said the first time) maybe the first man will be on that list.
That said, it is not a piece of sexism that particularly bothers me.