The WTF-ery of "Clinton Fatigue"

So reading over at The Moderate Voice, I learn from Shaun Mullen that it will be a very very bad thing if voters just get, well, tired of Hillary Clinton:

The long and the short of the situation is this: Republicans have been fiendishly clever in keeping voters (and that supposedly liberal media) focused on her. If she cannot put the focus on us — as in the dividends voters should expect to reap from her presidency, a sure-thing win could slip from her grasp.

A fatal case of Clinton fatigue next November would not merely hand the White House to a Republican who, judging from the overcrowded GOP field to a man (sorry, Carly), would not merely undo the significant accomplishments of Barack Obama, but even more importantly pack a Supreme Court that would do untold damage for many years to come.

1. Yes, those Republicans sure are "fiendishly clever" in getting "the media" to focus on Hillary, reminding us that she is unlikeable (For Reasons!) despite being really, really popular. I guess Mr. Mullen was unable to avoid their evil mindrays as well. Whoooops! Oh well! "The media" just happens!

2. What candidate ON EARTH is not expected to be in the spotlight? (Oh yeah, a woman candidate. Because we're tired of your face, missy!) Seriously, it takes a real irony deficiency to complain that Clinton isn't putting the focus on voters. She just finished a listening-to-voters tour (which was bad because she wasn't focused on mainstream media, apparently). AND she just announced a major plan to restore voting rights across the country. That sounds like a focus on voters to me.

3. "undo the significant accomplishments of Barack Obama." YES. UNDO HIS MAN-WORK! Don't get me wrong; I don't want to see the Republicans roll back Obama's accomplishments. But context matters, and it's cringe-inducing to read that. It's not that, say, Clinton needs to win in order to further her own ideas for reform and progress. Nope! She needs to win this election so she can protect Obama's agenda. Get out there and protect that man's work, madam! (And keep that spotlight off yourself, okay?)

4. Oh yes, the Supreme Court. Do I hear a "Roe! Roe!"?

If someone is worried about a GOP win because voters get "fatigued" with Clinton, maybe that person should not write a column reminding us what a boring old lady she is.

In fact, if it were me, I would be actively trying to write about Clinton in a way that does not reinforce misogynist stereotypes. Because there are substantive critiques of Clinton to be made, but vague complaints about how people might be "tired" of her are not among them.

I'm pretty damned tired of Mike Huckabee and Rick Santorum, but it's not out of some sense they've just been around too long and are no longer fresh faces. It's because their policies are harmful, bigoted nonsense that (for a start) favor Christian Dominionism, homophobia and misogynistic patriarchy. It's because Mike Huckabee pals around with child sexual abusers. It's because Rick Santorum can't even put aside his bigotry for a loved one. Those are actual positions those men hold, and I am tired of them.

So if you have a substantive criticism of Clinton make it. If you find you don't actually have a substantive critique to make, how about not making one? Because, frankly, this election could do with a whole lot less sponsorship from the letters W, T, and F.

Shakesville is run as a safe space. First-time commenters: Please read Shakesville's Commenting Policy and Feminism 101 Section before commenting. We also do lots of in-thread moderation, so we ask that everyone read the entirety of any thread before commenting, to ensure compliance with any in-thread moderation. Thank you.

blog comments powered by Disqus