Winners
get to write history. Losers, if they are lucky, get a ballad. Hillary
Clinton made history for three decades as an advocate, a First Lady, a
Senator, and a Secretary of State, but she will now be remembered as
much for what she didn’t do as what she did. A female candidate in an
election that didn’t hinge on gender after all, she became a symbol in a
fight that was about much more than symbolism. She’s the woman who was
almost President, she is what might have been and what will yet be.
In
the autopsy of the doomed Clinton campaign, there is no shortage of
fatal causes. Expectations certainly missed their target: the race
between the first plausible female presidential candidate and a man who
bragged about grabbing women “by the pussy” did not boil down to gender.
In interviews across the country in the year leading up to the
election, many voters suggested that shattering the glass ceiling wasn’t
an urgent priority for them. Some took it as a given that a woman will
be President one day, and it wasn’t worth electing someone they believed
was the wrong woman just to show it could be done.
To
some, other issues—economic anxiety, cultural values, a desire for
change—mattered more. Of the 70% of voters who said Donald Trump’s
treatment of women bothered them, 29% voted for him anyway. The female
coalition was a mirage, splintered by party, race and education: Clinton
won 54% of all women, but Trump won 88% of Republican women, 52% of
white women and 61% of white women without a college degree. She walked
away with a lead of more than 2.5 million votes, but not the White
House. Read more >>>>
There
is plenty to disagree with in this article. Bustle's Cate Carrejo raises an
objection with the first paragraph. My personal objection precedes
Cate's since I would not label Hillary Clinton a loser. But the line
Carrejo highlights forms the premise of Alter's thesis.
In its annual postmortem of the year, TIME Magazine
released its perennial list of top influencers for 2016, and this
year's #2 is a familiar face. Hillary Clinton, who was runner-up in the
November presidential election, also came in second to Donald Trump in
the Person of the Year contest. But TIME's article on her election and legacy seems to have underestimated why the loss happened. TIME's assertion that the presidential election was not about gender
is infuriating, because it ignores the massive setback that Clinton and
her campaign had to contend with before the race had even begun. Read more >>>>
Far from seeing Hillary as a wildflower lost in the woods and fading from the public eye, I see her resurging - rising as we all implored her to in 2008.
Ever the Phoenix, she will be back, I expect, and more awesome than ever
for the scars she acquired in course of this election cycle. Hillary
has amassed an even larger and stronger coalition in this effort than
she did in 2008. Then she accrued 18 million of us. This time around
she has more than 65 million of us. We are battle wise and battle
ready. Whatever Hillary decides to take on, her army will be right at
her back.
Oh! And by the way, she also won this poll! The editors make the final decision.
After
beating Donald Trump to the popular vote in the United States election,
Hillary Clinton took her popularity a step further as she defeated
Trump again in the Time Magazine Person of the Year poll.
Resul of
the poll shared by stand up comedian Mike Drucker show that of the
total votes of 107,511 Clinton amassed 50 per cent as against Trump’s 30
per cent.
If
you're been on social media today, then you've probably already seen
the announcement. President-elect Donald Trump has been named Time Person
of the Year for 2016, in a move that surprised precisely nobody. But in
the run-up to the announcement, there were several different options in
Time's online reader poll, and one of them was, well, the other candidate
in the 2016 race ― the won who actually won millions more votes than
the next American president did. That's right, there are many tweets saying Hillary Clinton should've been Time's Person of the Year for 2016.
Sure,
it may not seem logical to give the distinction to the runner-up,
especially if you're gauging future impact. Clinton's career as an
elected official is likely over, while Trump's hasn't even begun yet (as
weird and frightening as that may sound).
But the enormous
historical landmark Clinton's candidacy represented in American history
can't be overlooked, and whether it's earnest or aspirational, some
people out there really would've rather seen her face staring out from the cover of Time than Trump's iconic glower. Here are nine tweets making the case, or simply wishing desperately that things had somehow gone differently. Read Tweets >>>>
