- The Washington Times - Friday, April 7, 2017

ANALYSIS/OPINION:

Hillary Clinton, if she’s not careful, will go down in history as the presidential candidate who most couldn’t let the loss go — rivaling the current No. 1 slot holder for that category, noted chad-counter Al Gore.

In public statements this week, Clinton blamed an anti-woman bias among her fellow countrymen as the reason she lost the White House. In a word: fantasy.

“Certainly misogyny played a role,” she said, while delivering remarks at a Women in the World Summit, Breitbart noted. “I mean, that has to be admitted.”

Well, newsflash: It really doesn’t.

What might be admitted, though, is that Clinton couldn’t quite get the white women out of the gate and into the ballot boxes to vote for her.

A FiveThirtyEight reported in a November post-election roundup: “Clinton’s stunning loss … showed that issues of culture and class mattered more to many American women than their gender. The sisterhood, as real sisterhood tends to be, turned out to be riddled with complications.”

And while exit polls showed Clinton winning women by 12 points over Trump, “Clinton lost the votes of white women overall and struggled to win women voters without a college education in states that could have propelled her to victory.”

As Homer Simpson might say: Du’oh!

So while it’s true Donald Trump won by 12 points with men, it’s equally true Clinton lost with white women. The breakdown of white women was this: 53 percent Trump, 43 percent Clinton.

The breakdown of white women who hadn’t graduated college was this: 62 percent Trump, 34 percent Clinton.

“Although Clinton didn’t outright lose women,” FiveThirtyEight wrote, “their relatively anemic support for her in key states played a role in her Electoral College demise.

So misogyny, Mrs. Clinton?

That would only stand to reason if the misogynists were the women voters themselves. And even in liberal ears, that just has to sound fantastical.

LOAD COMMENTS ()

 

Click to Read More

Click to Hide