Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

SonderWoman

(1,169 posts)
Fri Sep 4, 2015, 01:53 PM Sep 2015

National Organization for Women Endorses Hillary Clinton.

http://now.org/media-center/press-release/now-is-a-proud-supporter-of-women-for-hillary/

Washington, DC – Hillary Clinton’s campaign is launching its “Women for Hillary” grassroots effort this weekend in New Hampshire, and the National Organization for Women is all in.

Hillary Clinton has been a trailblazer for women with an impressive record of public service where she put women’s rights at the forefront. Everywhere Clinton worked she used her voice and power to raise the status and improve the lives of women and girls. Clinton made “women’s rights are human rights” a rallying point throughout the world. As Secretary of State she made women’s rights the core of U.S. foreign policy, including institutionalizing a new and sweeping strategic process recognizing women’s involvement and work on behalf of women internationally. Electing a feminist woman president is not only historic, but would lead to further advances toward equality for all women.

During the two-week rollout of “Women for Hillary” NOW supporters will be attending house parties, coming out to events with Hillary Clinton and her surrogates, and organizing in early states because gender matters in the United States today, and women’s votes will matter in this election more than ever before.

The National Organization for Women is always on the side of making history, and over the next two weeks we’ll be looking forward to the sound of barriers breaking down.
72 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
National Organization for Women Endorses Hillary Clinton. (Original Post) SonderWoman Sep 2015 OP
YEA Thinkingabout Sep 2015 #1
This Democratic primary is a test for Americans, Ron Green Sep 2015 #2
I don't know what that means, but... SonderWoman Sep 2015 #3
NOW is a big and long-established organization, and they need to do what their political environment Ron Green Sep 2015 #13
Really Ron... DURHAM D Sep 2015 #19
lol, DURHAM D that's not what he said! eom Duval Sep 2015 #28
Oh... please translate. DURHAM D Sep 2015 #30
Perhaps not, which is one of the political exigencies I mentioned. I simply think NOW's Ron Green Sep 2015 #35
Just as I thought. DURHAM D Sep 2015 #38
NOW has always been the conservative-establishment wing of feminism. Ken Burch Sep 2015 #58
I'm not surprised, and good for them. MineralMan Sep 2015 #4
No big surprise, but still, good for clinton! Scootaloo Sep 2015 #5
So? What is there to be surprised about? sadoldgirl Sep 2015 #6
They endorsed Obama in 2008. OilemFirchen Sep 2015 #22
After endorsing Hillary in the primary jfern Sep 2015 #34
And without endorsing McKinney in the General. (n/t) OilemFirchen Sep 2015 #37
That's relevant how? jfern Sep 2015 #40
As a response to the post to which I was replying: OilemFirchen Sep 2015 #42
This male is proud to stand with Secretary Of State Clinton and the National Organization of Women. DemocratSinceBirth Sep 2015 #7
completely expected ibegurpard Sep 2015 #8
I don't hear about them much anymore, them or the Human Rights Campaign. m-lekktor Sep 2015 #9
Pretty busy website.. Historic NY Sep 2015 #47
Not a surprise at all. Hillary is the only woman in the party running. Autumn Sep 2015 #10
To them it's more important to back a female than to consider that the status quo rhett o rick Sep 2015 #11
Will you start a petition to see if they polled all their members? DemocratSinceBirth Sep 2015 #12
You mean like the DNC did before DWS decided to unilaterally limit the debates. rhett o rick Sep 2015 #52
Sadly I think That Is true colsohlibgal Sep 2015 #14
Women need change and Clinton is the status quo candidate. We need progressive change for rhett o rick Sep 2015 #54
The status quo serves many quite well. hifiguy Sep 2015 #15
National Organization for Women or an anonymous internet poster? Hmmm. SonderWoman Sep 2015 #23
That is huge. Do you know if Emily's List has endorsed yet?? Number23 Sep 2015 #16
Where have you been? DemocratSinceBirth Sep 2015 #17
Literally or figuratively, as in how did I miss Emily's List endorsing Hillary? Number23 Sep 2015 #18
Haven't seen you in a while. DemocratSinceBirth Sep 2015 #21
Got sick of the panicked screaming. And the folks standing in the middle of the panicked screaming Number23 Sep 2015 #24
well i can see why an organization for women would retrowire Sep 2015 #20
More importantly, she is qualified. Metric System Sep 2015 #25
Then why didn't they do that in 2008? If the choice was based on gender, they would have. n/t pnwmom Sep 2015 #27
Good point. n/t retrowire Sep 2015 #39
then don't plan to do that again with this field.... VanillaRhapsody Sep 2015 #66
As stated in a reply above: OilemFirchen Sep 2015 #26
...after endorsing Hillary in the primaries... Fawke Em Sep 2015 #36
... OilemFirchen Sep 2015 #41
Yes. Fawke Em Sep 2015 #46
Excellent. And I believe they are fans of Bernie as well, but I can clearly see why Hillary would randys1 Sep 2015 #29
It seems to me NOW has chosen for symbolism rather than for the welfare of women fbc Sep 2015 #31
Under the bus! SonderWoman Sep 2015 #32
No. Just going by their history. eom Fawke Em Sep 2015 #44
They endorsed the not female candidate in 2008. SonderWoman Sep 2015 #59
Not in the primaries. Fawke Em Sep 2015 #61
I hope the first female president has a compelling success story fbc Sep 2015 #33
Well done! OilemFirchen Sep 2015 #43
good lord DURHAM D Sep 2015 #45
As a dispassionate observer I am compelled to award that round to you. DemocratSinceBirth Sep 2015 #48
Well that's just awkward mythology Sep 2015 #50
That's just wrong. lostnfound Sep 2015 #53
Sexist drivel. n/t demmiblue Sep 2015 #55
Really? Starry Messenger Sep 2015 #57
Hi Star DURHAM D Sep 2015 #65
I just adore it! Starry Messenger Sep 2015 #68
You think Hillary is famous because of who she married??? zappaman Sep 2015 #64
I'm used to seeing this kind of crap spewed at Hillary from the Right. Hey, maybe Bill wouldn't have Metric System Sep 2015 #71
WOOT! ismnotwasm Sep 2015 #49
Thank you NOW-for what you do for Hillary--and women in this country. riversedge Sep 2015 #51
In other news...the sun rose and cats could haz cheezburgers... Ken Burch Sep 2015 #56
NOW silenttigersong Sep 2015 #60
Good for NOW JohnnyLib2 Sep 2015 #62
Post removed Post removed Sep 2015 #63
Great news. Way to go NOW! leftofcool Sep 2015 #67
Congrats Hillary riversedge Sep 2015 #69
they're obviously a tool of the plutocracy and monied interests of the DLC wyldwolf Sep 2015 #70
can't stop the inevitable ericson00 Sep 2015 #72

Ron Green

(9,821 posts)
2. This Democratic primary is a test for Americans,
Fri Sep 4, 2015, 02:01 PM
Sep 2015

and we may yet fail it.

But there's still time to build it from the ground up.

Ron Green

(9,821 posts)
13. NOW is a big and long-established organization, and they need to do what their political environment
Fri Sep 4, 2015, 03:33 PM
Sep 2015

requires. That's their business, but for them to endorse HRC this early in the process is to ignore the candidacy I believe will in the long run help turn us toward a more peaceful and just society for women.

Ron Green

(9,821 posts)
35. Perhaps not, which is one of the political exigencies I mentioned. I simply think NOW's
Fri Sep 4, 2015, 05:04 PM
Sep 2015

bolder step would be to look beyond the obvious choice of a woman and consider a truly transformative choice.

On edit: Although maybe that's what they did in 2008 and it didn't work out as well as planned.

 

Ken Burch

(50,254 posts)
58. NOW has always been the conservative-establishment wing of feminism.
Fri Sep 4, 2015, 07:43 PM
Sep 2015

The ones who have always resisted the idea that feminism should acknowledge differences in the needs and objectives of working-class women, women of color and lesbian and bisexual women from those of upper-middle-class white women. And NOW was also the group that always stressed an exclusively "working within the system" approach even when the system was clearly institutionally designed to make it impossible for women to work within it.

That, and who thought they'd even consider endorsing anyone else?

MineralMan

(146,190 posts)
4. I'm not surprised, and good for them.
Fri Sep 4, 2015, 02:10 PM
Sep 2015

Their support is justified, based on NOW's goals. I'd be surprised if they didn't endorse her.

sadoldgirl

(3,431 posts)
6. So? What is there to be surprised about?
Fri Sep 4, 2015, 02:19 PM
Sep 2015

Did anyone think that NOW would support Fiorina?
After all, there are only two women running.

OilemFirchen

(7,143 posts)
42. As a response to the post to which I was replying:
Fri Sep 4, 2015, 05:16 PM
Sep 2015
Did anyone think that NOW would support Fiorina?
After all, there are only two women running.

DemocratSinceBirth

(99,704 posts)
7. This male is proud to stand with Secretary Of State Clinton and the National Organization of Women.
Fri Sep 4, 2015, 02:21 PM
Sep 2015

I have been a proud feminist since I came out of the womb.

m-lekktor

(3,675 posts)
9. I don't hear about them much anymore, them or the Human Rights Campaign.
Fri Sep 4, 2015, 02:26 PM
Sep 2015

They all must be content with the state of things at present!

 

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)
11. To them it's more important to back a female than to consider that the status quo
Fri Sep 4, 2015, 03:23 PM
Sep 2015

isn't at all favorable to women. We need change for everyone's benefit in the 99%. H. Clinton doesn't stand for that change.

 

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)
52. You mean like the DNC did before DWS decided to unilaterally limit the debates.
Fri Sep 4, 2015, 07:24 PM
Sep 2015

What the frack, do we have Democrats that aren't democratic? I guess it's ok if your candidate benefits.

colsohlibgal

(5,275 posts)
14. Sadly I think That Is true
Fri Sep 4, 2015, 03:34 PM
Sep 2015

Again, it is past time for a female president. However this woman thinks Bernie, as a true progressive, will help most women more than Third Way Hillary.

 

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)
54. Women need change and Clinton is the status quo candidate. We need progressive change for
Fri Sep 4, 2015, 07:25 PM
Sep 2015

all in the 99%.

 

hifiguy

(33,688 posts)
15. The status quo serves many quite well.
Fri Sep 4, 2015, 03:40 PM
Sep 2015

The status quo must go, and go now. Time to take back the country from the plutocrats and their servants/enablers, regardless of the party affiliation they claim.

Number23

(24,544 posts)
24. Got sick of the panicked screaming. And the folks standing in the middle of the panicked screaming
Fri Sep 4, 2015, 04:28 PM
Sep 2015

trying their damndest to pretend that they can't see or hear it.

retrowire

(10,345 posts)
20. well i can see why an organization for women would
Fri Sep 4, 2015, 04:21 PM
Sep 2015

want to endorse the chance at the first woman for president.

OilemFirchen

(7,143 posts)
26. As stated in a reply above:
Fri Sep 4, 2015, 04:33 PM
Sep 2015

NOW endorsed Obama in 2008.

Many of these rejoinders are expositional in a most unflattering fashion.

Fawke Em

(11,366 posts)
36. ...after endorsing Hillary in the primaries...
Fri Sep 4, 2015, 05:07 PM
Sep 2015
The National Organization for Women, which had originally endorsed Sen. Hillary Clinton in the Democratic primaries, made no mention of Palin in its Statement, calling Obama "the candidate who is out there every day standing up - clearly and consistently - for women."


http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/09/17/national-organization-for-woman-endorses-obama-snubs-palin/

So, yes, like Emily's List, it has to do with her plumbing.


And, I'm a woman.

Fawke Em

(11,366 posts)
46. Yes.
Fri Sep 4, 2015, 05:29 PM
Sep 2015

I don't mind, really. They should back pro-choice women.

I'm just saying that they did the same thing in 2008. They choose HRC over Obama in the primaries, but double-backed and endorsed Obama once he became the nominee.

In other words, I really don't expect NOW and/or Emily's List NOT to endorse the Democratic woman in the primaries.

randys1

(16,286 posts)
29. Excellent. And I believe they are fans of Bernie as well, but I can clearly see why Hillary would
Fri Sep 4, 2015, 04:39 PM
Sep 2015

be at the top of their list.

Fawke Em

(11,366 posts)
61. Not in the primaries.
Fri Sep 4, 2015, 07:53 PM
Sep 2015

They endorsed Clinton in the primaries and then Obama in the general. I posted proof of that somewhere else in this thread.

But, here it is again:

The National Organization for Women, which had originally endorsed Sen. Hillary Clinton in the Democratic primaries, made no mention of Palin in its Statement, calling Obama "the candidate who is out there every day standing up - clearly and consistently - for women."


http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/09/17/national-organization-for-woman-endorses-obama-snubs-palin/

This is the primaries.

Same MO.
 

fbc

(1,668 posts)
33. I hope the first female president has a compelling success story
Fri Sep 4, 2015, 04:53 PM
Sep 2015

Rather than being famous for who she married.

DURHAM D

(32,595 posts)
45. good lord
Fri Sep 4, 2015, 05:27 PM
Sep 2015

Apparently you are not aware that she was on the cover of Life magazine when she was 22.

She has been famous all of my life and I assume all of yours unless you are like 80.

 

mythology

(9,527 posts)
50. Well that's just awkward
Fri Sep 4, 2015, 06:55 PM
Sep 2015

It's really not nice to come to a verbal sparring match armed with facts and stuff.

lostnfound

(16,138 posts)
53. That's just wrong.
Fri Sep 4, 2015, 07:24 PM
Sep 2015

I'm a Bernie supporter but I think that is a sexist and grossly unfair comment. She's a graduate of Wellesley AND Yale AND was Secretary of State And Senator and YES, First Lady. The fact that the burden of child rearing and being married to an ambitious spouse often means that women make sacrifices for their family doesn't disqualify her.

SHE IS PLENTY QUALIFIED...I just don't like her positions, her voting history, or her primary areas of focus as much as I do Bernie.

DURHAM D

(32,595 posts)
65. Hi Star
Fri Sep 4, 2015, 09:14 PM
Sep 2015

Don't you just love how all the really nice men came into this thread to tell us little women what we need to think and do. I am forever grateful. You?

Metric System

(6,048 posts)
71. I'm used to seeing this kind of crap spewed at Hillary from the Right. Hey, maybe Bill wouldn't have
Sat Sep 5, 2015, 11:15 PM
Sep 2015

been President without Hillary's support. She also had plenty of accomplishments in her own right BEFORE marrying Bill:

commencement speaker at Wellesley which garnered national attention, including in LIFE magazine; Yale Law grad; member of the Watergate impeachment inquiry staff; children's rights advocate; first director of the University of Arkansas' legal aid clinic

silenttigersong

(957 posts)
60. NOW
Fri Sep 4, 2015, 07:51 PM
Sep 2015

does not speak for all feministsHillary does not speak for many feministsHillarys big liability with women is Bill Clinton.

Response to SonderWoman (Original post)

 

ericson00

(2,707 posts)
72. can't stop the inevitable
Sat Sep 5, 2015, 11:37 PM
Sep 2015

so Clinton-detractors, you got two things you can do.

1. Nothing
2. and like it

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»National Organization for...