Democratic Iowa Isn't Progressive about Women?

[benny05]

Today, I was reading Taylor Marsh's blog. The post was about Clinton getting boo'd at the Heartland Forum in Des Moines yesterday. Taylor believes Clinton can take the boos and was right to stand her ground in not committing immigration reform in the first 100 days of her presidency, if Clinton is in the WH. I don't have a huge problem with her answer either as the Rethugs won't do anything about the path to citizenship for undocumented workers either.

As this was Taylor's main post of the day (hey it's Sunday, so not unusual on a smaller blog to leave the threads open longer for comments), there were many comments about it. Most of the readers tend to pull for Clinton over there, and Taylor has been pretty harsh about Obama and his candidacy in general. But she surprised me in posting this comment amongst the others:

Everyone needs to get off of Iowa. It's one flippin' state. It's who has longevity. Clinton was *never* supposed to be this strong in that state. It's a very conservative place. She's got strong Democratic ideology, unlike Obama. They're also not progressive where women are concerned. Don't forget that point, which is important.

http://www.taylormarsh.com/archives_view.php?id=26637

I don't know about you, but to me, Iowa does matter, considering that the majority win translates into more funds, endorsements, and other votes for the candidate in NH, NV, and SC. That certainly happened in 2004 for Kerry in which his support surged in NH after winning IA. But another point: many of the Iowan women I know are pretty progressive. They have a Lt Governor, Patty Judge, who is progressive. Many more Iowan women are getting involved with politics, and they are progressive as well.

Clinton was ahead in the polls until recently. And it seems to me that some of her supporters, including Taylor Marsh (who hasn't officially endorsed Clinton, but posts more positive spin on Clinton's actions, and wants a "viable" woman candidate in the WH) are trying to downplay Clinton's chances in Iowa by saying IA isn't as progressive "where women are concerned."

Iowans: I'd like your take. I think Taylor's comment is a bit over the top.

[dk2]

1. Iowa does count

If not why does Obama's campaign want to have college kids caucas abd vote there from Ill if they are students in Iowa, and doesn't Clinton do the same?



They are so worried! Edwards is still the best choice and greatly underestimated.

[pioneer111]

2. Iowa counted when Clinton went ahead in the polls

Now that she has dropped back, we are seeing the attempt to lower expectations and make Iowa less relevant.
If Clinton can't win Iowa when she has spent so much money there, it could indicate that she is not the best candidate.

I am so surprised at Taylor for dissing Iowa about women. This is such a stereotypical attack.
I think people are taking a look at candidates other than Clinton and liking them better. Besides I think Edwards will win.

Clinton is the corporatist candidate and is not that progressive herself. People are getting it even if Taylor isn't.

[MontanaMaven]

3. Didn't Hillary say something about Iowa's not electing women

to the Governorship or U.S. Congress? Guess she figured she wasn't getting the male vote in the general election anyway, so she'd appeal to the women in an odd kind of way. Unfortunately, she has Taylor Marsh on her side who has a clunky way of putting things. She is partially correct, but incorrect in dismissing the state in such a cavalier and peevish way. All's fair...

What she may be correct about is that even Democrats here in Montana have a bit of misogyny going on. It exists everywhere. And probably in Iowa. The boys' tree house with the "No girls allowed" sign prominently displayed is a real problem in state politics. It should be addressed but not in a dismissive way. Clinton better hope that most people don't know who Taylor Marsh is.

[pstans]

4. Iowan here

Iowa has never elected a woman to the be Governor or to Congress, making us just one of 2 states (along with Mississippi). However, I don't think that has much to do with the caucuses because the caucuses is limited to Democratic voters and not the entire state.

BTW- Patty Judge isn't very progressive. As Sec. of Ag she was Corporate Ag's best friend.

[provis99]

5. well, Alabama never had a woman governor, either

and anybody who cites Lurleen Wallace is a clueless clown.

[pstans]

7. Then they must have had a woman in Congress

[FatDave]

6. Iowa's pretty much like every other state

The cities (and yes, there are cities here) are progressive, the rural areas not so much. The farmers used to be strongly democratic, but I'm not sure any more. The cities and small towns balance into pretty solidly purple.

As far as Iowa mattering, of course it does. A win in Iowa is a huge asset in New Hampshire. I'm not saying it's right or wrong, just that it is.