2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumRuPaul just gave the most politically pragmatic endorsement of Hillary Clinton
Asked about his feelings on Democrats and Hillary Clinton by E. Alex Jung at Vulture, RuPaul replied:
"I fucking love them. I have always loved them. And let me just say this: If you're a politician not just in Washington but in business and industry, you have to be a politician there are a lot of things that you have to do that you're not proud of. There are a lot of compromises you have to make because it means that you can get this other thing over here. And if you think that you can go to fucking Washington and be rainbows and butterflies the whole time, you're living in a fucking fantasy world. So now, having said that, think about what a female has to do with that: All of those compromises, all of that shit, double it by ten. And you get to understand who this woman is and how powerful, persuasive, brilliant, and resilient she is. Any female executive, anybody who has been put to the side women, blacks, gays for them to succeed in a white-male-dominated culture is an act of brilliance. Of resilience, of grit, of everything you can imagine. So, what do I think of Hillary? I think she's fucking awesome. Is she in bed with Wall Street? Goddammit, I should hope so! You've got to dance with the devil. So which of the horrible people do you want? That's more of the question. Do you want a pompous braggart who doesn't know anything about diplomacy? Or do you want a badass bitch who knows how to get shit done? That's really the question."
http://www.vox.com/2016/8/12/12460042/rupaul-hillary-clinton
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)I teared up reading that. Doesn't happen to me often.
heaven05
(18,124 posts)with honest to god truth of how it works in this system....question is:can a majority of realistic voters deal with it?
RockaFowler
(7,429 posts)StepnKretchit
(60 posts)Sophiegirl
(2,338 posts)I spend 23 years working in a corporate government consulting job. At one company (which is pretty unheard of these days). As a former military spouse who could never get established because of constant moving, I finally settled in the DC area and took a job as a secretary. It was all I could qualify for.
For the next 23 years, I had to be 10 times smarter, quicker, more agile, more diplomatic, more willing to compromise to achieve even a portion my goals than my male colleagues. I had to do it as a single mom juggling family and work that none of the men had to deal with.
Over those years, I achieved my own personal goal of becoming a part of the corporate management team Hurray!! I was accepted!! I made it. Or, did I? As it turned out, nothing changed. The struggle only seemed to intensify. It took far more effort to be taken seriously despite the success I had achieved. I became disillusioned, depressed and quite frankly, angry. I dreaded going to work every day. It was a miserable existence. The fight would never end because, I was a woman in a man's world. IN 2012 NO LESS!!!
Four years ago, at my husband's suggestion, I threw in the towel in absolute defeat and disgust. I enrolled in an immersive Pastry Arts school - a lifelong desire. It was the most gratifying thing I have done since, well, watching my children graduate from college and become successful young adults. (Not sure anything can top that for me.)
But, I continued to look back at my corporate career with sadness at what I perceived to be a complete failure.
Until RuPaul said this: "Any female executive, anybody who has been put to the side women, blacks, gays for them to succeed in a white-male-dominated culture is an act of brilliance. Of resilience, of grit, of everything you can imagine."
A switch just flipped for me. I DID SUCCEED!! I ran the gauntlet and came out on the other end in one piece. Disillusioned, yes. But intact and stronger for it. Instead of regret, I will never look back and feel anything other than the successful woman I was then and am now.
I cannot even begin to understand how exponentially worse HRC has had it. But there she is. Smart, strong, resilient and under no circumstances, a mat to walk on.
My respect for her continues to grow every single day.
Thank you RuPaul. You just changed the biggest misperception of my life. And gave me yet another reason to respect and support Hillary.
(I apologize for the length of this post.)
Hav
(5,969 posts)I, as an introvert and often the odd one out, had to learn that there will always be people who will never accept you, no matter what. I also know some of the feelings you had. While it is hard to change other people, you can at least stand up for yourself. Leaving behind an environment that is hostile to you is not a failure, in my opinion. It just meant you didn't regard it as worthwhile to put up with their shit anymore. Life is too short to be miserable because of other people.
hibbing
(10,098 posts)Sophiegirl
(2,338 posts)It wasn't a hostile environment at all. On the whole, it was a great company to work for else I wouldn't have lasted 23 years. But the underlying, institutional male culture became more and more obvious the further up the ladder I rose. And the more disillusioned I became. It was so ingrained into the culture that, as I'm sure comes as no surprise, no one even recognized it existed. I made the right choice to leave. It was time for a long overdue change. I actually left on very good terms and still keep in touch with many of the people there.
flor-de-jasmim
(2,125 posts)Ideas aren't good (or they are "minor considerations, missing the big picture" until a man says the same thing (which can happen in the blink of an eye!). And if you are short, literally "over-looked".
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)In the world of the performing arts, you are invisible pretty much in terms of roles once you pass 45.
greatlaurel
(2,004 posts)I had a very similar experience in a science field working in government. The level of sexism, animosity and sabotaging was so high I was in denial of how bad it was for years. Once I realized what was being done, it was a weight off my back. I became proud of the work I had accomplished rather than frustrated by the lack of professional advancement. I paid the price for slamming the freaking door wide open and there have been many women who have followed with real opportunities to advance coming after me. Now if we could just get rid of the foul Rethugs running the state real accomplishments could happen for the good of the citizens. Sadly, the current Kasich administration is running the state government into the ground with a philosophy of threats and intimidation to the state employees.
RuPaul really gets it, grit. guts and good judgement to navigate extremely dangerous waters are Hillary Clinton's secret weapons. The fact that she is incredibly brilliant helps, too.
BlancheSplanchnik
(20,219 posts)Do you mind if I share it on my FB page? Anonymously, like "one woman's story", or something?
I already posted the RuPaul article.
It's funny--but not humorous-- how a woman could say what he said, but it's never taken seriously until enough men say it?
Sophiegirl
(2,338 posts)Feel free to use it.
BlancheSplanchnik
(20,219 posts)It would make a good letter to the editor. Maybe something with a large readership, like huff post?
Really important to get stories out there. People relate to personal stories, and you told it really well. That's not easy!
calimary
(81,304 posts)Not a bit too long!
Rather, a Thing of Beauty! I know exactly how you feel. Savoring this.
Sophiegirl
(2,338 posts)Very much.
ecstatic
(32,705 posts)Adrahil
(13,340 posts)I can't stand political purism. Politics should be driven by idealism, but tempered by realism. It s the Art of the Possible.
AlbertCat
(17,505 posts)It should also be pushing the possible to beyond what people thing is its limits. That's not "rainbows and ice-cream" either. It's not 'we can't do that right now."
Adrahil
(13,340 posts)...but I think a realistic assessment of the political possibilities are in order too. The reality is that our nations economy is going to have some dependency on Wall Street for a long time. The reality is that the House is going to be controlled by the GOP for at least another couple cycles. The reality s that the electorate as a whole is unlikely to support radically progressive policies at this time. We must formulate strategies that take those realities into account.
AlbertCat
(17,505 posts)Well, a majority want single payer.
And free college
And mainly less pay for play, elitist politicians.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)And "corporatist" and "establishment stooge" when you dissent at all on which battles you pick, because you have to pick some and let others go.
Otherwise you wind up going off in 20 different directions and getting nowhere.
Some of those "non-elitist" career politicians have done some of their own prioritizing, such as "Not letting a damn war keep me from being re-elected," committing what Paul Wellstone called "environmental racism" and still continues to profit from it, and weeks after saying that gay marriage was a state's rights issue (during a re-election campaign), that he wouldn't support it in his own state because it was "too divisive."
Being able to keep one's own staff for more than a few months is also a skill that one would need to accomplish any lofty goals, especially when they are talking about never making compromises.
Be careful who you accuse of pay for play.... because they've all done it in one way or another, and wouldn't pass the purity test.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)as to what is and is not feasible, because otherwise, they're really no different than politicians who say that defunding Planned Parenthood will reduce the number of abortions, and "most people" don't like Planned Parenthood.
That isn't going to be a reality no matter how many voters want it. Abortions will increase if Planned Parenthood is defunded, and forcing our health care system into a single payer system in fewer than 10 years would disrupt the system too much, even if it was politically possible.
It's up to congress. And certainly not going to happen with a president who has issues working effectively with their own progressive peers, let alone being obstructed by the GOP.
Even if everyone claps their hands and reeeeeeaaallly believes.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)Ever as nothing, it's time to grow up and realize the concept was tested for support with colleagues on the senate floor- and that matters a whole lot. More than the exaggerated promises we have seen dudes make just to be splashy.
AlbertCat
(17,505 posts)I also think people want less snobby elitism like being told to grow up ...and fewer politicians who aren't very creative or effective but with just name recognition.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)To work with people some would call enemies and pick our battles. I hear a lot of fools saying Obama and Hillary have done nothing... And I realize my bodily autonomy and civil rights mean less than their wallets. Not going to apologize for having different priorities. Fought for many more years than the lot of those suddenly obsessed w the oligarchy. Respecting other people civil rights and genuine struggles is part of growing up. So not really caring if I offend those who have described my uterus or social Justice as a wedge issue or distraction.
sheshe2
(83,785 posts)bettyellen
(47,209 posts)ehrnst
(32,640 posts)ehrnst
(32,640 posts)Talk about clueless old white men....
BlancheSplanchnik
(20,219 posts)Yessssssssssss!
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)You have to prioritize.
Not everything can be on one agenda.
BlancheSplanchnik
(20,219 posts)I think "elitism" has become a buzzword. It's too broad to focus on any specific criticism.
Some use the word as code for politicians who use big words and "don't know their place".
Others use it to refer to the ultra-wealthy class who buy legal favors and have no concept or concern for day to day life under their "leadership".
It's not that there's anything wrong with using the term "elitist", but it's more useful to clarify the problem. Otherwise you can't clarify solutions. In my not very humble opinion.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)BlancheSplanchnik
(20,219 posts)TheDebbieDee
(11,119 posts)And after the election you can call her President 8ITCH!
narnian60
(3,510 posts)to love Rupaul.
MFM008
(19,814 posts)!!!
unblock
(52,243 posts)Initech
(100,079 posts)sheshe2
(83,785 posts)Liberal_Stalwart71
(20,450 posts)HELL FUCK YES!!!
Towlie
(5,324 posts)VOX
(22,976 posts)In a time when reality has left the building.
Laser102
(816 posts)AgadorSparticus
(7,963 posts)Hortensis
(58,785 posts)Thank you, RuPaul, for the very straight speaking.
qwlauren35
(6,148 posts)have the balls to tell it like it is. RuPaul has balls.
thesquanderer
(11,989 posts)if someone had written it here as their own OP!
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)than if someone who was not known for that vocabulary had said it.
Liberal_in_LA
(44,397 posts)JCanete
(5,272 posts)The question always comes down to whether or not you are compromising the wrong things, or too much. Our conversation about whether to go with Clinton or Sanders in the primaries should have always been more civil, and pivoted around the point of not whether or not both politicians had good intentions, but whether or not one method was more effective than the other, or too compromised to do the good it wanted to. Not that motivations, or actual world views of the candidates should have been off the table, but giving both a generous read, this should have been the crux of the debate rather than who was the bad guy or the empty rhetoric populist.
I still believe that when you take money from big interests, you can't effectively fight against that money. On the other hand, for the most part, I believe that when you don't take money from big interests, you are very unlikely to get into office, or if you get into some position, prepare to get savaged by the media. The Sanders campaign happily surprised me, but it didn't change my mind about this. Case in point, he didn't win.
So that's the compromise that a lot of establishment politicians have made, hopefully for some of them, in the name of doing good. Still, the question remains, can they do good by focusing not just the platform, but the national discourse itself, away from the most influential and toxic elements in our whole system. I have my opinion on the last thirty years of that, but perhaps we finally have the right confluence of climate and events to make significant change champion-able and even achievable by our next President.