I find this highly amusing in a deeply black comedic sort of way considering Markos’ complete insensitivity to Kathy Sierra’s situation last year:
The more [Hillary]’s attacked on personal grounds, the more sympathy that real person will generate, the more votes she’ll win from people sending a message to the media and her critics that they’ve gone way over the line of common decency. You underestimate that sympathy at your own peril. If I found myself half-rooting for her given the crap that was being flung at her, is it any wonder that women turned out in droves to send a message that sexist double-standards were unacceptable? Sure, it took one look at Terry McAuliffe’s mug to bring me back down to earth, but most people don’t know or care who McAuliffe is. They see people beating the shit out of Clinton for the wrong reasons, they get angry, and they lash back the only way they can — by voting for her.
The vote for the two “change” candidates outstripped the vote for the two “experience” candidates. I’m with change. I have no interest in seeing behavior that, in essence, helps the status quo.
That’s our Kos: Defender of Women’s Rights from time immemorial, unless, that is, you happen to be someone who receives rape and death threats online. Then you should just STFU and take it like a man. By the way, Kos is only bashing people who criticize Senator Clinton because he doesn’t want her to win. He could give a flying fig about the media’s misogyny. I wonder why ….?
And yes, that’s a rhetorical question folks.
