Two women. Two views. Two columns.
Two women. Two views. Two columns. Two of the top emailed stories at the NYT as of 10:10 p.m tonight. Gloria
. Gloria's column might be remembered as more historically galvanizing before a crucial election. But Maureen's column might be remembered as more historically accurate after a crucial election. ... Hey, Oprah and Deval, cut it out. At least some blacks got voting rights before women. Hey, Margaret Mitchell and Scarlett O'Hara were really the more victimized serfs, right? ... I still think Hillary's tears were sincere. But Maureen makes a good case it doesn't matter. ...Update
- 1.10.08 -- Three more women. Three more views. Three more columns. Joan
, who concludes:
So will women like Rafferty remain “ticked” through Super Duper Tuesday on Feb. 5? God, I hope not. Then Hillary wins.
Who knows whether it was a sympathy/ticked off/substance vote. Probably divided evenly among all three. But assuming Hillary got a huge portion of that 57 percent female vote, isn't it amazing in retrospect she only won by 3 percent? ... Hub Blog ran into a Republican strategist friend last night who had just returned from New Hampshire. He said two things clearly pushed Hillary's vote: her campaign operation and females. He was quite impressed, though obviously not excited about her victory. ...Update II
- 1.10.08 -- Robert Novak
notes the big female vote, dismisses Hillary's tears as phony, urges Republicans to rally around McCain and warns that the "Clintons" (plural) are the most formidable opponents Republicans will face in November. ... I definitely agree with the last point. Some Republicans are itching to take on Hillary. But they're fools to think she'll be easy to beat.