Why is Hillary campaign shy of chanting electing First Woman President is in itself the biggest CHANGE in USA?

She would be accused of using the gender card. It seems its ok for obama to go after the black vote specifically, however if hillary goes after the female vote sepcifically, they would call it a sexist campaign. There seems to be one standard for obama and one for hillary. And he is given alot of latitude while she is given none.Why is Hillary campaign shy of chanting electing First Woman President is in itself the biggest CHANGE in USA?
The simple answer is that she can't get it both ways. After a term and a half as a senator with no record, and eight years as first lady with nothing to show for it, she can't run on a record of being somebody who will bring change; her record doesn't reflect it.





Plus, her status as a woman is negated by the fact that Obama is black. There is no card to play; if she runs as a woman all Obama has to do is run as a black. She gets killed both ways if she plays it; as a liberal she's supposed to be immune to sex / race / orientation / religious preferences. That burns up that card in the primary.





She CAN play it if she wins the nomination. Indeed, Obama can play it if he wins. But there is a lot of votes to gain before they can play that card.Why is Hillary campaign shy of chanting electing First Woman President is in itself the biggest CHANGE in USA?
Basically, what Obama and Hillary have said that if either one of them is nominated then history will be made. Also, more history will be made if either one becomes president. Nothing wrong with the facts of this issue.
Electing anybody other than a white male is a change simply because it has never happened. Nonetheless, this is not the kind of change that makes a difference when it comes to the economy, war, health care, public education, higher education, taxes, and protecting the constitution.
because it is a meaningless event
Hillary's campaign is not based on her gender, it is based on the fact that she is the most qualified to become president.
Electing someone base upon gender is as dumb as electing someone based upon their race or religion.
Yeah, it IS a meaningless change! Will we have a President who is NOT in bed with big business, lobbyists and special interests? Of course not. Obama and Clinton are both just as bad as each other when it comes to 'big money', especially with all their 'bundlers' too.





Will we finally see universal healthcare in America. Of course not. Not while these people are in bed with the health 'insurance' companies and despicably plotting to stop candidates like Senator Mike Gravel who ISN'T in bed with those pigs from having a voice in the media to get his message across in his campaign! What Hillary did in plotting with Edwards that way was disgusting and unconscionable. And undemocratic too!





That man has 10 times the character, AND experience, AND record of achievement as a Senator that Obama or Clinton do, or ever will.





He is the most honest, the most intelligent, gutsy and the one man with the most integrity in this race. And he IS still in the race.





He might not win, but he's much more worth supporting than corporate lackeys like Obama or Clinton.





Check out http://www.gravel2008.us if you want to find out anything about him.