[Beach333]

Regardless of your words about Stein, most people have never heard of her, period.

“You are the one who “feels a sense of pride” at her nomination. Why? Are you a feminist?”

I said I felt a sense of pride that a woman had been nominated. I have nothing in common with the way Hillary Clinton thinks. Why would that make me a feminist? Why would you attack me?

[Kenny]

I acknowledge your point that it should be a historic event, a proud moment. Unfortunately with her, it’s just not.

[entropy12]

I said I felt a sense of pride that a woman had been nominated.

That sounds sexist to me. Why should gender matter more than honesty, record of accomplishments (Hillary has none), and not taking money from countries who treat women like 3rd class citizens?

[kabar]

You said, Sorry if you guys can’t understand the difference between feeling pride for the moment that a woman is nominated for a major party’s run for presidency."

You think that I and others are attacking you. That is not the case. I am just trying to understand why you feel a sense of pride for this moment.

I asked if you were a feminist because it appears that Hillary's gender is very important to you in terms of feeling a sense of pride. You obviously don't like her and will not vote for her. I would be upset that such a despicable human being spoiled what was an historical milestone. I would be angry with no sense of pride whatsoever.

Regardless of your words about Stein, most people have never heard of her, period.

She was a national candidate for President and the Green party received the fourth highest total of votes. She is also a women. Just because you haven't heard of her doesn't diminish her accomplishments.

I wonder how much you know about the history of women as it pertains to the Presidency and Vice Presidency. There were people like Shirley Chisholm, Geraldine Ferraro, and Sarah Palin who helped pave the way along with many others.

[bushpilot2]

Is it an historical moment if Hillary Clinton wins in November?

[MIA_eccl1212]

Other women have been nominated before... and hillary was not actually nominated.

She CHEATED to get the deck stacked in her favor by corruption, coercion, deception, blackmail and collusion... that is what the emails show.

She was NOT the first one. She IS the one that we know broke the rules and cheated to get the nomination. The only women who would be proud of that, are those who believe it is necessary for them to cheat, manipulate, corrupt and then claim legitimate victory when their own scum and villainy are the foundation for the clearly stolen result.

She is neither the first, or legitimate in the role her husband bought for her.