[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Xmca-l] Re: I just think it's great, more than great,
- To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: I just think it's great, more than great,
- From: Annalisa Aguilar <email@example.com>
- Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2016 22:40:32 +0000
- Accept-language: en-US
- Authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) firstname.lastname@example.org;
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=unmm.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector1-unm-edu; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=gNDyINf+FOh8lN4hil3gKAcmViD9rMe/YZ3e2HpD178=; b=X2OtKWZzZfrvTEoRRa+RG8wbkAlUxTRzrqK95BnVpXtf4tf3ZZ/9wqcD/EfoAdC6Vh+owVVkf8dwLHohNmqPUC3QU4Md0J5UzPnod7rRq9xojKghSZiXP/dSJD8Tt+ut3GbEu6ExcNwF0twQ7YY2rlnsJukvxUx9tmXo8FlV6qk=
- In-reply-to: <HE1PR0301MB2188CFF61B33469B4C8CC2F587010@HE1PR0301MB2188.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
- List-archive: <https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/private/xmca-l>
- List-help: <mailto:email@example.com?subject=help>
- List-id: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l.mailman.ucsd.edu>
- List-post: <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org>
- List-subscribe: <https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca-l>, <mailto:email@example.com?subject=subscribe>
- List-unsubscribe: <https://mailman.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca-l>, <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org?subject=unsubscribe>
- References: <email@example.com>, <HE1PR0301MB2188CFF61B33469B4C8CC2F587010@HE1PR0301MB2188.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
- Reply-to: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Sender: <email@example.com>
- Spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM
- Spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99
- Thread-index: AQHR6c0ccV5NBBCrIkqmEvLW1VAPF6AvyiuAgAAx09Q=
- Thread-topic: [Xmca-l] Re: I just think it's great, more than great,
I want to believe that she is a better option than he is, too.
If people decide to not vote for her because of her husband, that is their choice. I vote for the person, not the person's spouse.
Bringing up all the ugliness of sexual stories associated with the candidates seems to be a red herring, if you ask me. That's not to confirm or deny these his-stories, it's just to say it's more sensationalism. It's just another way to not talk about the issues.
Did anyone notice in the speech last night that her husband was referred to as "Explainer-in-chief"?
Wonder what that meant...?
In any case, I'm just happy that a woman has been nominated for the office of President. To be able to rant over the inadequacies of the woman-candidate is far more interesting than having no woman-candidates to rant about at all.