General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forumsvankuria
(904 posts)Not sure I would've thought if it on my own.
ashling
(25,771 posts)bettyellen
(47,209 posts)What the fuck?
Beacool
(30,253 posts)My favorite Star Trek captain responds.
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)BainsBane
(53,093 posts)given that there are endless threads about how she "looks." It says a great deal about what the opposition to her is about.
The picture is in fact a mock up of the Rosie the Riveter campaign from WWII.
ashling
(25,771 posts)I just made the comment that it looks like Vivian Vance as Ethel Mertz.
The OP is not to suggest anything about Clinton or her looks
It does not say anything about her looks
The post is not about Clinton, but about the graphic.
If you are interested in what I think about Clinton (which you are not) go here
Hillary says she wants to be my champion?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026494964
BainsBane
(53,093 posts)her campaign photo being unattractive, and now that she looks like Ethel Mertz. It is about her appearance. Your other OP may comment on substance (well, not really, but more so), but this one does not. It's just more nonsense about how a woman looks.
ashling
(25,771 posts)Not Hillary. This was not intended as a comment on Hillary Clinton. It was not intended to be pejorative, derogatory, sarcastic, or in any other way a comment on the candidate or her looks.
The only "nonsense" was about how a picture has a certain resemblance to someone. If you disagree, FINE, but don't insinuate that I meant something that I clearly did not.
As far as the substance of the other post ... I only use it to show that I am not anti nor am I pro Hillary.
DeSwiss
(27,137 posts)K&R