Justice Ginsburg Blames “Sexism” For 2016 Election Loss

PUBLISHED: 10:42 PM 13 Feb 2018

“No Doubt”: Liberal Justice Pushes Partisan Agenda, Issues Absurd Claim About 2016 Election

She just reminded everyone that it’s time for her to retire.

A few months ago, while speaking at a Columbia University Women's Conference, Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg claimed she has “no doubt” that sexism played a role in President Donald Trump’s victory (pictured above).

A few months ago, while speaking at a Columbia University Women’s Conference, Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg claimed she has “no doubt” that sexism played a role in President Donald Trump’s victory. This is because, according to her, a male Democratic candidate would’ve been treated differently than Clinton.

Specifically, when asked by CBS’ Charlie Rose if sexism played a role in the 2016 election, Justice Ginsburg replied, “I have no doubt that it did.”

When Rose followed-up and asked if she thought the sexism played a decisive role, she told him, “there [are] so many things that might have been decisive, but that was a major, major factor.”

To clarify, she added, “I think it was difficult for Hillary Clinton to get by even the macho atmosphere prevailing during that campaign, and she was criticized in a way I think no man would have been criticized. I think anyone who watched that campaign unfold would answer it the same way I did: Yes, sexism played a prominent part.”

Ginsburg’s comment, however, is absolutely absurd and utterly reprehensible. First, it’s absurd because if Clinton was a male but had all of the exact same baggage, she still would not have won the election. People didn’t oppose Clinton because she was a woman, they opposed because she supported terrible policies and has a questionable past.

Second, it’s reprehensible because it’s a blatant attack on Trump’s supporters. By blaming sexism for Clinton’s loss, she’s basically calling that a lot of Trump’s supporters sexist, which couldn’t be further from the truth.

In addition to being absurd and reprehensible, her comment also makes it clear that she seriously needs to retire. This is because, if she either can’t figure out why the Democrats actually lost the election or continues to push a partisan, anti-Trump agenda, then she shouldn’t be deciding the fate of others.

This isn’t the first time that Ginsburg has blamed sexism for the Democratic Party’s 2016 election loss. She made a similar comment shortly after President Trump won.

Although ridiculous, Ginsburg’s comments are sadly not very surprising seeing as she’s been an extremely outspoken critic of the president. During his campaign, for instance, she stated, “I can’t imagine what this place would be — I can’t imagine what the country would be — with Donald Trump as our president.”

To clarify, she added, “he is a faker. He has no consistency about him. He says whatever comes into his head at the moment. He really has an ego.”

Outraged by her unfair criticism, President Trump tweeted, “Justice Ginsburg of the U.S. Supreme Court has embarrassed all by making very dumb political statements about me. Her mind is shot — resign!”

Unfortunately, Ginsburg isn’t alone in her belief that prejudice is why the Democratic Party lost the 2016 election. Hillary Clinton also made the same claim in her new book about her defeat.

“Why am I seen as such a divisive figure and, say, Joe Biden and John Kerry aren’t?…What makes me such a lightning rod for fury? I’m really asking. I’m at a loss,” wrote Clinton in the book.

“I suspect that for many of us—more than we might think—it feels somehow off to picture a woman president sitting in the Oval Office or the Situation Room,” she continued.

“It’s discordant to tune into a political rally and hear a woman’s voice booming (‘screaming,’ ‘screeching’) forth,” she added, noting, “even the simple act of a woman standing up and speaking to a crowd is relatively new.”

In addition to Ginsburg and Clinton, ESPN’s Jemele Hill, a controversial liberal who co-hosts “SportsCenter,” appeared on MSNBC’s “PoliticsNation” with Rev. Al Sharpton, another controversial liberal, several days ago and also made a similar claim.

The ESPN co-host’s comments about the president were prompted by Sharpton asking, “how do you feel when you heard the president in a State of the Union address still take a shot at people that are standing up about injustices?”

In response, she quite absurdly replied, “I wasn’t surprised and I think this is going to…probably [be] a constant thing for the president because it’s a very easy dog whistle, it’s low hanging fruit, it’s what I like to call ‘racial pornography,’ because it’s a way to stoke his base.”

Comments like this are, unfortunately, not uncommon from Hill. Several months ago, for instance, she engaged in a lengthy tirade about Trump while arguing with several people on Twitter.

Hill’s rant against the President began with the tweet: “Donald Trump is a white supremacist who has largely surrounded himself w/ other white supremacists.”

When someone, presumably white, pushed back against her tweet, she replied, “the height of white privilege is being able to ignore his white supremacy, because it’s no threat to you. Well, it’s a threat to me.”

In a series of follow-up tweets, Hill added, “Trump is the most ignorant, offensive president of my lifetime. His rise is a direct result of white supremacy. Period…He has surrounded himself with white supremacists — no they are not ‘alt-right’ — and you want me to believe he isn’t a white supremacist?”

Despite what many on the left claim, President Trump did not win the election due to prejudice. Instead, it’s quite clear that he won because he did a better job of connecting with voters and campaigned on issues that people in key parts of the country truly cared about.