Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

oberliner

(58,724 posts)
Thu Dec 21, 2017, 04:26 PM Dec 2017

Kirsten Gillibrand, The Senate's unapologetic feminist, is leading the resistance against Trump

Even as Kirsten Gillibrand has charted a meteoric political rise, she has maintained the ability to fly ever so slightly under the radar, exploiting opponents' consistent failure to recognize her as a lethal political threat. Since Trump's inauguration, the junior senator from New York has earned the distinction of being, statistically, the chamber's most anti-Trump member (voting against the president's position 93.7 percent of the time), and her steadfast opposition to Trump's Cabinet picks won her legions of new admirers. Yet she still managed to get Trump, whose proposed budget slashes everything from the State Department to food stamps, to agree to spend $2 million on a commission commemorating the centennial of women's suffrage. Gillibrand, noting the funding was tucked into a must-pass appropriations bill, says with a slight smile, "Trump didn't necessarily know it was there."

It makes sense, of course, that Congress' most unapologetic feminist would be best positioned to channel the white-hot rage that drove millions of women to take to the streets in protest of Trump's inauguration. "We are at a very intense moment," she says. "If you're not fighting, you're going to lose." But in certain ways, the Age of Trump has also helped propel a number of Gillibrand's most closely held causes.

She's long argued that until women are equally represented in Congress, the issues that matter to them won't get the attention or resources they deserve. Six years ago, she started Off the Sidelines, a PAC that supports women seeking public office. This year, she says, "a far greater number" of women than ever have reached out – overall, Trump's election has spurred at least 16,000 women and counting to consider a run for office. "The silver lining of the Trump presidency is it is an era of activism, and one where women really want to be heard," Gillibrand says. "They are stepping up and owning their ambition and being willing to take risks – they know that the things they love are at risk."

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/features/how-kirsten-gillibrand-is-outsmarting-donald-trump-w501354
19 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Kirsten Gillibrand, The Senate's unapologetic feminist, is leading the resistance against Trump (Original Post) oberliner Dec 2017 OP
Fat chance she'll be as effective against trump as she was against Franken. brush Dec 2017 #1
Post removed Post removed Dec 2017 #2
Trump is not going anywhere over sexual allegations standingtall Dec 2017 #3
I don't love her and won't vote for her in a primary... Of course a general would be different... Demsrule86 Dec 2017 #4
$2 million on a commission commemorating women's suffrage? ProudLib72 Dec 2017 #5
It should go to women fighting for reproductive rights not to something that is really about the Demsrule86 Dec 2017 #9
A regular Joan of Arc she is! jalan48 Dec 2017 #6
the same one who sat silent for a year before calling on trump to resign.... msongs Dec 2017 #7
She's the only Democrat to vote against every one of Trump's nominees onenote Dec 2017 #8
That is meaningless. You can't stop his nominees. Demsrule86 Dec 2017 #10
So you think the Democrats in the Senate should vote for Republican nominees onenote Dec 2017 #12
I don't think it matters...keep your powder dry for 18...be ready. Then we can engage in meaningful Demsrule86 Dec 2017 #13
Dry Powder!! My old friend!! It's been such a LONG TIME!! hatrack Dec 2017 #16
So if Franken had voted for Sessions, you'd be fine with that. onenote Dec 2017 #17
It would be meaningless...and I would rather they kept their powder dry for the important stuff. Demsrule86 Dec 2017 #11
"Gillibrand has charted a meteoric political rise". Fun fact oasis Dec 2017 #14
Ah, No ebbie15644 Dec 2017 #15
Shorter: she sent a Tweet last week and it got in the news. ucrdem Dec 2017 #18
I'm sorry; you're not allowed to post something positive about Gillibrand here... brooklynite Dec 2017 #19

Response to oberliner (Original post)

standingtall

(2,785 posts)
3. Trump is not going anywhere over sexual allegations
Thu Dec 21, 2017, 04:47 PM
Dec 2017

The more time spent on sexual allegations the less time is spent discussing the Russia issue.

Demsrule86

(68,576 posts)
4. I don't love her and won't vote for her in a primary... Of course a general would be different...
Thu Dec 21, 2017, 04:51 PM
Dec 2017

I have no interest in anything she says as she showed really bad judgement in the Franken matter...glad you all in New York love...her and all . I wouldn't want her primaried or anything, but just not interested in her for higher office.

ProudLib72

(17,984 posts)
5. $2 million on a commission commemorating women's suffrage?
Thu Dec 21, 2017, 04:52 PM
Dec 2017

What does that even mean? If it's $2 million to promote grassroots female activism then it's laudable.

Demsrule86

(68,576 posts)
9. It should go to women fighting for reproductive rights not to something that is really about the
Thu Dec 21, 2017, 05:21 PM
Dec 2017

past. No doubt the women involved were great, but we have limited funds...this just seems like going through the motions to me.

onenote

(42,703 posts)
8. She's the only Democrat to vote against every one of Trump's nominees
Thu Dec 21, 2017, 05:02 PM
Dec 2017

She deserves credit for that. A lot of Democrats, including Al, should have followed her lead in that regard.

onenote

(42,703 posts)
12. So you think the Democrats in the Senate should vote for Republican nominees
Thu Dec 21, 2017, 05:23 PM
Dec 2017

unless we can get 51 votes?

Really?

Demsrule86

(68,576 posts)
13. I don't think it matters...keep your powder dry for 18...be ready. Then we can engage in meaningful
Thu Dec 21, 2017, 05:24 PM
Dec 2017

stuff.

onenote

(42,703 posts)
17. So if Franken had voted for Sessions, you'd be fine with that.
Thu Dec 21, 2017, 05:37 PM
Dec 2017

And you're fine that he did vote to confirm Kelly.

And it goes beyond nomination. Gillibrand has voted against the republican majority on cloture motions more often than any other Democrat.

Resisting doesn't mean voting for something because we can't defeat it.

oasis

(49,387 posts)
14. "Gillibrand has charted a meteoric political rise". Fun fact
Thu Dec 21, 2017, 05:31 PM
Dec 2017

about meteors: "Now you see 'em, and now you don't".

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Kirsten Gillibrand, The S...