Clinton, Stein and Albright offered a challenge.

[delrem]

I don't think it's "sexist" to respond to it.
I think responding to such challenges is part of politics.

[djean111]

1. What is the challenge? To vote for Hillary because she is a woman?

I am a woman, and gender is not even on my list of issues to consider.
Boring (evidently, to some) stuff like war and jobs and the TPP and cluster bombs and sending children back to danger to teach a lesson (it takes a village to hurt children too), increased H-1B visas - stuff like that. Those are the things that affect my vote. I am thinking of the country as a whole. Not some sort of symbolic gesture.

The way people maunder on about the gender thing presupposes that Bernie and Hillary are the same on the issues that are important to me - NO, they are not even close - or that I would (shallowly and facilely) believe that electing someone because of gender is more important than the issues I feel strongly about.

That is pathetic, to me. Bringing up the fact that Hillary is a woman is, to me, sexist and kind of insulting. Assumes I don't care about the issues, and/or Hillary and Bernie are pretty much the same on the issues. Someone is either stupid or disingenuous if they believe that or expect me to believe that.

[delrem]

2. In the back of my mind was pushback against Killer Mike quoting somebody

who said something that was antithetical to the Clinton/Stein/Albright assertion.

[djean111]

3. Frankly, there is nothing anyone can say that would budge me from voting on the issues.

Nothing.

Also, the Clinton campaign's initial roll-out was sexist, IMO, with all that oh, all the wimmenfolks will vote for Hillary, Hillary would be the first woman president, crap like that. They should have expected push-back.