I recently read an article published by the Huffington Post, discussing how our society doesn’t dislike Hillary Clinton because of all the wrong she has done in her time in the public sphere, but rather, because she is a woman. Larry Womack, the journalist, cites various times other politicians have done illegal things similar to Clinton, but argues that there was no uproar in society when those politicians committed such crimes. But, if you can see past Womack’s rhetoric, you will understand that he is excusing Clinton of her crimes. He’s basically saying that because other politicians committed crimes, we shouldn't hold Clinton accountable for her crimes.

I’m also bothered by Womack’s article because he opens up with seemingly sarcastic reasons people might hate Clinton, such as her untrustworthiness, her problems with transparency and her ties to corporations. He is shying these actually important flaws away without any discussion of their further implications. Well, Womack, I’ll give you their further implications.

1. Untrustworthiness

Okay so let’s just play with this and say Clinton is elected as President. (shudders). If a large portion of our country thinks that she is untrustworthy, what makes Womak think that foreign leaders, members of Congress, the American people will easily support her policies? He acts as if it’s completely normal to not trust people. That’s not how society works. We expect trust from all relationships in our life. We expect them from our friends, family, significant others, colleagues, peers. We don’t like people who we can’t trust. We don’t feel safe around them.

2. Transparency

I’m sorry, but when did we start letting our government do whatever it wanted without holding them accountable or checking in on them? They govern us, therefore we, the people, have the right to transparency and to know what is happening in our government. He acts as if transparency in politics regarding classified information and Clinton’s handling of foreign affairs during her time as Secretary of State is equal to Trump not releasing his tax forms, which is what he compares it to. Trump not abiding by politic norms is what his entire campaign is about: clearly why he hasn’t released his tax returns. If he didn’t pay taxes for 18 years, he did so legally through laws our country has created. If Clinton can’t come up with her 33,000 emails, what makes Womack think she would share information relevant with the public about various policies? She wouldn’t. Furthermore, what makes Womack think there wouldn’t be an increase in shady, backdoor politics with Clinton around? News flash: there would be.

3. Ties to Corporations

Similar to his payments or not in taxes, the laws in our country allow U.S. companies to store their money in offshore accounts to refrain from being liable for that money in tax returns. While this practice isn’t a very good practice, obviously companies are going to use it because it is legal and saves them money. Trump at least has the knowledge as a businessman that this practice is hurting the American economy and therefore will stop it if he is in office. So for Womack to link Trump as a big, bad business person is inaccurate. He’s simply using practices legally in place for his benefit. Womack, instead, is trying to defend Clinton’s speeches and fundraisers connected to Wall Street that have brought in millions to the Clintons as normal. Because of this practice, because she has been “bought” by Wall Street and other corporations, they will be looking for things from Clinton if she is elected. Her focus will no longer be on the American people, but the top 1% she says she so desperately hates.

And Womack, believe me, I’m not mourning Obama’s exit. I’ll be celebrating the day he walks out of office, in hopes that Trump will be walking in.

Just look at this statement Womack makes:

“What kind of a society treats these two people as equal in any way?”

He is outwardly encouraging society to not treat people equally. Isn’t that what liberals proclaim their ideology encompasses? To treat people equally? I’m afraid Womack has broken with his party and just made an absurd statement that no one in society would respect. But maybe Womack isn’t the only one to break from such ideology. Do you ever find that liberals proclaim the art of making your own choices and having your own opinion until suddenly your opinions are drastically different from theirs? Liberals are quick to judge when others don’t agree with something they’ve done. That seems very counter-intuitive to the accepting ideology liberals seem to boast about.

If you, for some reason, haven't thought his paper was out of line, we haven't gotten to Womack’s biggest claim: that people in this country hate Hillary Clinton because she is a woman. Here’s the problem with feminism in this country (if you even believe feminism is real): women aren’t suppressed. Stop acting like America is a land that spews hatred and anger towards women. As a 20-year-old woman, I am not hated in this country. I am not oppressed in this country. I am given opportunities similar to those of my male counterparts and, like men, I have to work to make those opportunities a reality. Women, like men, have to work. I think sometimes feminists think that women don't need to work for the same opportunities men need to work for. Well, by that logic, we wouldn't be giving men equality, either. To say that people hate Clinton because she is a woman is like saying people hated Obama and didn’t want to vote for him because he’s African American. Clinton promises “equality” for women, while Obama promised “equality” for African Americans. I’m sorry, but has anyone else noticed race relations have gotten exponentially worse in the last eight years?

So Womack, it’s not that I want to tear your paper apart as a 20-year-old college student, but I believe you haven’t really thought much, if any, of your paper through. Stop looking at Donald Trump as a bad person. This notion that these tapes released have completely shattered his campaign are completely irrelevant. What he said is awful. I cannot and will not defend it, and I don’t expect anybody else to.

But what the American public has to understand is that this election is about far more than a tape released eleven years ago. This election will set the course for the next few decades in global history. This next administration will choose Supreme Court justices and finally make a decision on how to handle terrorism (please note: this decision could be one that puts American people in harm's way). This election will change the world. Womack forgot to mention that if Clinton is elected, millions of babies will be legally aborted and gun owners will get their right to protection taken away from them. We live in a world where we should know that both of these are wrong. They are so much more than just wrong – they are heinous, and illegal. If we don’t elect Donald Trump AND vote Republican down the ballot, our country will spiral out of control.

So, no Womack, I don’t hate Hillary Clinton because she is a woman like me; I hate Hillary Clinton because she will destroy the best country in the world.