I have no problem with Hillary winning winning the election but voting for her because she is women is not a sufficient reason to vote for her. Voting for her because she stands up for women is.
Also bringing up 9/11 again is easily a thing the reps would have been criticized for too.
No one's saying to vote for her only because she is a woman, as if that exists in a vacuum.
I'm saying it IS a reason to vote for her. It is a significant, important matter. Diversity matters, and diverse representation at the top matters.
There is empirical, tested evidence of this. It leads to better outcomes across the board.
http://www8.gsb.columbia.edu/rtfiles/leadership/diversitydec2010/bernstein-diversity-at-top.pdf
Esther Duflo, a Bates Clark Medal winner, has done significant research on this:
One of her many, many papers on the subject:
http://economics.mit.edu/files/792
This paper uses political reservations for women in India to study the impact of
women’s leadership on policy decisions. Since the mid-1990’s, one third of Village
Council head positions in India have been randomly reserved for a woman: In these
councils only women could be elected to the position of head. Village Councils are responsible
for the provision of many local public goods in rural areas. Using a dataset we
collected on 265 Village Councils in West Bengal and Rajasthan, we compare the type
of public goods provided in reserved and unreserved Village Councils. We show that
the reservation of a council seat affects the types of public goods provided. Specifically,
leaders invest more in infrastructure that is directly relevant to the needs of their own
genders