Now that the Presidential primary race is over and the general election is underway, members of the media are looking back on their coverage of Hillary Clinton and trying to decide if they were sexist or not. Clark Hoyt, a writer for The New York Times takes his own employer to task and places a large amount of blame on Maureen Dowd, a columnist for the paper. Dowd was also named on the National Organization for Women’s Hall Of Shame list for her coverage of Clinton, which Hoyt describing as “loaded with language painting [Clinton] as a 50-foot woman with a suffocating embrace, a conniving film noir dame and a victim dependent on her husband.” Other members of the media specifically named by NOW as being sexist in their coverage of Clinton are MSNBC’s Chris Matthews and Tucker Carlson. Sexist coverage of Clinton is being cited as one of the reasons why some of her supporter say they won’t vote for fellow Democrat Barack Obama in the general election, some even saying that they will vote for John McCain instead. Salon’s Rebecca Traister discusses those supporters and why they are so pissed off in her column this week. So what do you guys think? Do Clinton supporters have a point? Or should they move on and decide who to vote for based solely on the issues?