Hillary Plays the Emotion Card

eoe wrote:

Well, I've never seen or heard of her getting choked up about anything in the many, many years she's suppposedly been in public office and todays' emotional show was way too convenient and much too coincidental for me to buy into.

I disagree. she is being ripped to shreds by everyone, dems and repubs alike, and it's been going on forever and that will get to anyone eventually, even an "Ice Queen".

I AM however beginning to think that her candidacy is in trouble. I will vote for Obama if he wins the nomination.... but only to keep the weakest field of republicans I've seen in my lifetime out of office. I still do not believe he's the man for the job and I worry about him being in office not because I think he's a scumbag like bush... but because I think the job will eat him up.... I don't think he's ready for it.

Time will tell.

0 Replies

Yeah, I've been trying to figure out where to react to that one. (The Steinem Op-Ed.) The first half was pissing me off. The second half/ ending left me confused about what she was getting at.

Oh, when I look it up online I see that I was wrong about where it ended in the paper version. I thought it ended here:

Quote:

I'm not advocating a competition for who has it toughest. The caste systems of sex and race are interdependent and can only be uprooted together. That's why Senators Clinton and Obama have to be careful not to let a healthy debate turn into the kind of hostility that the news media love. Both will need a coalition of outsiders to win a general election. The abolition and suffrage movements progressed when united and were damaged by division; we should remember that.

But it doesn't.

Hmm, as I finish the whole thing I'm less annoyed, but I still find a lot to argue with. For example:

Quote:

"Progressive"? "Radical"? I'm not sure. I think Edwards has a point with the status quo thing, as Cycloptichorn showed with the money-from-lobbyists graphic for example. And I don't think that the women over 50 or 60 who disproportionately supported Clinton are necessarily more radical. It's again the competition thing that she says she decries. Isn't it pretty radical to support Obama, too? In fact, with the Iraq vote, with the Iran Revolutionary Guard vote, with Obama's more vigorous opposition to DOMA, etc., it could be pretty easily argued that he's more progressive and more radical than she is.

0 Replies

The right woman could get elected, Hillary has high negatives constantly...she is simply not likable.

This country is not as backward as portrayed on gender matters although it is still present just like racism. And where around the world are gender and/or race discrimination not present at some degree?

Just because Hillary is not a palatable person doesn't mean the window for a female president window is closed.... nor that any other woman candidate in the future that is a political animal will be a shoe-in.

0 Replies

The question to be asked is this: should women in public life be treated exactly the same as men? If so, is it not relevant to note that any male candidate who cried in public about the stresses of his campaign would essentially be finished? When we don't hold her to that standard, are we being sexist or just humane? I mean, I have long felt her to be one of my least favorite national politicians, but I can still see she's hurting, even if her bewilderment is inextricable from her sense of entitlement. I'm okay with politicians weeping occasionally in public. Churchill did it all the time.
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/

0 Replies

I agree, Brand X. That's what I didn't like about the beginning of the column.

If we didn't actually have Barack Hussein Obama in front of us, doing well, would we say that this hypothetical MAN had a chance? Weird name, weird background, black... never gonna happen.

Heck, people have been saying that up until very recently anyway.

While of course there is still racism and sexism, I think Obama should get credit for having done as well as he has, rather than just crediting/blaming sexism. Why isn't Edwards the front-runner? Why, for that matter, was Hillary the front-runner for so long?

Obama constructed a really good organization in Iowa and a really good surge at the end. Hillary didn't react well to it. She lost.

It doesn't have to be about sexism.

0 Replies

Hey Hillary, iron my shirt will ya?

Quote:

US presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton's run in the all important primary state of New Hampshire has turned from bad to worse with rival Barack Obama's early win in first ballot results.

Mrs Clinton's first faced screaming male protesters telling her to "iron my shirt" at a rally in the state.

I am not saying the reason she is loosing to Obama is because of sexism; but the reaction to her emotionalism is; IMO. And also it appears to sexism is alive and well to some voters.

0 Replies

There are plenty of rednecks still around.

0 Replies

revel wrote:

I am not saying the reason she is loosing to Obama is because of sexism; but the reaction to her emotionalism is; IMO. And also it appears to sexism is alive and well to some voters.

OK, picture Edwards crying in frustration because he has so much to offer, but just can't get the press to pay attention. He's done. Period. Romney tearing up because no one respects all he did in Mass? Would it be all over the press? Absolutely. Howard Dean was crucified for yelling at a rally. That Clinton has been given some sympathy in this respect is due to her gender. Still, I think this is a net loss for her.

0 Replies

If any of the other candidates became teary-eyed and choked up, they'd be labeled p****** and that would be all but the end of their political careers. Hillary's not some silly female who can't control her emotions in public. She's played the sympathy card, the gender card, she pulls these cards out of her sleeve whenever she feels it's necessary. A couple of weeks ago, I posted that I've lost alot of respect for her. Well, after last nights' grand performance, I have officially lost ALL respect for her.

0 Replies

God, I am so tired of this campaign, even though officially it has just started. Of course, unofficially it's been on for months. This should not be a major headline item, but it is. Meh.

0 Replies

Men have cried on TV in the past and been called compassionate, Hillary does it and is either called fake or weak.

I personally think most people are misstating what she was crying about. She was watering up thinking about the direction of this country and how she don't want to see it go backwards. (like it has been) She honestly thinks she is the most qualified out of those running to see that it don't. I am not sure it is a loss myself because she might turn out to be an underdog with all the bad attacks she is getting, mostly from democrats.

Rivals Reacts to Teary Clinton

I think this was the most honest emotion that we have seen from Hillary and I liked it. We'll see how it plays out a few days from now after everyone has anyalyzed it to death.

0 Replies

(((((((((((((((((((BEAR HUG FOR HILLLARY)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))

0 Replies

revel wrote:

Men have cried on TV in the past and been called compassionate, Hillary does it and is either called fake or weak.

I personally think most people are misstating what she was crying about. She was watering up thinking about the direction of this country and how she don't want to see it go backwards. (like it has been) She honestly thinks she is the most qualified out of those running to see that it don't. I am not sure it is a loss myself because she might turn out to be an underdog with all the bad attacks she is getting, mostly from democrats.

Rivals Reacts to Teary Clinton

I think this was the most honest emotion that we have seen from Hillary and I liked it. We'll see how it plays out a few days from now after everyone has anyalyzed it to death.

See, I don't believe that's why she was tearing up. At all.

She's had a long time and literally hundreds of opportunities to passionately discuss the direction of the country, and she hasn't really done so; and hasn't gotten emotional about it before. It's a little too late in the game to change tactics and have people believe that it's genuine.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

I don't know if anyone else has mentioned this, but what struck me most is what a big copycat she is, not her emotional display, which I think is fine if it is believable. To me it wasn't believable. Why? Because Edwards scored big points in the debate by saying almost the exact same thing -- that this was personal for him, and that it being personal set him apart from the other candidates because it meant that he wouldn't give up when things got tough. So what does she do but come out and try to co-opt his message and say how personal this is for her. Maybe it really is, but it's awfully convenient timing.

0 Replies

Yes, I definitely had that thought, too.

0 Replies

It's funny the lip service that's given to the necessity of non polarizing, non cynical change in leadership..... except where Hillary is concerned of course. Laughing

0 Replies

Care to expand on that, bear?

0 Replies

For something which scored big; I haven't heard a word about Edwards saying the same thing first. If he did; then it does change things. What exactly did he say and when did he say he say it?

0 Replies

FreeDuck wrote:

Care to expand on that, bear?

no... it is so obvious it requires no expansion.

0 Replies

Quote:

[EDWARDS:] And this is a very personal cause for me, because I come from a family -- my father is in the audience tonight -- where my father worked for 37 years in the mills. He didn't get a chance, like I did, to have a college education.

And this is a fight for the middle class and families just like the one I grew up with. My grandmother, who helped raise me, had a fifth or sixth grade education, came from a family of share-croppers, she worked in the mill every day so that I could have the chances that I've had.

And this -- I spent 20 years fighting irresponsible corporations in courtrooms.

EDWARDS: I know what it takes to fight these people and win.

But here's what I would want people to know. What I want people to know is, this battle is deep inside me and it is personal.

And it matters whether it's personal or not, because is if it's either academic or political, when the tough fight comes, you'll walk away from it. You'll do what's political.

This fight is deeply personal to me. I've been engaged in it my whole life, to fight for the middle class, to fight against powerful special interests. And it is a fight I will wage on behalf of the American people as president of the United States and win, as I have for 54 years.

From the debate on Saturday:

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2008/Story?id=4092530&page=3

0 Replies

Hillary Plays the Emotion Card

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know