Hillary turns on the tears again. (1 Viewer)

[Saintlady]

I should have been more specific. I know a lot of women who are voting for Hillary for the simple fact that she is a woman, I didn't mean all women in general.

There are also men out there who will not even consider voting for her because she is a woman.

fyi: I'm not a Hillary supporter, and I am a fem.

 

[DavidM]

I should have been more specific. I know a lot of women who are voting for Hillary for the simple fact that she is a woman, I didn't mean all women in general.

No, I understand.

Still, you do realize that there are some white men who will only vote for other white men, right? And that this country had an election process predicated on that very ideal for a long time.

Ideally people will vote on substance and while there is truth in saying Obama is getting some black support because he's black, and Clinton is getting some female support because she's a woman, it's also true that McCain, Romney, and Huckabee enjoy their share of support from white male voters for reasons no more substantive.

 

[yaygosaints]

Yeah, I know what you're talking about. I guess it's just because I don't think about things like that and I can't think of a single reason for why I would want to vote for Hillary (I'm having trouble thinking of reasons to vote for McCain and Romney also).

 

[SaintJ]

Similar complaint is lodged at black voters for supporting Obama because he is black.

So does this mean that white men have traditionally promoted and supported white male candidates just because they are...white men?

lmao

 

[SoonerJim]

Her host and former colleague spent minutes addressing her chief motive for the WH, "saving the children", and we have the audacity to quibble with her essential goodness? The current National Review cover story on Jonah Goldberg's new book, "Liberal Fascism", has an excerpt concluding with a paragraph on Hillary's candidacy. Her language encompasses the vocabulary of rehabilitive nannyism, extending the helplessness of the human condition to the adult population. Children are buffeted in a storm of beastial capitalism, assaulted by conservatives and Those Who Hate.

Electing Hillary returns us to the halcyon years of 1993 to 2000, when sharks, OJ, and McVeigh were our greatest enemies. Hillary was at the vortex of everything that went well, and had nothing to do with the stuff which didn't.

Her bio is replete with references to children. I am unaware she worked as a corporate lawyer steeped in conflicts of interest in cases where her erstwhile spouse had any controlling interest. Her WH records are sealed until after the inauguration. Bush did the same thing; so did Giuliani. Winners do this.

Should she be elected, I will purchase a Hillary Cackle ringtone in tribute to the Tracey Flick model of dogged determinism displayed in the film "Election". Nixon ran ugly, and he was elected twice. Do it for the children.

http://www.phonesherpa.com/aviationringtones

 

[Mamba]

I have a question for TPS and SBTB. Both of you guys have demonstrated solid political acumen here on the EE board in times past and both of you have indicated that you believe substance > style when it comes to politics. SBTB, you in particular made a comment in a recent post (which was a great post) in which you condemned the laziness of many voters who choose their candidates based on superficial reasons, rather than issues of substance.

So I'm just wondering why both of you are so repulsed by a simple show of emotion on Hillary's part? How do you reconcile statements you've made on this thread with other statements you've made in recent threads?

For what it's worth I'm not posting this to defend Hillary, because I will not vote for her. I'm just curious about your comments and would like for either of you (or both) to clarify.

 

[Saint by the Bay]

I have a question for TPS and SBTB. Both of you guys have demonstrated solid political acumen here on the EE board in times past and both of you have indicated that you believe substance > style when it comes to politics. SBTB, you in particular made a comment in a recent post (which was a great post) in which you condemned the laziness of many voters who choose their candidates based on superficial reasons, rather than issues on substance.

So I'm just wondering why both of you are so repulsed by a simple show of emotion on Hillary's part? How do you reconcile statements you've made on this thread with other statements you've made in recent threads?

For what it's worth I'm not posting this to defend Hillary, because I will not vote for her. I'm just curious about your comments and would like for either of you (or both) to clarify.

Because I don't believe the crying, in either case, was genuine. In the end I think it is "style". Last time she cried was the same day polls were released showing Obama had surged way ahead in New Hampshire. This time it's the same day polls are released showing Obama has tied her in nationals and most importantly in California. Hillary and Bill have been playing identity politics to the hilt in these primaries. IMO this is just more of that. She knows females relate to her crying and that's exactly who she's been losing in the polls.

If I thought it was genuine I'd actually probably be a bit touched by it. I actually empathize more than anyone here knows with someone overwhelmed by accomplishment and desire to help. In Hillary's case however I think it's a calculated political move that worked once so she's playing the card again.

 

[Mamba]

Because I don't believe the crying, in either case, was genuine. In the end I think it is "style". Last time she cried was the same day polls were released showing Obama had surged way ahead in New Hampshire. This time it's the same day polls are released showing Obama has tied her in nationals and most importantly in California. Hillary and Bill have been playing identity politics to the hilt in these primaries. IMO this is just more of that. She knows females relate to her crying and that's exactly who she's been losing in the polls.

If I thought it was genuine I'd actually probably be a bit touched by it. I actually empathize more than anyone here knows with someone overwhelmed by accomplishment and desire to help. In Hillary's case however I think it's a calculated political move that worked once so she's playing the card again.

So what is the primary reason you won't vote for Hillary? Because she exploits the "style" aspect? Or because she lacks substance?

 

[TPS]

>>So I'm just wondering why both of you are so repulsed by a simple show of emotion on Hillary's part?

We have to face the obvious fact that most politicians will say or do anything to get elected. Unfortunately, sometimes they go above and beyond. W and Hillary both come to mind. I'm not disputing that Hillary (or W) is a human with a full range of available emotions. But at the same time, we have to draw on our experience. The Clintons, regardless of how viewed in the prism of history, are known to start wars or launch missles when the heat goes up around them. Essentially, and maybe it's just my opinion but..., they will do anything that is politically expedient. Clearly, as Hillary shed that tear just when she needed a momentum boost in January, she could use another boost in the polls going into tomorrow where she has very little momentum. Getting her feminine side out there appears to be a campaign tactic. Ultimately we may (or may not) be able to prove whether it worked (or backfired) based on how different the voting patterns are tomorrow from the polls. Ref. January 8, 2008, the New Hampshire primary.

TPS

 

[Pasty]

The Clintons have shown two tactics that have proven equally distasteful to me during this campaign. The first worked for them, but the second seemed to backfire.

When the polls were down, she shed the tear, "found her voice" and played the sensitivity card.

When the polls were up, she sent Bill out to be the bad cop and drive a racial wedge between the constiuencies, while she remained "above the fray."

It's the run and the pass in their offense, and I look for Bill to start throwing some more bombs very soon.

 

[steltz02]

Did you guys even watch the video?

One of her former colleagues spent a few minutes complementing her on everything she has done for the youth of this country. She didn't cry she just got a little choked up, big deal. I am a man, and I will get a choked up if someone who I respect and have worked with for a long time praises me from their heart for the years of hard work that we put in together. It was just a public affirmation of some of the good work that she has done.

It seems like you are really grasping at straws to say, there goes Hillary crying again just to get votes, what a conniving and calculating and dishonest ****. She got caught up in a moment for about 3 seconds, didn't "CRY" at all, and began talking again.

I am torn between Obama and Hillary. It is pretty sad, but I will probably vote for Obama for the hope of partly unifying this country. The Hillary haters will do whatever they can to bring her down.

Women get emotional sometimes, get over it.

 

[Saint by the Bay]

So what is the primary reason you won't vote for Hillary? Because she exploits the "style" aspect? Or because she lacks substance?

A few reasons.

First we have had a Bush or Clinton in or near (VP) the White House for 28 years. They are owned by the same people (look at their donor lists) and it's time for that small cabal to loose the death grip they have had over us policy for nearly 3 decades.

Second I don't like the way she and Bill play the game of politics. I respect the gamesmanship but I don't think it's any coincidence the political discourse in this country has declined so much during the Clinton years. While they have been the victims in many cases they have also been the aggressors and I don't think we'll see any improvement in that with Hillary in the White House.

Third, her abuses of power even as First Lady are legendary.

Fourth, the woman wants to garnish the wages of anyone that doesn't want to be on her health plan. I mean, come on!

Fifth, and this is probably the most controversial, I have no respect for her staying in that marriage the way she has. She's either incredibly opportunistic with no principles (likely) or incredibly weak and insecure. We're not talking about one impulsive affair here, we're talking decades of well known well documented infidelity. Yet she stayed all the while at his side with a big smile on her face. It's pathetic and is a window into her character IMO. No matter how you slice staying in a marriage where you are cheated on and publicly humiliated repeatedly over a period of numerous years (his affair issue stretches back to before he was Gov. by all accounts) shows a person with a major character flaw one way or another.

I could actually list more reasons I'm not a Hillary fan but I think I've listed enough reasons I'd never vote for her.

 

[Pasty]

Steltz,

I'm not a Hillary hater by any stretch of the imagination (or I wasn't until the campaign), but like Romney, it appears that every move she makes is calculated and cynical.

For instance, I read today that her supporters in CA (I believe) adopted, -- or more accurately, stole-- Obama's "Yes We Can" chant. The change they made, which is quite telling, was "Yes she can." And that, in a nutshell, is what is wrong with Hillary Clinton and her campaign. Where Obama focuses on the collective unifying message, Hillary's message is all about herself.

 

[steltz02]

Steltz,

I'm not a Hillary hater by any stretch of the imagination (or I wasn't until the campaign), but like Romney, it appears that every move she makes is calculated and cynical.

For instance, I read today that her supporters in CA (I believe) adopted, -- or more accurately, stole-- Obama's "Yes We Can" chant. The change they made, which is quite telling, was Yes she can. And that, in a nutshell, is what is wrong with Hillary Clinton and her campaign. Where Obama focuses on the collective unifying message, Hillary's message is all about herself.

What does Hillary have to do with her supporters adapting Obama's chant?? How can you blame that on Hillary? In my opinion Hillary supporters have every right to take Obama's chant and apply it to Hillary as well, why not.

I am a bit leary about Obama. He comes into this election with the Mantra ' I am the agent of change'. Of course just about every sane person in the US right now wants 'change' . Obama has taken this idea that so many americans have fallen in love with and has used it incredibly effectively.

Hillary is not Bill, and she is certainly not Bush, and she will bring change, and maybe even more change than Obama can bring. Hillary feels she is the agent of change as well, but that statement belongs to Obama he has a monopoly on it and has rallied many followers on the 'change' mantra alone. It kind of seems unfair.

I believe that Hillary and Obama esentially have similar beliefs on all major issues with a small deviation on Iraq and Health Care. I believe Hillary's plans are a bit more concrete, detailed, and well thought out, and she has more experience in implementing these plans.

There is no way of knowing that Obama will truly bring change. What I do believe is that he is a captivating speaker and a source of ispiration for many of those who have been supressed around our country. This will be refreshing, but will he truly be able to produce what he is saying he can, or is it just more empty words. Obama is playing some pretty tricky politics is well, he is just playing from a better strategic position. No one is going to get mad at Obama for repeating over and over and over that he is the agent of change, but as soon as Hillary questions Obama's record or credibility she is looked at as an evil *****.


Bottom line I would be happy with either candidate and would love for them to end up on the same ticket. I am just sick of all of this nasty nasty hate for the Clinton's and Hillary in particular. Some of it may deserved depending on your point of view, but the level of hate is pretty extreme. I hear lots of my republican friends calling her a psychotic lesbian **** and talking about how evil she is. I ask them what do you mean in particular, and they don't really know, they just hate her. It doesn't make much sense to me.

 

[DMaestro]

Hillary feels she is the agent of change as well,

Hillary is the embodiment of Clintonian politics. Been there, done that.

Big-budget lobbyists on the books? Same ol'.

National health care....haven't we been through this before?

Mudslinging, opportunistic campaigning.....sounds familiar.

Ultra-polarized partisan politics....let me guess: she's the victim, right?

And the coup-de-grace: 4-8 more years of hubby Bill making headlines for all the wrong reasons.

Her one overt claim to change: "I'd be the first female president!" Sorry, that's not quite good enough for me.....