Slog: News & Arts

RSS icon Comments on This Breaks My Heart

1

A Muskie moment?

Posted by Jubilation T. Cornball | January 7, 2008 10:28 AM
2

I really didn't see this coming.

I still better get my bumper sticker.

Posted by Mr. Poe | January 7, 2008 10:29 AM
3

I'm not voting for no cry-babies.

Posted by Ziggity | January 7, 2008 10:31 AM
4

I'm sure the GOP candidates and press will throw this back at her, "HRC couldn't even make it through the campaign before having an emotional break down..." I bet one of the O'Reily type people will make a joke about her being on her period.

Posted by Little Red Ryan Hood | January 7, 2008 10:31 AM
5

Pardon my cold heart, but doesn't this sort of emotional move seem calculated? She gets a tad bit weepy and then gets back on implying that Obama's not qualified for the job. I can't help but shrug.

Posted by Sam M. | January 7, 2008 10:32 AM
6

She's not finished, and watching her cry isn't heartbreaking. Seriously, who cares? The campaign has barely begun in earnest, and if she's already breaking down then there's no possible way she's strong enough to finish the race to November, to say nothing of serving four or eight years in the highest-pressure job on earth.

The ridiculous length and strain of the campaign has no other real purpose that to demonstrate that strength. Nobody is actually listening to what the candidates are actually SAYING; it's not important. Blah blah hope, blah blah change, blah blah blah. None of it has any relation at all to what they will actually do as President.

And really, when a woman cries, our hearts are supposed to break? And that's not sexist somehow? Especially since she's crying because she's not receiving the coronation she believes she deserves? Come on. Stop whining, and get out there and kick some some ass.

Posted by Fnarf | January 7, 2008 10:33 AM
7

certainly one of her more sympathetic moments. i actually believe clinton is more liberal than she lets on, and that she would be more liberal once in office, but she's been running the "rebugican lite" campaign in the belief that it will win her the nom and the presidency, and it's just been blowing up in her face. moral of the story: don't let fear dictate your decisions. (and let people see at least a hint of real human every once in awhile, like here).

Posted by ellarosa | January 7, 2008 10:33 AM
8

"emotional breakdown" ? "crying"? you folks are overstating it a bit, methinks.

Posted by ellarosa | January 7, 2008 10:36 AM
9

I with #6, Eli...

I'm not saying Hilary's some "cold-hearted bitch" stereotype or anything, but you're not really falling for this are you?

What continues to impress me is how she is the best politician, on either side, in this race. She is poised and calculated, and she has the best team of folks around her.

If she tears up for a moment -- maybe just out of sheer exhaustion? -- she still quickly gets right back on target in a fraction of a second??

That doesn't break my heart...

Posted by Mickymse | January 7, 2008 10:39 AM
10

First it's all about Hillary being "angry", now it's about her "hurting". Mostly, I'd feel bad for her because of how journalists try to milk the most minute events of the campaign for cheap drama.

Like this here, for example. "Emotional breakdown"? No.

Posted by tsm | January 7, 2008 10:39 AM
11

There's no crying in politics

Posted by Clint | January 7, 2008 10:39 AM
12

I think she's got a great point. I do believe that on her first day in office she knows exactly what needs to be done and how to execute it. I feel Obama has been focusing all his efforts on just winning this election that when he's finally sworn in he'll have no clue what to do next. I like seeing her soft side. I'd rather a president get up and show how they really feel than sit stoically telling us what we want to hear.

Posted by Rye | January 7, 2008 10:42 AM
13

It's all about Hillary. Always was.

Posted by superyeadon | January 7, 2008 10:46 AM
14

As much as I shudder over Mrs. Clinton, I really don’t see how anyone could say that she is not more substantive than the other candidates. For example, Mrs. Clinton in Saturday’s debate was the only one who addressed the considerations of the need to work with the Iraqis’ who helped the military, civilian contractors, the businesses, civic projects, in getting out of Iraq. It seems the others just think it’s a matter of closing the suitcase and running out.

Posted by raindrop | January 7, 2008 10:46 AM
15

So...showing a momentary flourish of frustration and then jumping back on message like a broken record is supposed to make me feel sad how? C'mon Eli, these people, especially someone like Hillary, know exactly what they're getting in to. It's not fun, it's not nice, and this is barely news.

Posted by Hernandez | January 7, 2008 10:46 AM
16

A lot of the time when Hillary talks it grates on my nerves. But in this video she sounded more natural. Like there is an actual person there and not some political marionette.

Posted by elenchos | January 7, 2008 10:48 AM
17

Rye @12, talking points much?  You realize new presidents have over 2 months between election and inauguration, right?

Posted by lostboy | January 7, 2008 10:50 AM
18

I still think that the Obama hype will run it's course ala Dean.

And I think that Hillary is the best Dem for the job, hands down.

And I hate! hate! hate! the media jumping on every little thing and calling "she is done". For fuckssake, even after NH there are still 25 states that will relly decide the nom. Jesus.

Posted by Original Monique | January 7, 2008 10:51 AM
19

I can't say that I feel for her. She's experiencing the same stress as any other candidate, she's just expressing her frustration differently.

That said, Fnarf's criticism is bullshit. A female candidate shouldn't be dinged just because she's not an emotional cripple to the same extent as your average man. My God! She teared up! When exhausted and stressed! Unless she's on the verge of a breakdown, I don't see how this shows any deficiency on her part.

Posted by keshmeshi | January 7, 2008 10:51 AM
20

I'm not sexist but I remember when back in the early 90s when Shannon Faulkner started at the Citadel in Charleston, SC and was crying on TV during an interview b/c she was in too tough of an environment. This video of Hillary reminds me of that. My case being, she's in a man's environment. Literally, she's playing a man's game in a biggest political arena historically played by men. She can't breakdown in public like this because she'll lose the respect of everyone including her opponents.

I think this video will hurt her campaign more than ever. I know the Obama or Edwards campaign won't use it but enough people will here about it from TV syndicates, blogs, printed-media columnists, radio columnists, and Youtube that it'll affect her.

Posted by apres_moi | January 7, 2008 10:53 AM
21

God you people suck. That wasn an admirable, real, hart-felt analysis of what makes this candidate tick.

She knows she's hated. She knows Obama's more charismatic; she knows that she's down.

But she showed some humanity.

And it looks like she really believes that Obama, for all hsi charisma, is not ready or experienced enough to be president.

I have to hand it to her -- I'm wondering the same thing.

Posted by Jonathan | January 7, 2008 10:53 AM
22

I didn't see anyone having a breakdown or acknowledging that the campaign is over. I saw someone echoing/parroting what John Edwards and Barack Obama have been saying -- that this is personal. That seems to be a message that is resonating out there in voter-land and Hillary's picked up on it.

I like to see a little humility in a candidate. Hillary hasn't shown much. I really am torn between thinking this was a real display of real human emotion or a calculated move to make her appear more human.

Posted by ahava | January 7, 2008 10:55 AM
23

@14, If she's not picked as the presidential candidate for the Dems, she surely would make a damn good VP.

Posted by apres_moi | January 7, 2008 10:56 AM
24

Getting back to topic, I'm struck by how Hernandez @15 dismisses not Hillary's display of emotion, but Eli's as well.

Posted by lostboy | January 7, 2008 10:56 AM
25

@17 - Yea, you're right, 2 months is MORE than enough time to prepare to run the country.

Posted by Rye | January 7, 2008 10:58 AM
26

Keshmeshi, she's nowhere near as exhausted and stressed as she's going to be. If she's cracking now, she's too soft to be president. Maybe that's a shitty way to choose, but it's the truth. Fucking Putin and Musharraf and Maliki aren't going to cut her any slack because she's a woman and "not an emotional cripple", and neither is the Republican candidate.

Posted by Fnarf | January 7, 2008 10:59 AM
27

myself @24:

*not only

Posted by lostboy | January 7, 2008 11:01 AM
28
My case being, she's in a man's environment. Literally, she's playing a man's game in a biggest political arena historically played by men. She can't breakdown in public like this because she'll lose the respect of everyone including her opponents.

You're an idiot. Politics isn't a man's environment anymore than it's a white environment or a rich environment. It's an environment dominated by rich white men, but it doesn't belong to them and, ultimately, it's controlled by the American people -- most of whom are women. Contrary to what you probably think, your Realpolitik for Dummies isn't realistic in any sense beyond the most facile and myopic analysis; it's just ignorant and divisive.

Turn your computer off, put your hair shirt on, and go apologize to your mother. You have sinned, and deserve to be punished.

Posted by Judah | January 7, 2008 11:05 AM
29

Rye @25, that would be excellent snark if your argument @12 had been about the presidency as whole rather than the "day one" sound bite.

Are you seriously alleging that Obama has, not just in the campaign but in his career as a whole, made no preparation for holding executive office and has no plan of action for when he arrives?

(oh, pleasepleaseplease try to argue that.)

Posted by lostboy | January 7, 2008 11:09 AM
30

Eli, you are a gullible sap. This was a ploy, a la Ron Brown's funeral: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vDtcyVbPvC4

Posted by Chris | January 7, 2008 11:09 AM
31

But where does this idea that because she's a woman it's OK or expected for her to get a little weepy? I'd be thrilled to vote for a woman if I thought she was tough enough. Is she tough enough? Prove it.

Posted by Fnarf | January 7, 2008 11:10 AM
32

Strange that she did this right after both Washington Week in Review and the McLachlan Report both commented on her lack of emotion at events ...

Posted by Will in Seattle | January 7, 2008 11:11 AM
33

What if Edwards or Obama got a little "weepy" or their voices cracked "emotionally"? They would be eaten alive.

Posted by laterite | January 7, 2008 11:14 AM
34

Yeah, it breaks my heart too -- because having her cry in front of people just makes her look like a weak female, which is exactly what she needs to NOT look like if she's actually going to win this election. Plus, if she thinks life is tough right now, wait until she's actually the President. Is going to bust out in tears every time she gets tired or frustrated on the job? Jeez, suck it up, Hills!

Posted by meghan | January 7, 2008 11:14 AM
35

Further, recalling Arrested Development, remember when the rest of the Bluths would poke at Michael for being unemotional, then when he did start to cry in the last episode, they all got uncomfortable and weirded out? Yeah.

Posted by laterite | January 7, 2008 11:20 AM
36

hillary's not an actor, she's a politician. and i think, looking at her background, she's gone into politics because of all that stuff she said in the video. everyone with a soul, when exhausted, overwhelmed and wondering if what they're doing is mattering to anyone, when asked the right question at the right time in the right way...their voice would crack a little. she didn't burst into tears, she answered honestly, unscripted. thank god.


i think there's political theater, and then there's people getting emotional and letting go. edwards did it with his "it's personal" speech at the debate the other night. he didn't cry, but he was undeniably rattled and having an emotional moment. why is it any different for hillary?


far as i'm concerned, it was one of her most honest moments. i bet it'll actually score her some points with the independents and women who have been thinking she's a soulless bitch.


god, i hope she sweeps super tuesday.

Posted by kim | January 7, 2008 11:22 AM
37

"As much as I shudder over Mrs. Clinton, I really don’t see how anyone could say that she is not more substantive than the other candidates."
-@14

"And I hate! hate! hate! the media jumping on every little thing and calling "she is done".
-@18

"...Fnarf's criticism is bullshit. A female candidate shouldn't be dinged just because she's not an emotional cripple to the same extent as your average man. My God! She teared up! When exhausted and stressed! Unless she's on the verge of a breakdown, I don't see how this shows any deficiency on her part."
-@19

"And it looks like she really believes that Obama, for all hsi charisma, is not ready or experienced enough to be president.

I have to hand it to her -- I'm wondering the same thing."
-@21

Thank you fellow Sloggers for the level-headed comments listed. And to all of you riding the Obama train: Are you absolutely sure you want to hand the reins to this guy? He's smart, he's cute, etc. But man, what an absolute mess we're in right now as a country. I have to say Hillary's whole "ready on Day 1" thing resonates with me...this is no time for on-the-job training.

Posted by Matthew | January 7, 2008 11:25 AM
38

@24 - Truth be told, I was never bothered by the "lack of emotion" that so many others criticized Hillary for, so I wasn't looking for some moment to make her look more human or emotional in the first place. Whether or not she shows fatigue and frustration on the campaign trail is really a non-issue with me and my vote, which is what leads me to dismiss Eli's emotional reaction to this bit of "news".

Posted by Hernandez | January 7, 2008 11:34 AM
39

sorry hillary, sometimes its just not in the cards

Posted by matt | January 7, 2008 11:34 AM
40

LEAVE HILLARY ALONE! She works SO HARD for all you BASTARDS and all you guys think about is her high voice and establishment :( :( :(

LEAVE HER ALONE I SAY. Don't you DARE make her cry.

Posted by N | January 7, 2008 11:37 AM
41

Quote: "You’d have to be heartless not to feel for her right now."

Guess I'm heartless. I don't feel for her. She brought this all on herself with her icy cold personality and demeanor.

Welcome to the real world Hillary. You are clearly not ready to be a president with your background and lack of qualifications.

Reality Check

Posted by Reality Check | January 7, 2008 11:43 AM
42

it definitely scored her more points with me. i would really like to vote for obama, in eight more years.

Posted by well | January 7, 2008 11:45 AM
43

@26,

Tearing up a little doesn't equal cracking. That's my point. From birth, boys are taught never to show emotion, except perhaps anger. Girls don't get that lesson, so, yes, sometimes we tear up when stressed or frustrated. It doesn't mean we're weak.

The insistence on never showing emotion, except for destructive emotions, is one of the most pathetic aspects of masculinity.

Posted by keshmeshi | January 7, 2008 11:47 AM
44

It makes her a bit more human, but it doesn't make me feel sorry for her anymore than I feel sorry for Joe Biden: an experienced liberal who needs to step aside for a representative of a new generation. Its okay. Its life.

Posted by Jason | January 7, 2008 11:51 AM
45

It makes her a bit more human, but it doesn't make me feel sorry for her anymore than I feel sorry for Joe Biden: an experienced liberal who needs to step aside for a representative of a new generation. Its okay. Its life.

Posted by Jason | January 7, 2008 11:51 AM
46

It makes her a bit more human, but it doesn't make me feel sorry for her anymore than I feel sorry for Joe Biden: an experienced liberal who needs to step aside for a representative of a new generation. Its okay. Its life.

Posted by Jason | January 7, 2008 11:51 AM
47

I think Hillary's efforts to humanize herself are too little too late. She tried to hijack Obama's change message without luck. Now, she is trying to take some of Edwards Passionate and Personal themes. Her own spiel of Experience hasn't played well. It has been decades since she was part of the real world. And it shows.

Posted by Zander | January 7, 2008 11:52 AM
48

@43 thank you!
honestly, seeing anyone's human side scores them points with me. hell, even if W had the same reaction to his shitty approval ratings i'd still think he was an evil fucker but was trying to do what he thought was right. now i think he's just an evil fucker who is trying to screw us over.

Posted by righton | January 7, 2008 11:53 AM
49

#43 thanks for the quick lesson on male emotional problems. I suddenly realized the cause of all my problems. Your broad sterotyping saved my life.

Posted by Mike | January 7, 2008 11:56 AM
50

43- are you fucking kidding me? this isn't an issue of what is or is not "acceptable" for a man or woman to do publicly - this is not acceptable for a politician of either gender. when something tragic happens, maybe, but not when they're just feeling sorry for themselves.

this is a popularity contest. if she can't handle hearing that she's not as popular as she had previously thought without getting a little emotional, she's in the wrong business.

Posted by brandon | January 7, 2008 12:07 PM
51

well, crying isn't the same as an emotional break down, and perhaps the focus on this is a bit sexist. i don't care if a candidate cries. but i'd rather then cry over something other than their self.

Posted by infrequent | January 7, 2008 12:09 PM
52

Boo fucking hoo.... I can't help but feel like this is calculated. Advisors whispers to show more compassion, et al. I'm over hillary. I used to back her, but seriously? No.

Posted by Homo Will | January 7, 2008 12:14 PM
53

it needn't be a men's club. but, unfortunately, hillary clinton has to know that crying might not appeal to people who are used to men, and used to them acting emotionally "strong" in these cases.

Posted by infrequent | January 7, 2008 12:17 PM
54

The news today isn't that Ms. Clinton got upset. It's that she's down 10 points in NH.

All you Obama fans, with your talk of it all being about generational change and of rejecting what the CLINTONS (because yes, they worked as a team!) did for our country in the 90s (you know, the stuff that left Bill with a 88% approval record with Democrats): I hope you fucking know what you are doing.

You are handing the keys to a young guy who, though handsome and possessing a suave demeanor, has little national experience and appears unable to speak extemporaneously. If he fucks this up in the fall, we will have either four years of McCain (most optimistically) or Fuckabee (least so).

I'll say it again. I hope you all know what you are doing with this one.

Posted by Big Sven | January 7, 2008 12:22 PM
55

I hear ya' Eli. The hardest thing to remember about these self-made monsters running for President is that they used to be human beings.

All the same, I'm sick to death of Hillary. The sooner she leaves the national stage the better.

Posted by Gurldoggie | January 7, 2008 12:24 PM
56

I cannot imagine Hillary Clinton expressing any emotion that has not been carefully scripted and vetted by a focus group selected from members of her select target-market. Many supercomputers are less calculating than she.

That said, if she's the Democratic nominee, I'll still vote for her.

Posted by NapoleonXIV | January 7, 2008 12:34 PM
57

keshmeshi, you really hurt my feelings by calling me pathetic (due to the shortcomings of my gender) but the only way I know to express it is to strangle this little kitten I keep in my cube. way to go.

Posted by ask a straight dude | January 7, 2008 12:36 PM
58

@54 - Hillary's experience can be as much of a liability as an asset. Yes, you're right, Hillary is a known quantity - and plenty of independents have already decided against her because of it. It's misguided to declare Hillary the "safe" choice.

Posted by tsm | January 7, 2008 12:57 PM
59

you mean hillary's experience going on television and telling divisive lies to cover up for her lying, cheating sack-of-shit husband after years and years of him publicly humiliating her? is that the "experience" you're talking about? because that's all i'll remember her for.

i'm sorry for her really shitty luck with her really shitty husband. it wasn't her fault, she was probably screwed politically no matter how she handled the situation, but as far as i'm concerned she made the wrong choice and i don't trust her. no thank you.

Posted by brandon | January 7, 2008 1:15 PM
60

For me, how much emotion Hillary does or doesn't display is a non-story, a distraction. I do have to respond to one comment, though. Big Sven @54:

You are handing the keys to a young guy who, though handsome and possessing a suave demeanor, has little national experience and appears unable to speak extemporaneously.

OK, Big Sven, please provide an example of Barack Obama's inability to speak extemporaneously. I read back over his Meet the Press interview, and I'm hard-pressed to see what you're talking about.

Big Sven continued:

If he fucks this up in the fall, we will have either four years of McCain (most optimistically) or Fuckabee (least so).

You're right, BS. God forbid for the first time in how many cycles the Democrats would be running to win rather than not to lose. God forbid the Democrats should run someone who appeals to large numbers of independents and even some Republicans.

Maybe after Obama wins in overwhelmingly white and independent-heavy New Hampshire (after he won in overwhelmingly white and independent-heavy Iowa), we can keep up this story line about how he can't possibly appeal to voters outside the Democratic base. Maybe after he's withstood how many rotten, disingenuous attacks from the Clinton attack machine (who even managed to dig up his kindergarten papers), we can keep up the story line about how he can't possibly hold up against the Republican attack machine.

In a way, Obama supporters like me have come to relish the attacks because they just make our candidate come across stronger.

Posted by cressona | January 7, 2008 1:19 PM
61

@54 - We do know, Big Sven. And it's gonna be great!

Keep attacking, we love it!

(funny that Cressona and I end up on the same side after so long ...)

Posted by Will in Seattle | January 7, 2008 1:26 PM
62

I think it's bullshit that people still consider it a weakness when leaders show emotion. I see this and I feel for Hillary, and I like her more--and I already liked her personally. I wish more leaders would show their humanity like this. Emotional depth is a leadership strength so long as it does not overwhelm other leadership abilities.

That said, our culture at large does consider open displays of emotion to be weak, so this will hurt her. That's too bad. I wouldn't vote for Hillary in the primary in any case, because she's wrong on policy, but it pisses me off that she probably will pay a price for this.

Posted by Cascadian | January 7, 2008 1:31 PM
63

One of my problems with Hillary had been that she seemed too manly, like she was overcompensating for not being a man by acting extra tough, which is scary if you think about Iraq, and how Bush had the same issue with his balls. Anyway, I'm starting to warm up to Hillary now.

Posted by poltroon | January 7, 2008 1:34 PM
64

Jesus Christ. She's fucked if she's a cold, hard ice queen and she's fucked if she displays one little tiny iota of an emotional (to repeat - she did not burst into tears or have an emotional breakdown).

This makes me abandon any hope of a female president in the next 20 years. Any woman who gets far enough to be a candidate for president has to be ambitious, driven, career-oriented, etc. Many people (both men and women, at least, the soccer-mom-type women) are going to interpret these qualities as meaning she's an ice queen bitch.

In this country, where likeability matters so much, it's going to be virtually impossible for a woman to be perceived as tough enough to be able to deal with the "terrorists", but not so tough that people think she's a bitch and won't vote for her.

Posted by Julie | January 7, 2008 1:38 PM
65

@55: "The hardest thing to remember about these self-made monsters running for President is that they used to be human beings."

I don't think that Hillary or any of the Democrats or even most of the Republicans are self-made monsters. They're people. I'm actually impressed that across the board, in both parties, each candidate seems to be running as a genuine representation of themselves. Hillary Clinton really is the whip-smart, highly experienced establishment figure that she claims to be. Edwards really is a working class guy made good who wants to make sure that the little guy isn't screwed by the system. Obama really is the embodiment of multi-cultural America who wants to reach across social and political divides to improve the country. Kucinich really is a flaky but sincere liberal. Richardson really does have the best foreign policy resume. Huckabee really is a committed Christian who gives half a shit about the poor and is honestly suspicious of the corporate wing of his own party. McCain really is a conservative with a maverick streak. Giuliani really is an authoritarian who can't think beyond the events of one day. Paul really is a lunatic libertarian. And Romney is naked ambition above principle. None of them are bullshitting the public about who they are or what they would do as president, though Romney probably thinks he is. And of them all, Romney's the only self-made monster in the sense that he's deliberately sold his soul in a vain search for power.

Compare that with Bush's original run, when he claimed to be "compassionate" and a "uniter." Or even Al Gore, who didn't really find his moral center until after the 2000 election was stolen from him. Or Kerry, Mondale, Dukakis. For once, we've got a wealth of choices among candidates who are running as themselves.

Posted by Cascadian | January 7, 2008 1:44 PM
66

Obama wants play nice with Republicans. Wouldn't that be lovely! We can all have a sleepover and braid each other's hair.

The Republicans have spent 12 years fighting the K Street Project. They're not fucking interested in working together. Obama is deluded. You don't try to "work together" with someone who wants to destroy you. You fight them.

Obama's been in Washington for two years and he thinks he's ready to take them on. What a fucking joke. Clinton has been fighting back against them for 15 years. She's had every dirty trick throw her way and then some and she's still fighting. Her campaign is tight. She's ready to be as good a Prez as Bill was. (If you don't think Bill was a good Prez then name a preferable recent one - go on, try)

What is it with Dems that they get all wet for a charming man who gives a good speech?

Posted by gavingourley | January 7, 2008 1:52 PM
67

Sorry, I just... can't seem to bring myself to feel sorry for "My Husband (Who Cheated On Me) Was President, So I Can Be, Too!" at all. Since I never wanted her to get the nom in the first place.


I'd rather have Obama asking questions and making careful, thoughtful moves after a 9/11 scenario then have HRC crying, feeling helpless about it.


HRC is crying because she was overconfident. She thought she was a shoe-in. All the pieces fit. And when it becomes apparent that we don't like her, we really don't like her, she breaks down.


She was all business and action after the NH office hostage situation, but now she's falling apart? Because now she doesn't feel like she's in control. Because now it affects her directly, instead of just some staffers in some obscure Seacoast town in some obscure New England state.


Dial 922. Call the WAAmbulance.

Posted by K | January 7, 2008 2:08 PM
68

Thank you @ 64.

You've summed up how I feel about this in a nutshell. The NH debates just underscored my confidence in Hillary. It's really too fucking bad that people can't get past their faulty ideas of how a female leader should "act" to see that she's by far the best candidate the Democrats have.

Posted by Juliette | January 7, 2008 2:20 PM
69

Like Freud asked: "What does a woman want?"

What does the American voter want? And who will the wise American voter approve to give them what they want?

It's purely depressing to think about what each presidential candidate must go through each day thinking: "What can I do to please you?" "What can I do to keep you from hating me?" "And Jesus, God, where will I get the strength to keep this Marathon up, or will I drop dead from exhaustion, derision and ignorant dismissiveness?"

Since this is clearly a rhetorical question, no answer is sought. And it's true the shortest verse in the Presidential Political Bible is: "Candidates wept." Whether you know it or not.

Posted by RHETT ORACLE | January 7, 2008 2:48 PM
70

If that was genuine, it was kind of nice to see some passion bubble up past the wonkery (equally important, of course).

If it was her being manipulative, I'm further convinced that she's a political genius.

I have some concern about either Obama or Edwards having the backbone to deal with congress. I don't worry about backbone with Hillary. Seeing some emotion from her only increases my confidence that she'll take the Republicans on full-force. I'm not worried about Obama lacking the experience to deal with terrorism, or healthcare. I'm worried about him being unprepared for the pack of vicious Republicans who would await him. Clinton knows that game.

I still prefer Obama, ultimately, but I would be quite happy voting for this woman.

Posted by violet_dagrinder | January 7, 2008 3:19 PM
71

bush tears up all the time.

but not about killing.

Posted by max solomon | January 7, 2008 3:54 PM
72

#64: What about Ann Richards? She managed that rock and hard place quite well. She did it with humor and personality.

Voters demand personality from all their candidates, not just women (see Al Gore, John Kerry.)

Posted by la | January 7, 2008 6:04 PM
73

I recognize that I'm in the pro-Clinton media perception warp, but to me this looked like one of her finer moments on the campaign trail.

Posted by josh | January 7, 2008 6:26 PM
74

Fuck, I should watch those linked videos before I comment.

WHAT CRYING??!?!

I saw her get misty eyed, and a bit chocked up, but what CRYING? Am I missing something? You fucking bastards. I don't understand what the fuck the big deal is.

Posted by Original Monique | January 7, 2008 6:36 PM
75

I'd feel bad for her if it wasn't so clearly her imminently damaged ego weeping.

Plus, how sincere can you be when you cry through Mark Penn-created talking points? Boo - "I'd be ready on Day One" - hoo.

Posted by amocat | January 7, 2008 7:41 PM
76

@66:
Bill was a good President? His welfare "reform" increased homelessness and drove people to food pantries and soup kitchens in record numbers. He signed the DOMA screwing gays and all those who believe in equality. He made it much more difficult for death row prisoners to appeal their cases and seek justice. WTF? The last thing we need is another Bill Clinton.

I'm fine with Hillary Clinton's show of emotion. It was NOT a breakdown, it was NOT crying, it was NOT weakness. But, I don't think that she'd be a good President. I think her husband was the best REPUBLICAN President we've ever had.

Posted by Papayas | January 7, 2008 9:30 PM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 45 days old).