ARS on Twitter
RSS
The Chill Factor
Posted by Raven on September 16th, 2007
The prospect of having Hillary Clinton becoming the President of the United States does not terrify me. Nor does it scare me. She doesn’t hold that much power over me…she may win the nomination, but I really doubt she will ever win the job.
Recent polls suggest many of us not only don’t like her, trust her and find her unappealing, she’s also cold as ice:
Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, who has the highest negative ratings of any presidential candidate in the 2008 race, can add another voter designation to her image: the coldest.
The Gallup Poll recently asked voters to rank the candidates on a “feeling thermometer,” in which zero was the coldest and 100 was the warmest. The New York senator and Democratic front-runner was the “most polarized” of all the candidates in either party, according to the poll.
“Nearly as many Americans say she leaves them cold as say they feel warmly about her,” Gallup said.
The poll showed 49 percent considered Mrs. Clinton a warm personality, but 44 percent thought she was “totally cold” and the remainder rated her as “neutral.”
That’s a lot of people. 44% consider her “totally cold”- why? Is it her personality? Is it her inability to come across as a normal average woman? I think so. Women are nurturing by nature- and many will argue with me about this. Women are supposed to be warm and, yes, we’re supposed to use our feelings and emotions to help us make decisions. Hillary? She is cold as a dead fish and it will have an impact.
In February of 2006 Hillary tried to banish the famous SHRILL reputation she brought upon herself:
New York Sen. Hillary Clinton launched a charm offensive on Monday in a bid to counter charges from a top Republican that she sounds too angry to get elected president.
In a half hour news conference at a Head Start classroom in Manhattan, Mrs. Clinton took great pains to avoid sounding shrill as she urged the GOP to worry instead about “these devastating budget cuts [and] the confusion and bureaucratic nightmare in the prescription drug benefit.”
The New York Times noted that Mrs. Clinton “spoke in even tones” to reporters and used “temperate phrases” as she “conveyed her displeasure at Mr. Bush’s budget priorities.”
[...]
Mrs. Clinton’s outburst during a 2003 Connecticut fundraiser, for instance, is already one of the most replayed soundbytes on talk radio, helping to cement her “Shrillary” image with critics.“I am sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and you disagree with this administration, somehow you’re not patriotic,” she bellowed to the crowd.
Remember that? Who can forget? So lady like. But that isn’t my issue with this temper tantrum she had.
A poll last July suggested Hillary had some work to do to garner an image of being a kinder softer person. Among women she just wasn’t getting as much support as she would like:
Women view Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York more favorably than men do, but she still faces skepticism among some women, especially those who are older and those who are married, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll.
[...]
But the poll held some warning signs for Mrs. Clinton. Voters remain split about her, with the percentage of voters who view her unfavorably, at 40 percent, higher than for any of the other major candidates for president, although they are not as well-known. Neither men nor women fully trust that she is saying what she really believes, the poll found.
I don’t trust her. I don’t trust her experience. Her agenda pushes her away from me; her constant flip flopping with the wind causes me to question her honesty. And her history causes me to question her motives. Add to that, her hopes to turn my country into a pit of socialism really disturbs me. I believe Hillary will turn back women…instead of moving us forward she will make us more dependent upon others for survival. The others being the federal government. Do women really need a government that will tell them what they can and cannot do? To protect us from threats and evils of the world? I don’t think so.
The poll showed that women’s views tend to shift depending on their demographics. Their support for her is most pronounced, for example, among unmarried and less-affluent Democratic women. More than 8 in 10 working women say she understands their problems.
The older the woman, the more negatively she views Mrs. Clinton: 27 percent of those under 45 view her negatively; 33 percent of those between 45 and 64 view her negatively; and 40 percent of those 64 and older view her negatively.
Younger women, as with younger people in general, tend to be very liberal and see the world for all it is not. They live in a world where anything is possible and peace and good will should abound…they’re not wise in the reality of current events and threats. I know…I used to be the same way. The older we get, the smarter we are.
“I like her strength, and I like that she’s been behind the scenes in the White House and knows the process and has the Senate experience,” Karla Whitt, 32, a small-business owner in Charlotte, N.C., said in a follow-up interview. “I do like that she is a woman,” she added, “but that’s not the main thing.”
So what is the main thing?? I say this: Hillary is trying to play two roles. She wants to be seen as one of the guys- a tough calculating player who has clout among her peers; yet at the same time she’s trying to come off as a real woman with all those traits many of us are proud of. She can’t have it both ways and all these polls are trying to tell her this.
Even those women who call themselves feminists, have issue with the two Hillary’s:
Baby boomer women grew up with the Feminine Mystique and then came of age with the Women’s Liberation Movement. As a result, millions of us have spent our lives crafting a compromise—or a fusion—between femininity on the one hand and feminism on the other. And for many of us feminism did not mean trying to be more like men. It meant challenging patriarchy: trying to bring equity to family life, humanizing the workplace, prioritizing women’s issues in politics, and confronting the dangers of militarism and imperialism. And millions of us fought (and continue to fight) these battles wearing lipstick, skirts and a smile: the masquerade of femininity we are compelled to don.
Hillary, by contrast, seems to want to be more like a man in her demeanor and politics, makes few concessions to the social demands of femininity, and yet seems to be only a partial feminist. She seems above us, exempting herself from compromises women have to make every day, while, at the same time, leaving some of the basic tenets of feminism in the dust. We are sold out on both counts. In other words, she seems like patriarchy in sheep’s clothing.
EXACTLY.
Not all feminists are anti feminine. Hillary would do well to take notice of this.
For me, Hillary represents everything a woman should not be. Cold. Calculating. Conniving. I see her as using her womanhood as an insult to women. She wants to be taken seriously. She wants to play with the boys and she wants to be in that exclusive club…but she isn’t the woman for the job.
I’m very loud and obnoxious at times. I can come across as mean and gruff and nasty. I have moments of total emotional breakdown…and I can be cold and calculating too– mess with my kids and you will see the most ruthless and evil bitch there ever was. Mess with my life and you’ll see even worse. I play with the guys and for the most part I can keep up with them. I’ve confronted sexism in it’s worst ways; I’ve slapped down more than a few overly manly men in my time, who deserve it.
But, the everyday average ME is warm, soft, very feminine and (gasp!!) emotional. I do use my womanly instinct to guide me with choices and decisions; I use my emotions and feelings too. Yes, I have temper tantrums and bouts of crying…and I do question way too many things that only women can question. However, I seek out men to counter these traits when they get out of control. I need men to calm me down and help me rationalize my thoughts and my ability to think clearly. It’s not a crime to do this.
I AM A WOMAN and I don’t pretend to be anything but that.
Hillary does. And that’s my biggest issue with her.
It’s the wrong time in our nations history, for a woman to be our President. In the end, if she gets the nomination, I don’t see her winning. Why? Because I really don’t think MEN, of any political party, will vote for her. That includes liberal and Democrat men. Men are men, and it doesn’t matter what their politics are: They want women to be women and they know that women are different…In the end, when it comes down to the nitty gritty, I say MEN will make the rational choices that must be made. They will not vote for Hillary.
While we women must always celebrate who we are, and we must not lose the very traits that make us WOMEN, we have to be serious when it comes to our nations national security and defense. Hillary’s focus is totally incorrect for the times. While she seeks to soften up her masculine aura, our enemies hope and pray (to Allah) that American women vote for her.
September 16th, 2007 at 10:11 am
Excellent post my friend!
I’m not so sure I would agree that ALL men would not vote for Hillary; you present an interesting argument here though, and food for thought.
I wonder what the results would be for a poll of liberal and Democrat men? Would they vote for her or a Republican? I don’t know. I really don’t.
September 16th, 2007 at 10:16 am
Here’s one man who will vote for Chillary.
September 16th, 2007 at 10:55 am
Raven, this was an EXCELLENT post. You have outdone yourself and IMHO this post makes you far more feminine than Hillary could ever HOPE to aspire to.
September 16th, 2007 at 11:36 pm
Excellent discussion, Raven. You’ve touched on many of the contradictions in her character.
However, I am rather frightened of Hillary because she exhibits personality traits that the great dictators of the 20th century also exhibited. This doesn’t mean that she’s going to become a Stalin or a Mao, only that her instincts are totalitarian in nature – and that’s not what we need in a President, especially if she gets a pliant Congress.
In particular, Hillary has a number of laudable intentions in terms of her political goals: justice, health care availability to all, quality education. The problem is that (1) she believes that the way to achieve these goals is through government fiat and compulsion, i.e. force (versus the alternative of persuasion of individuals and the marketplace); (2) that she believes she has an annointed mission to be the agent (perhaps God’s agent) to bring these to pass; and (3) she is utter ruthless in the means that she would use to accomplish her program.
The other striking feature of Hillary is that she and Bill represent the anti-family. I’m not referring to Bill’s inability to keep his pants up, but rather the mutual manipulation of each other that defines their relationship, at least those aspects of their marriage that are visible to the public.
September 18th, 2007 at 3:44 pm
While some may view hillary as a leader, I can’t help but see her as someone lacking integrity, ethics, and leadership qualities. I don’t trust her to be commander in chief of our armed forces, since she has in the past shown her dislke of the military and I would even question her support of a strong intelligence capability. Too many questions with no answers in sight.
September 19th, 2007 at 3:51 pm
Kim, Wesley Clarke is merely kissing up here- this is a political move for him. He wants a hand in some guvmint office some day so he’s doing these things for that reason; also in 2012 I bet he runs again for POTUS.
September 19th, 2007 at 3:58 pm
CT, yes, Hillary wants to rule with an iron fist on all those issues. She has no respect for the American way- free markets and capitalism in general…I can see her being a total cut throat to achieve her stated and unstated goals.
It’s not womanly! And I have a huge problem with that.
How dare she pretend to be a woman in this race, when she’s about as feminine as a ….well nevermind…YOU can guess my thought here LOL!!!
Hillary is not a MOM either. She has a daughter, but she’s no Mom- shes too cold and calculating and selfish. She and Bill have always come across to me as being the most selfish couple- right up there with most Hollywood types. Uuugh. I think they love their daughter and are proud of her, but they’re not her parents in any sense of the word, not like I am a parent to my daughters.
I can’t relate to Hillary at all. She’s a phoney woman. She’s cold. She’s unpassionate. She’s everything every woman should avoid becoming. Bitter. Spiteful. Full of hate. Manipulating. All terms and traits I hate in people, esp women.
September 19th, 2007 at 4:01 pm
BAS- these points are obvious to me as well;
Hillary lacks any of the needed skills and experience and HONESTY to be a leader.
Can we see her now, after the US is attacked?
Can we see her now, after France is nuked?
Can we her now, after Britain succumbs to Islamic rule? Laugh, but I foresee these things happening someday in the not too far future…
Hillary would enable the destruction of my country because she would not fight back.
September 19th, 2007 at 4:41 pm
She’ll get into the White House, quickly discover that she can’t do half of the things she’d like to do, compensate by employing the usual smattering of Band-Aids, and remind all those who complain about the Republicans of all the things they used to hate about the Democrats. Neither party dares to change much of anything. They just waste their time and our money in different ways.
I usually vote for the third party candidate with the most vowels. Vowels are a clear mark of competent leadership ability.
September 21st, 2007 at 9:36 pm
You guys crack me up. She’s not womanly! She’s not a mom! She’s anti-family! (sheesh, I’d rather have Chelsea over to dinner than Jenna.), she’s not a parent to her child like you are to yours? What are you-nuts? How would you know that? the “persuasion of individuals and the marketplace” is better?! Try paying my 1,230. a month insurance premium, that’s the “marketplace” for you, and SHE was the only one trying to fix it BEFORE it got this bad, years ago. Quality education! I LOVE the republican version of education: send my kid to the Ivy leagues so they can graduate to a 200k a year job. The rest of you can go to community college, but don’t count on Pell grants, we’d rather spend the money elsewhere. I don’t know if I’ll vote for her, but I will tell you one thing, I have no doubt whatsoever that she would have done a better job than that man that’s in the white house, you know, the one who has accomplished nothing in six years…(forgive me, he has accomplished screwing up the middle east and building the next generation’s debt load). Yow, and Wesley Clark? He’s a retired 4-star General. Any military man walks on water with you guys except the ones that are Democrats. Questioning her support of a strong intelligence capability? Like maybe you think we have one now? I’m starting to think ya’ll just don’t think a woman can lead. Oh that’s just soooo redneck.
oh, and Civil dude– totalitarian? What on earth do you think of Mr. Bush with his executive branch power grabs if you think SHES totalitarian? “Gods Agent” I do believe that was Bush’s playbook you were reading. Ruthless? Ask Rove about ruthless. This administration brought ruthless to a whole new level. Methinks you are missing your target politician with those arguments.
September 21st, 2007 at 9:47 pm
Mac I strongly recommend you go read this posting about Chelsea and the Bush twins; all are respectable young ladies but there is a slight difference to how they have turned out and what their priorities are.