Is it Hillary, or just a woman thing?

Apparently not.

 

It's hard to analyze Hillary because of her husband. All those theories can be thrown out. And it's not just that her husband was president, it was all the scandals (real and imagined) that grew out of that time.

She is not a textbook example of a powerful woman.

EDIT: Funny that we were talking about his and Maureen Dowd has a column on it today that, of course, makes my point a lot better. I swear I didn't read this first.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/13/opinion/13dowd.html?hp

 

"Puppies" excluded, several posters here just decided to totally ignore dragonfly's point to declare that they just don't "like" Hillary, etc. How about "the Goldberg paradigm"? That's hard to refute, whether you "like" Hillary or not. Or maybe I'm missing something?

 

She can't? She will? Proof?

 

Ahhh yes.... prove an unproveable.

Well done.

 

Part of that is because she wants it both ways, and tries to play it that way. She wants to be known as a politician and a great leader? Fine. But as soon as she's grilled on a particular topic, or any of her shady personal dealings are brought up, she starts whining about how the press is picking on a poor defenseless woman. She's done that several times during her campaign.
It's things like that, in addition to her dead mackerel-like personality, that turn people off of her.

 

Simon,

Well, it's just as easy for me to say that's wrong, isn't it?

 

Let's face it: she entered the race and conducted herself as though she was invincible and the one to beat.

Please.

Hillary may be very well packing a penis under that Ann Taylor Loft pants suit, but at the end of the day, she voted for us to go into Iraq, she is too hawkish for the right, even though her take on foreign policy is still murky, and, she wants everyone to buy health insurance.

And maybe it's just me, but in hindsight, it sorta seems like Hillary's numbers went into the death spiral right about the time Bill started campaigning super hard for her.

 

No, she wouldn't. I would think John Edwards would have been proof of that. Obama's run a great campaign to date -- he's been positive, stresses compromise and has raised a ton of money and support from people who ordinarily would tune out the nominee races. If Hillary were a man, that much still would not change.

 

Hillary plays both ends against the middle: "You don't treat me like you would a man" and "I'm picked on because I'm a woman."
Sorry, but you can't have it both ways.

 

When you boil it down to brass tacks, I think in their heart-of-heart's, rank-and-file voters who don't get deeply involved in the political process, and that's most of them, have never got past the fact that HRC's political career almost entirely exists because of her marriage to Bill Clinton.

Her political attributes and subsequent Senate career aside, I don't think many folks have ever got past that. And fair or unfair, it hurts her. I think that comes first. Animosity, especially from the right, about her being a woman come second.

 

If she'd shed some tears, she'd make another push.