Log in

. ..: .: ..::.: ..:.:.....: ...::: ...::.

April 2011
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30

gwen [userpic]
Article on Hillary's divisive political nature...

I'm mostly putting this here to bookmark it, but it's an article about what I've been saying for the past two years. Hillary Clinton is polarizing, and has a lot of sentiment against her among Republicans. The article even goes further than me and points out that the anti-Clinton sentiment is so strong, it has the potential to mobilize Republicans to come out to the polls just to vote against her.


Part of the problem here is that I think is that the Republican populus votes more based on the image of 'Republicanness' of a candidate, not on policies.

The fact that Hilary seems to be a 'stuffy Northerner intellectual' is the problem, and no votes are going to fix that.

If Democrats want to win elections by being Republicans, they have to become a lot better actors and pick up the cultural Republicaninity...ness... um... whatever, you get the idea. ;)

I really think the reasons given in the article are the reasons I've heard more than anyone calling her a "stuffy Northerner intellectual". Specifically:

Some anger at her is residual resentment of her husband whose second term was mired in a long impeachment process stemming from an extramarital relationship. For some it's about her policies -- pro-gun control, for universal health care.

Others cite a personality they see as too aggressive and insincere.

It's the third I've heard the most, really.

I'm personally against her policies, but not those cited. She's mostly been working on, since becoming Senator, censoring video games -- something I strongly disagree with. And really, it's an example of how her policies in general reflect the "Protect the Children!" mantra that I really dislike.

I was kind of conflating 'stuffy Northern intellectual' with 'aggressive and insincere.'

Carpet-baggers, and so on.