More women feeling skeptical about Clinton's authenticity - though they wish they weren't

The Dallas Morning News ^ | July 8, 2007 | Melinda Henneberger

[Eric Blair 2084]

The most appealing thing about Hillary Rodham Clinton has always been her enemies, who often seem not in their right mind, screaming that she is a murderer and calling her names like "Her Thighness." They make you want to like her.

Yet in interviews across the country with women of all ages, races, income brackets and points of view, one of the rare patches of common ground was skepticism about the first female presidential contender with a serious shot at the White House. Over 18 months, I traveled to 20 states listening to women speak at length about what they care about and what drives them crazy as they look toward the presidential election in '08. I ought to like her, many of the strongest Democrats among them said. But on no other matter did left, right and center converge as on the view best summed up as "Anybody but Hillary' – to the point that I began to dread the mention of her name, because it meant we would probably not get around to talking about anything else that day.

All of which runs contrary to the accepted narrative of this election cycle, which is that it is women who are leading the charge for Mrs. Clinton's candidacy. Polling, which at this point still mainly measures name ID, certainly shows a far more mixed picture for Mrs. Clinton where female voters are concerned; 51 percent of those who participated in a recent Washington Post-ABC News survey said they support her for the Democratic nomination.

[SuziQ]

It just occurred to me that if Fred Thompson is the Republican nominee, he may get some of those votes from women who can't stomach Her Heinous, because of Jeri, his wife. Jeri doesn't seem to have gotten where she was in DC by 'marrying into' the life. She became a lawyer, and, from what I've read, a successful media consultant for the GOP before she even knew Fred. So Jeri is more of a role model for young women than Hillary, who got where she is by marrying a man she knew would be ambitious enough that she could just ride to the top with him, without a whole lot of effort on her part.

It will be interesting to see Jeri out on the campaign trail, making speeches on behalf of her husband.

[pray4liberty]

Hillary Clinton doesn’t have a serious shot at the presidency, and never has. That is rubbish pushed by a hopeful media. Women in NYC disliked Hillary in surprising percentages even before her first senate run. I well recall the NY Post stories on the subject.

Yeah, but look at the results: she got in anyway. So who voted for her?

[ken21]

what’s needed is a

real woman

like

margaret thatcher.

[AnAmericanMother]

That's why I inserted the asterix and the disclaimer.

My mother in law is a great lady -- Irish Catholic New Jersey farm girl, and no biggod nonsense about her. She's in her 80s and still active as can be - garden club, tennis, golf, church. We all love her.

[fieldmarshaldj]

C’mon now, even Satan wouldn’t want to make a contract with someone as unscrupulous as Hillary.

[Xenalyte]

See my tagline, yo! ;)

[altura]

Hah! It’s okay. A lot of women have a crush on Hillary and you know so much about her physically, I’m wondering about you....:)

[greccogirl]

Remember the “Presidential knee pads?” God save me from these kind of women.............

[greccogirl]

You know what, she is neither ugly nor fat. The reason I cannot stand her is she stayed married to a complete hound dog and possible rapist for years and put up with his crap just so she could ride his coattails to political power. And because she’s a liar, and a big one. “She didn’t know about Monica”. Well, if she’s THAT stupid, which for one minute I don’t believe she is, she sure as heck can’t be trusted to be President. Plus, she’s a legend in her own mind. And let’s face it, four years of her would mean four more of BILL. Egad. Please.

Positive role model for women? Hardly.

[AnAmericanMother]

Nope, I'm a former dancer and I work with performance horses and dogs. So I can assess structure pretty well.

If she were a horse, she'd go out of the ring in the first cut.

[AnAmericanMother]

Like I said, my problem is not with her looks but with her conduct and lack of character.

She's no prize in looks, but if she were a person of good character and honest, she would look a lot better. By the time you're 50, you have the face you deserve.

[gcruse]

LOL

Love it.

[PGalt]

She is authentic. Authentically creepy. Authentically criminal. Authentically evil.

I know that there are many outstanding posts past your post (#2)

Thanks to all posters and thanks to miat1111.

[Styria]

It cannot be a good sign for her candidacy, though, that some of these "modest boos" are coming from women who ought to be among her biggest fans.

No one has any compelling reason why women ought to be her biggest fans.

[altura]

I think it is a mistake to base our criticism of Hillary on her looks.

There are more plain, overweight and generally unattractive women out there than there are slim pretty dancers!

I saw at least ten youngish women at church today who were moderately to morbidly obese. Nobody there would win a beauty contest, not even me!

A lot of the men on Free Republic can be counted on to judge women by their looks.

I find it very inappropriate for women to do so, especially since ... in Hillary’s case ... it is a wild exaggeration, horse judging aside.

[AnAmericanMother]

Well, if you want to include the morbidly obese . . . . she's obviously not THAT, but other than Jerry Nadler and maybe Teddy Kennedy, how many morbidly obese politicians are there out there?

[fieldmarshaldj]

Well, there’s more fatheads than fatasses.

[lndrvr1972]

Because they are not stupid the reason he was Monica is because Hillary is a Lesbian she has only stayed married in order to become president. Bill is biting at the rains just so he can get back into the White House in order to screw everything with a heartbeat, he can count Hillary out on that one.

[bannie]

In order to BE a “liberal” (in the current sense), don’t you HAVE to be intellectually dishonest?

[PhilDragoo]