Why do conservatives get so pissed off by Hillary Clinton?

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by SPG, Nov 30, 2003.

  1. SPG macrumors 65816

    SPG

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2001
    Location:
    In the shadow of the Space Needle.
    #1
    This one has baffled me for a long time. Anytime I really want to set off a conservative republican on a red faced tirade all I have to do is say "Hillary Rodham Clinton!" and they freak out. Yet every time this happens I never get a coherent response as to why. So please, conservatives, republicans, Clinton haters, let a lefty liberal in on the dirt. What has Hillary done to piss you off?
     
  2. Ugg macrumors 68000

    Ugg

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2003
    Location:
    Penryn
    #2
    I've often wondered the same thing. Personally, I think a lot has to do with the fact that Americans hate strong women.

    I'm interested in hearing why as well, anyone???
     
  3. jonapete2001, Nov 30, 2003
    Last edited: Nov 6, 2012
  4. Ugg macrumors 68000

    Ugg

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2003
    Location:
    Penryn
    #4
    1 is incorrect, that title goes to a certain Eleanor Roosevelt.

    2. Something like 30% of Americans have no health care and another 30% are paying through the nose for it. If Americans and by extension American businesses don't want some form of government sanctioned health care, then why are so many businesses moving abroad mainly because health care costs are cheaper in countries where it is nationalized?

    3. If that is your opinion then that is your opinion.

    4. What do you mean by that?

    5. Of all your reasons for hating her, this is the most visceral and I can understand but it translates into fear of her more than hating her.

    6. Maggie Thatcher was a b****h, Hilary is just a little on the cold side. Don't you find this statement to be essentially misogynist? What is it with strong women and Republicans?


    Once again, I really do feel that the majority of repbublicans really, truly hate women in power. Your statements seem to bear that out.
     
  5. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #5
    The part where you label her a b*tch just drips of mysogeny.

    Would you call Ann Coulter a teddy bear? Or is she a bitch too? How about Helen Thomas? Or Kay Bailey Hutchinson? Kate Michaelman? Are they all "b*tches" too, or do you have good things to say about the conservative women?
     
  6. revenuee macrumors 68020

    revenuee

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2003
    Location:
    A place where i am supreme emporer
    #6
    Misogyny is exactly it guys... What could be scarier to a "Old" Conservative man then a women in power.
     
  7. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #7
    I'm no Hillary Clinton fan, and I hope she never runs for president. But I think a great deal of the Hillary Hatred can be traced back to Bill Clinton, who of course was hated by Republicans with unequaled fervor. People who have that much hate in them need a transference, or they'd burst a gasket from all that undirected rage. So if just mentioning her name causes some Republicans to flip out, then I say, mention her name often -- it's good for them and it's fun for you. Everybody wins.
     
  8. G5ROCKS macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2003
    #8
    If you want to understand why conservatives get so pissed off at Senator Clinton, figure out why the left gets so pissed off at President Bush. Once you've done that, you've got your answer. It might be that if conservatives hate strong women (see Mrs. Thatcher for evidence to the contrary), that liberals hate successful politicians, both men and women, who disagree with them politically and particularly ones who express moral certainty. (The Soviet Union is an Evil Empire, Tear Down this Wall!, etc. etc.).
     
  9. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #9
    nope.

    this forum is full of concrete ways in which bush's policies are destroying this country.

    contrast that to a woman who simply wanted the uninsured to have health coverage. don't add up.
     
  10. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #10
    Some of the issues are ideological of course, but I think in the case of the Clintons it goes deeper. Hillary Clinton is nothing more then the junior Senator from New York, but that doesn't stop a lot of people who are not counted among her constituency from holding strong opinions about her, mainly negative, and often furiously negative. I've been hearing for years from the conservative camp about the cultural war they've been waging against liberalism. I think the Clintons have become icons of that war, and having another Clinton in Washington gets their goat like nothing else could.
     
  11. jonapete2001, Dec 1, 2003
    Last edited: Nov 6, 2012
  12. G5ROCKS macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2003
    #12
    Hillary embodied more as first lady than simply holding secret healthcare hearings. Note the similarity with Dick Cheney's energy task force, then ask yourself is the same people who were pissed at Hillary were pissed at Cheney and vice versa. Nope. It's all about the politics.

    This forum is full of concrete opinions that aren't those of the American people as a whole. There seems to be a pretty big skew in the direction of Bush-hating on this forum, but that's not how most Americans feel about him. The majority of Americans respect Bush. There's a huge partisan split on Bush, just like on Senator Clinton, and I bet most here voting Democratic and so have a hard time understanding that there is more than half a country out there who respect Bush rather than hate him. Just like there are many on the left who love Hillary and hate Bush, there are many on the right who love Bush and hate Hillary. Therefore, understanding the motivations of one will help to understand the motivations of the other. And doesn't the world need more understanding? Bush is an icon to hate for the left, just like Hillary is an icon to hate for the right. Neither of them really deserve the hatred they get.
     
  13. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #13
    Ultimately I think you are right, neither one should be personally hated by anyone. I think it's another symptom of the bitterness partisan politics has sunk to.

    And the media hasn't helped a bit, having found that they can get better ratings with a boxing match between to extremist pols with agendas than an intelligent discussion between two opposing, but willing to talk without insulting people.
     
  14. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #14
    Need I remind you (apparently I do) that Hillary Clinton is a senator from New York and George Bush is the President of the United States? Everyone in the US is entitled to an opinion about whether George Bush is leading the country skillfully -- and to say that he's failed in that regard does not count as "hatred" in my book. But to be from a state other than New York and to have strong opinions about Hillary Clinton either pro or con suggests to me that something else entirely is going on here. That other thing is cultural.
     
  15. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #15
    how do you figure that?
     
  16. G5ROCKS macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2003
    #16
    A recent CNN/Time Magazine poll. December 1st issue. 57 percent of those polled answered the question "In carrying out his role as President, is George W. Bush a president the country can admire?"

    Yes 57%
    Strongly 31%
    Somewhat 26%

    No 42%
    Strongly 23%
    Somewhat 19%

    So, you can see that the majority of Americans appear to respect Bush (or at least they say he is a president the country can admire).

    IJReilly,
    Why the sarcasm?
    Hillary Clinton has been a major actor on the national political stage for quite some time, well before she was a figure in New York politics. She isn't a local New York politician. Like RFK, she's a national figure holding a state office. Were she to run for president, she would, according to polls, secure the nomination rather easily. She's more than the Senator from New York, both to the left and to the right. She's a national figure.
     
  17. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #17
    thank you
     
  18. Taft macrumors 65816

    Taft

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2002
    Location:
    Chicago
    #18
    The two examples aren't comparable. The rage directed toward Clinton stemmed from her exclusion of conservatives during the formulation of her healthcare plan. The rage directed at Cheny stems from his close ties with corporate energy firms, the apparent conflict of interest rising from this relationship and the subsequent policies which resulted from the secret meetings (which many people find shortchanges the environment while aiding the energy corporations).

    I'll agree with you on only one point: that partisan politics are too bitter and hostile these days.

    You don't really address the core of zim's point: many of us on the boards have listed the numerous ways in which G.W. Bush is a bad president, and moreover, a deceitful president who caters only to industry.

    Where are the specific allegations against Hillary? The single most important initiative she has ever been involved in (the healthcare fiasco you mentioned above) was an utter failure and subsequently, she hasn't been involved in directing national policy.

    The bottom line? I can name for you no fewer than 10 policies implemented under Bush's watch that I find objectionable based on my personal values. You couldn't name 10 policies implemented by Hillary Clinton. This means that people are forming an opinion of her based not on her political track record, but rather on partisan loyalty or some other irrational criteria.

    And "the man on the street" backs this up. Ask a person why they don't like Hillary. You get responses like, "she's too fridged," or, "she's a bitch." Do these people know Hillary Clinton? How are they qualified to make such statements? Do these things have any bearing on her ability to perform in a public office?

    Taft
     
  19. G5ROCKS macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2003
    #19
    Of course the example are comparable. The left is using Cheney'e energy task force as an icon to embody all it hates about the right, and the right used "Hillary care" to embody what it hated about the left. I remember hearing complaints that (libeal) environmental groups were excluded form energy policy discussions, and you tell us that conservatives were mad at Mrs. Clinton because they were excluded from the discussion. We can connect the dots and see the similarities. Hillary-haters will tell us that it is her close ties with socialism that makes them mad. Is that rational? No more than the rage at Cheney is rational.

    I probably could find 10 policies implemented by the Clinton administration (an administration Hillary was a part of) I don't like, and I certainly could find 10 policies from the Bush administration that I don't like. But I don't hate Hillary Clinton or Bush. Ask the man on the street about Bush, and some will give you equally irrational responses. They don't know Bush anymore than Hillary haters know Senator Clinton. That's just how it works in today's political environment.

    Even on the issues, which you say are so clear and show Bush to be a bad, deceitful president, who caters only to industry, there are many Americans out there who simply see it another way, and agree with most of his policies. The country is split right down the middle and neither side has a monoploy on the truth, IMO. Read the Time article to see what I mean.

    The "bottom line" is that the left and the right aren't all that different in how they see their political opponents. A lot of people look at issues, and a lot of people look at personalities.
     
  20. Taft macrumors 65816

    Taft

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2002
    Location:
    Chicago
    #20
    We are arguing different points. You are arguing that the left and right latch onto specific actions of their opponents and use them as rallying calls to inspire hatred in the troops. I agree with that assessment. Both sides use irrational and irrelevent points to play partisan politics and confuse the American public into agreeing with them. Both sides suck.

    I, on the other hand, am arguing that the crticisms directed towards Hillary are, by and large, unfounded while the criticisms leveled against Bush have basis in policy.

    Involved in how? Was she implementing the policies herself? Or are you simply projecting her husbands policies onto Hillary?

    It is true that the average american is pretty ignorant about the issues. However, if the average American turns on the news, he is likely to receive a glut of information about the decisions that Bush makes. He is also likely to get analysis of that information which may give him a clearer picture of whether he agrees with the president's positions. Iraq, the War on Terror, the Patriot Act, tax cuts, environmental policies, energy policies...we hear about them constantly. Sure, it may not be pristine information and is likely to be filled with bias and "misinformation," but the average American has ample access to the decisions Bush makes and how that decision will likely effect the public.

    On the other hand, Hillary has never been president. We have never had access to a large quantity of decisions made by her. The only context in which most Americans know her is as first lady to Bill Clinton. In that context, she made few decisions.

    You (and others) may equate her politics to Bill's politics, but that is hardly a fair assessment of her skills as a politician. The fact is, until Hillary became a senator, none of us knew how she would perform as a politician. Now, as she serves for New York state, we get our first glimpse.

    I'm no Hillary supporter. She has good points, and bad points just like any politician. But I do think she gets a undeservedly bad rap. People loathe her for no good reason. She rubs people the wrong way and was connected to one of the most contentious presidents ever to have served and therefore people hate her.

    I can list reasons I don't like Bush. All of those reasons lie in policy decisions and rational arguments. And, just like most of America, I can't list many facts about Hillary and her political record. How can I go and say I hate someone I don't know anything about?

    Taft
     
  21. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #21
    if the argument that "the right hates hilary because of bill" argument were true, then why does it not follow that "the left hates laura because of george"?
     
  22. Taft macrumors 65816

    Taft

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2002
    Location:
    Chicago
    #22
    Whadduya mean?!?!?

    I hate that ****** witch! :rolleyes:


    Honestly? I'd guess that people view her more as a homemaker/childbearer. Hillary clearly had professional and political ambitions and I think that rubbed people the wrong way.

    Taft
     
  23. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #23
    exactly.

    i'd be willing to guess that a good chunk of the people who have so much venom for her also believe the woman's place is in the home.
     
  24. G5ROCKS macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2003
    #24
    Taft,
    You are special. You make your judgements based on policy. A lot of people don't. You probably use a Mac as well. A lot of people don't. That includes a lot of people who hate Hillary, and a lot of people who hate Bush. Just because you don't hate someone you don't know doesn't mean that others can't do that.

    Hillary Clinton has never been president, but you wouldn't know it from the attitudes about her on both the right and the left. Hillary Clinton was associated with policy in the Clinton administration more than other First Ladies. The healthcare fiasco set the tone for that. There was a perception that she was more involved in policy--not just baking cookies, and she marketed herself as such for a time during the campaign--kind of like two for the price of one--more than other first ladies have. It's just the perception. How much actual decision making power she had on policy isn't something that we can really tell right now.

    The reaction to Hillary is in part because of those political ambitions, which you say are obvious. Some people were also pissed at her over her expert trading in cattle futures, White House travel office firings, hidden billing records, illegally obtained FBI files, and crap like that. She didn't deserve all of that to stick, only some of it. The whole atmosphere apparently drove poor Vince Foster to kill himself.

    People loathe Bush for no good reason, too. You may dislike his policies, I may dislike his policies, but there are plenty who loathe him not for his policies but for who they think he is. He just gets under their skin, just like Hillary does! Dress up the policy is a different political figure and rhetoric and you won't get the same reaction. Read that Time article. Half of the people think Bush is strong, half say he's arrogant, and it splits on party lines. Those aren't policy adjectives, that's personal liking and loathing.

    Again, just because you don't hate someone you don't know anything about doesn't stop others, both on the right and the left, from doing just that.
     
  25. Frohickey macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2003
    Location:
    PRK
    #25
    I'd wish that HRC would run for President in 2004. :p :neener:

    Condi Rice would make an excellent President or VP choice. Bush/Rice in 2004 would make an excellent party ticket.
     

Share This Page