Hillary's Debate Moment - bickering and angry (VIDEO)

Hillary's Debate Moment
January 05, 2008 9:53 PM

It won't come across on the transcript, but Sen. Hillary Clinton got angry during the debate tonight.

She was bickering with Sen. Barack Obama about their differences on health insurance, and whether Obama's plan leaves millions of Americans uninsured.

And then she … well … she got angry.

Frankly, I don't even really understand what she was saying. What I was getting was how angry she is. Not about an issue, so much, as about the fact that Obama is beating her.

The clip, I predict, will be played again and again and again.

Pundits will say that her tone made male voters recoil. And led some female voters to sneer.

Clinton people are spinning this as her projecting strength. I do not think that will be the widely-head view.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/01/hillarys-debate.html

VIDEO HERE ---> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07u6uffKvpA

Doesn't she understand how to act like a woman at a debate?

:hi:

are you still stuck on $250 a week? :sarcasm:

That is what they should call their blog

Nice bit of subliminal suggestion. Not related in any way to actual or factual truth, however.

;)

I'm not a big fan of Hillary's, but it seems like there is now a drive to criticize her for anything and everything she says and does. I'm glad she responded the way she did. I admire her for not just sitting there and smiling through it all.

as ganging up on her inappropriately at times - they've lived this same BS. That was the only thing I didn't like about Edwards' approach to the debate tonight.

opposition. Better to know now than to have her in a highly sensitive foreign situation and have her come unglued because (whoever) isn't obeying her.

shrill, witchy, out of control, etc., while he's forceful and strong.

Check out the social science research on how women in leadership positions are discounted and put into "damned if you do, damned if you don't" positions.

I am an Edwards supporter.

If she says, "Oh well, guess you got me," she's being weak. If she says, "Wait a minute now. Here's how it is," she's being a nag. Grow up.

not every things is a sexist conspiracy.

When the republican stood up and walked toward her podium while he was answering a question.He was dragged over the coals for it. Was it because people are sexist toward men? Wasn't he just being tough and strong?

Rick Lazio was criticized because he charged up to her podium, waving a piece of paper in her face and insisting that she sign it. If he had made his point verbally without leaving his podium, he wouldn't have been criticized.

That seems to be the word of the evening.

Did the men also get "ANGRY" when they raised their voice and their eyebrows and pointed?

This is ridiculous. Double-standards all over the place.

and she handled the tag-teaming with style. John Edwards couldn't have been more of a suck-up to Obama, than if he got down on his knees and polished his shoes tonight. Did you hear that his campaign sent an email to the press naming the minute during the debate when he brought down the Clinton era? What a joke.

How ridiculous!

I thought he made Obama look weaker -- like two kids who can't fight on their own. It was unfortunate (for Obama) they were seated next to each other or it might not have come off that way quite so much.

I remember Edwards doing the same with Kerry in those debates.

I thought Clinton showed a lot of substance and knowledge in her answers, and she was FAR more concise than anyone else. Every word she used meant something -- nothing thrown away to go on and on with campaign themes.

I was so impressed with her, AND she did what we talked about...the first woman president in the history of the United States!

Her answers on foreign policy were very detailed (you know she's been talking to The General) and her connecting economy, environment and security through renewable energy was superb.

Very impressive.

What did you think of her "That hurts my feelings?" The camera cut to Chelsea laughing, which was fun to see.

and Obama didn't come off very well when he shrugged her off with, well you're likeable enough or something.

:rofl:

:rofl:

assertively laying out her record. Not a bad clip at all.

Bickering and angry? You mean "bitchy"?

I'm not persuaded, but I thought that stylistically it was an improvement over previous speeches I've seen from her. I don't think she's quite out of this yet.

You could feel the tension in a big way. Then Richardson made a joke about being in more civil discussions when negotiating with people holding hostages. It was certainly a bad moment in the debate for Hillary and after Richardson's joke Hillary looked somber as though she knew she had blown it.

...I guess the local ABC affiliate here on Guam thought "The Sound of Music" would be better to show (although they could have shown anything, considering they were competing with an NFL playoff game), but I didn't see what you saw in that clip. She looked fine to me, nothing like what I've seen described by her detractors (although not the slam dunk that her supporters are describing, either).

Bush was angry when Kerry questioned him. It's OK to be angry at Special Interest but not at the other candidates. That is where she made her mistake.

Thank you.

I saw no such loss of control. She just used some speech and rhetoric techniques to emphasize her points.

she was in control the entire time. Edwards looked like he was going to lose IMO. I thought it was funny that he was scribbling frantically, while everyone else was sitting calmly while the questions were asked.

dupe

I'm an Edwards supporter, but I didn't see anything wrong with her reaction. She wasn't shrill or bitchy. Just just stated some facts that she felt needed to be stated. She's a strong woman; and strength is what we'll need in our nominee.

Actually I thought tonight's debate was excellent. They all impressed me. But I didn't see anything to move me away from Edwards. :-)

Or is there something else?


This isn't worth a big to-do IMO. (And I'm not a Hillary supporter, for the record.)

Maybe you forgot already, I feel your pain.

:rofl:

smilies won't change that

Like you said, the clip will be played over and over again. She clearly lost it. Do a slo-motion of that video with harsh music and you've got a smackdown ad.

She said what she wanted to say. She was in total command.

when Edwards tried to hitch hike on Obama's identification with representing change to obscure the fact that, after edging out Clinton by less than half a percentage point in Iowa, he was no better received as an agent of "change" than Clinton was, with both of them trailing Obama by 8 points. Edwards read the polls; over 50% of Iowa caucus goers felt "change" is most important so now it is he and Obama who "won" in Iowa by being "agents of change" instead of he and Clinton losing in Iowa. It is a shamelessly tranceparent effort to spin the results.

Edwards flat out implied and virtually said that while he and Obama want to help working Americans by changing things in this nation to deal with their plight, that Clinton is the force of a status quo that wants to keep things the way they are and continue to punish working Americans.

I posted this on your other thread and since it seems you are going around starting multiple attempts to spin all this against Clinton, I will repeat it here:

Any other Democrat who doesn't go ballistic when accused as Hillary was of being in collusion with special interest forces who seek to lock in a status quo that harms the interests of working Americans would be hounded endlessly on DU for having no spine or worse; of actually being guilty as charged because they did NOT get furious over such a smear. When it is a Democrat defending themselves against a FOX news jock like that we cheer. When it is Hillary Clinton, who has devoted her entire adult life to the Democratic Party including organizing for George Mondale and staffing impeachment proceedings against Nixon, who gets outraged at the implications of that smeer then suddenly it is "a melt down". It seems men never melt down, they just bitch slap their accusers. Women are the ones who "melt down", right?

I've watched this twice and I think she comes across as strong, firm, direct, clear. Problem is there is a double standard for women. If she had a d*ck, it would have been a stellar moment. Because she's a woman, her detractors will spin this against her. Let's not play into it.