Why do Americans hate Hillary so much?

[columbus]

But it's complete horse excrement to claim that there is no partisan plan to take her down in affect.

This is something I have come to realize through the campaign. How much of the anti-Hillary memes are based on partial truth and revisionist history.
Such as the NAFTA thing. RW media and Trump keep screaming "Clinton signed NAFTA". But I was around in the 90's. I know that the Republicans negotiated NAFTA and one of the talking points of the election was that Clinton couldn't be trusted to sign that boon to the economy due to his ties to Big Labor. But he did sign it.
Now that the ill effects on the economy and the middle class are apparent, RW media doesn't want to talk about who supported it. Because that was the 1% and the Republicans.
But such details don't fit the RW media's narrative so they only want to talk about who actually signed it.

Same thing with the vote to invade Iraq. Clinton voted for it at a time when it had 90% support in the USA, and when she was a Senator from New York. To blame her for that misjudgment is raw revisionist history.
Tom

 

[Sapiens]

I'

Yes, it all started when she made the mistake of saying in an interview that someday she could see herself running for the white house. From that point on the Republicans saw it as their duty to destroy her as a threat.

I'd say it started with the fact that she was know as "Hillary Rodham" and only added "Clinton" after a big fuss.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

To put it simply, she's just not very likable - she has no charisma, and she lacks sincerity and genuineness. I'm not a Republican, nor is my opinion the result of years of insidious propagandization - it just seems to be plain truth.

 

[Underhill]

To put it simply, she's just not very likable - she has no charisma, and she lacks sincerity and genuineness. I'm not a Republican, nor is my opinion the result of years of insidious propagandization - it just seems to be plain truth.

There is some of that. But I could say the same for the last 2 Republican Candidates (and the two democrats before Obama). I don't think that explains the level of vitriol that is aimed towards her.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

There is some of that. But I could say the same for the last 2 Republican Candidates (and the two democrats before Obama). I don't think that explains the level of vitriol that is aimed towards her.

I'd say it's exacerbated and exaggerated by the fact that she's a woman. Both men and women are generally much less forgiving of "sins" in women.

 

[metis]

In regards to the OP, so much of this response we're seeing against Hillary is undoubtedly tied up in the relative gullibility of so many on the right and also their relative ignorance. For example, polls taken just a few months ago have it that roughly 60% of Republican voters believe in these things:
1.Obama was not born in the U.S.
2.Obama is a Muslim.
3. global warming is a hoax
4.evolution has not happened.

Now, with that record, why would it be difficult to imagine why so many on the right can't stand Hillary, especially since so many of them get their "news" from Fox, Breitbart, Limbaugh, and right-wing talk radio?

Mind you, I'm not a Hillary fan as I voted for Bernie.

 

[Underhill]

I'd say it's exacerbated and exaggerated by the fact that she's a woman. Both men and women are generally much less forgiving of "sins" in women.

There is probably some truth in that too.

This article talks about how the Clintons have been working publicly, since the 90's, for Hillary to run. So I don't know why people would act incredulous that Republicans have been working against her at the same time. We all saw what they did with Benghazi.

http://www.ozy.com/2016/when-hillary-clinton-ran-for-president-in-1992/68544

 

[Revoltingest]

Of course that is true too.

"Too"?
General system response is hardly an "also ran" phenomenon.

But it's complete horse excrement to claim that there is no partisan plan to take her down in affect.

I agree.
But why state the obvious?
It's normal for partisans to work to take down the other side.

Most of them have found any actual evidence. Benghazi is the clearest example. 11 separate investigations find no wrong doing, but republican 'news' outlets still bring it up 15 times a day. The same was true with Whitewater. Even the email thing has been blown wildly out of all sense of proportion. People talk about it as treason on the right, like she was intentionally handing information over to ISIS or something...

This is all to be expected.
Foes try to weaken her.
Fans try to exculpate her.
All proceeds as it will.

 

[Nous]

In all honesty, I didn't pay much attention to Clinton until the campaign started a year and a half ago.
When she was first lady I cared more about the presidency. She then was the senator from a far away state, who supported a war I was vehemently opposed to. As Sec. of State she kept supporting KSA, the fighting in Iraq, and the bludgeoning of Iran which were all things I oppose.
So at the start of the campaign, I didn't have a particularly positive view of her. And I despise seeing the Bushes and Clintons dominate the White House. I was expecting to gag my way through a Bush III versus Clinton II campaign.
I was not a happy camper.
At all!

But over time I have come to respect her a great deal. I have come to realize how much of my previous opinion was based on a few issues plus the consistent bias against her in the media. I think that there really is a "vast right wing conspiracy" that is largely fed by the Republicans recognizing her formidable threat to their party interests and the media with their taste for blood and scandals.

The way she has handled herself and the campaign (especially on the debate stages) has given me the belief that she is not just the least worst option. She will probably be an excellent president, because it is politically expedient to do so and she has the skills to do it in spades.
Tom

I can't believe how this is practically identical to what I was thinking and what I was about to say.

The more I hear from Clinton herself (rather than about her from someone else), the more I like her and the more I admire and respect her intelligence and poise.

 

[Underhill]

"Too"?
General system response is hardly an "also ran" phenomenon.

An spellin mistook. It's happened sumtimes.

I agree.
But why state the obvious?
It's normal for partisans to work to take down the other side.

Because the person starting the thread asked why...

This is all to be expected.
Foes try to weaken her.
Fans try to exculpate her.
All proceeds as it will.

Yes, and thus my post saying so... you know answering the question posed in the thread title.

And while I agree both sides do it, it is rare for a person to put up with this kind of political smash and grab for 25 years. Trump has had the luxury of experiencing it for 18 months or so. I hate to think of the mountains of dirt that may have been dug up on him with such scrutiny.

 

[Papoon]

She's a woman ? I just float that idea for consideration...and considering the ongoing support for a misogynist, maybe that's it.

 

[Revoltingest]

She's a woman ? I just float that idea for consideration...and considering the ongoing support for a misogynist, maybe that's it.

She's not just any woman.
She has her own record, personality, & agenda.
Even many fellow Dems dislike her.
Are they too sexist for this?
I'll wager your left one that Condi Rice ran as a Republican, the party would be supportive,
but Dems would be fulminating at her. Would it be sexist? I doubt it....just politics as usual.

 

[buddhist]

@Shrew IMO this is far worse than Watergate and Nixon:

 

[buddhist]

For example, polls taken just a few months ago have it that roughly 60% of Republican voters believe in these things:
...
2.Obama is a Muslim....

Seems like Hillary might also believe that he's muslim (not that it ultimately matters to me one way or another). If she's serious, then she believes Obama's a Muslim. If she's joking, then she must be racist.

 

[YmirGF]

Seems like Hillary might also believe that he's muslim (not that it ultimately matters to me one way or another). If she's serious, then she believes Obama's a Muslim. If she's joking, then she must be racist.

I utterly despise Clinton, but she is obviously attempting to make a joke here, however weak.

 

[Revoltingest]

Seems like Hillary might also believe that he's muslim (not that it ultimately matters to me one way or another). If she's serious, then she believes Obama's a Muslim. If she's joking, then she must be racist.

In fairness to Hillary, Obama did once claim to be a Muslim.
He was wrong, of course. It seems he was just confused at the time.

 

[Valjean]

http://www.politicususa.com/2016/04/02/stop-parroting-gop-lies-hillary-clinton-dishonest.html

Here is the thing; a fair number of people on the left are unaware of; the lion’s share of what they “think” they know about Hillary Clinton’s reputation “is the result of a quarter century of visceral GOP hatred.”

As noted in a recent Atlantic article, “no other political figures in American history have spawned the creation of a permanent multi-million-dollar cottage industry devoted to attacking the Clintons.”

For example, the Pulitzer Prize-winning “Politifact” gave Clinton the best truth-telling record of any of the 2016 presidential candidates in either party. She easily crushes Republicans Kasich, Cruz and Trump, and Politifact rates her as more truthful than her Democratic opponent.

 

[Sunstone]

The irony is that a whole lot of people who profess to feel moral outrage over "Clinton's lies" will simply lack the moral integrity to give serious consideration to Politifact's findings that she has the best truth telling record of any 2016 presidential candidate.

 

[idav]

I'd say it's exacerbated and exaggerated by the fact that she's a woman. Both men and women are generally much less forgiving of "sins" in women.

Ain't that the truth. We have a person who's husband has the same issues as the other candidate and many of them still point at the woman instead. A form of shaming the woman that we see in this country unfortunately.

 

[james bond]

A few reasons...