The question to be asked is this: should women in public life be treated exactly the same as men? If so, is it not relevant to note that any male candidate who cried in public about the stresses of his campaign would essentially be finished? When we don’t hold her to that standard, are we being sexist or just humane? I mean, I have long felt her to be one of my least favorite national politicians, but I can still see she’s hurting, even if her bewilderment is inextricable from her sense of entitlement. I’m okay with politicians weeping occasionally in public. Churchill did it all the time.
On the other hand, I can see why Clinton can get frustrated. When she went tough on her opponents in the last debate, she was deemed "vicious" or "shrill" rather than simply aggressive. Maybe she can’t win either way. My own view is that on both occasions, weeping a little and snapping a little, she was at the very edge of certain emotions: infuriated and exasperated. I think it must be all the more exasperating to know, somewhere in her psyche, that he is winning it fairly and positively. There’s a small current of Salieri-Mozart syndrome going on here.
(Photo: Stan Honda/Getty.)
The Dish 