I think it’s fair to say that Hillary lacks charisma and the ability to come across as warm and to connect with voters. John Kerry was similar. GW Bush is more likable than his brother Jeb!. Barbara Boxer and Elizabeth Warren both are more likable than Hillary.[/quote]
Yes, it’s fair. But remember that Barbara Boxer and Elizabath Warren elicit visceral hatred from the right. And they are not presidential material.
About Hillary, I believe that, as the first viable female presidential candidate, it’s fair to say that she’s being judged based on established notions of gender roles. She’s shrewd and careerist just like her male counterparts.
Plus with the whole Lewinski affair, Hillary was very unemotional. People would prefer if she threw a jealousy tantrum.
Like Queen Elizabeth not really caring that Diana died. Popular opinion didn’t like that so even the Queen had to give in.
Personally, I’m OK with women in high-power position being just like men. I don’t need them to show motherly/womanly empathy.[/quote]
So Hillary doesn’t elicit visceral hatred from the right? Really? I can clearly recall in 2008 a certain degree of Republican thought that at least Obama wasn’t Hillary.
I strongly disagree with you on Warren. She shares some of the same policy challenges Bernie does in the general election, but Warren is more Presidential than Huckabee or Santorum.
People want their Presidents to seem warm, like someone they could have a beer with. Hillary does face certain challenges as a woman, but a lot of those are specific Hillary issues a man would face too. Voters want a candidate who can “feel your pain”. Ted Cruz faces some of the same issues, he often feels like a Robot.
The genius of GW Bush was his ability to come across as a affable, regular old guy, despite being the son of a former President from a very, very, very rich family. And Bill Clinton just oozes charisma. The last truly unlikable President (personality, not politics) was probably Nixon.
