Why Is Clinton Disliked?

[Rob L 3,811]

David Brooks

I understand why Donald Trump is so unpopular. He earned it the old-fashioned way, by being obnoxious, insulting and offensive. But why is Hillary Clinton so unpopular?

She is, at the moment, just as unpopular as Trump. In the last three major national polls she had unfavorability ratings in the same ballpark as Trump’s. In the Washington Post/ABC News poll, they are both at 57 percent disapproval.

In the New York Times/CBS News poll, 60 percent of respondents said Clinton does not share their values. Sixty-four percent said she is not honest or trustworthy. Clinton has plummeted so completely down to Trump’s level that she is now statistically tied with him in some of the presidential horse race polls.

There are two paradoxes to her unpopularity. First, she was popular not long ago. As secretary of state she had a 66 percent approval rating. Even as recently as March 2015 her approval rating was at 50 and her disapproval rating was at 39.

It’s only since she launched a multimillion-dollar campaign to impress the American people that she has made herself so strongly disliked.

The second paradox is that, agree with her or not, she’s dedicated herself to public service. From advocate for children to senator, she has pursued her vocation tirelessly. It’s not the “what” that explains her unpopularity, it’s the “how” — the manner in which she has done it.

But what exactly do so many have against her?

I would begin my explanation with this question: Can you tell me what Hillary Clinton does for fun? We know what Obama does for fun — golf, basketball, etc. We know, unfortunately, what Trump does for fun.

But when people talk about Clinton, they tend to talk of her exclusively in professional terms. For example, on Nov. 16, 2015, Peter D. Hart conducted a focus group on Clinton. Nearly every assessment had to do with on-the-job performance. She was “multitask-oriented” or “organized” or “deceptive.”

Clinton’s career appears, from the outside, to be all consuming. Her husband is her co-politician. Her daughter works at the Clinton Foundation. Her friendships appear to have been formed at networking gatherings reserved for the extremely successful.

People who work closely with her adore her and say she is warm and caring. But it’s hard from the outside to think of any non-career or pre-career aspect to her life. Except for a few grandma references, she presents herself as a résumé and policy brief.

For example, her campaign recently released a biographical video called “Fighter.” It’s filled with charming and quirky old photos of her fighting for various causes. But then when the video cuts to a current interview with Clinton herself, the lighting is perfect, the setting is perfect, her costume is perfect. She looks less like a human being and more like an avatar from some corporate brand.

Clinton’s unpopularity is akin to the unpopularity of a workaholic. Workaholism is a form of emotional self-estrangement. Workaholics are so consumed by their professional activities that their feelings don’t inform their most fundamental decisions. The professional role comes to dominate the personality and encroaches on the normal intimacies of the soul. As Martyn Lloyd-Jones once put it, whole cemeteries could be filled with the sad tombstone: “Born a man, died a doctor.”

At least in her public persona, Clinton gives off an exclusively professional vibe: industrious, calculated, goal-oriented, distrustful. It’s hard from the outside to have a sense of her as a person; she is a role.

This formal, career-oriented persona puts her in direct contrast with the mores of the social media age, which is intimate, personalist, revealing, trusting and vulnerable. It puts her in conflict with most people’s lived experience. Most Americans feel more vivid and alive outside the work experience than within. So of course to many she seems Machiavellian, crafty, power-oriented, untrustworthy.

There’s a larger lesson here, especially for people who have found a career and vocation that feels fulfilling. Even a socially good vocation can swallow you up and make you lose a sense of your own voice. Maybe it’s doubly important that people with fulfilling vocations develop, and be seen to develop, sanctuaries outside them: in play, solitude, family, faith, hobbies and leisure.

Abraham Joshua Heschel wrote that the Sabbath is “a palace in time which we build.” It’s not a day of rest before work; you work in order to experience this day of elevation. Josef Pieper wrote that leisure is not an activity, it’s an attitude of mind. It’s stepping outside strenuous effort and creating enough stillness so that it becomes possible to contemplate and enjoy things as they are.

Even successful lives need these sanctuaries — in order to be a real person instead of just a productive one. It appears that we don’t really trust candidates who do not show us theirs.

Edited May 25, 2016 by Rob L

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

Or maybe because she has lied to us repeated times and conducts herself like 18th century French nobility.

[Jacque67 7,328]

Or maybe because she has lied to us repeated times and conducts herself like 18th century French nobility.

Like 18th century French nobility???? Sacre bleu!!!!!!!!!

[Sousuke 1,214]

Haha the OP seems to be turning a blind eye to Hillary. She has a number of scandals dated back to the 1970s. Sure they never have quite been able to pin one on her but when you literally bounce from scandal to scandal through your career people stop trusting you.

[Harpa Timsah 13,258]

Like 18th century French nobility???? Sacre bleu!!!!!!!!!

But not 17th century or 19th century, only 18th century. Vive le roi! Vive la reine!

[Jacque67 7,328]

http://youtu.be/sHNnjvk9j_4

[eieio 1,594]

This brooks idiot is the same guy who predicted trumps demise about a dozen times. Then he admitted he was out of touch with reality. What a loser.

I guess I give him credit for continuing to write, as I am sure he is not capable of doing anything else....even if he is clueless.

[Jacque67 7,328]

I'm sure Brooks would like to extend his thanks vowley

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

I'm sure Brooks would like to extend his thanks vowley

Is vowley even a word. That was strong right there. Kudos

[Rob L 3,811]

But not 17th century or 19th century, only 18th century. Vive le roi! Vive la reine!

where the devil are those douchebags ?

This brooks idiot is the same guy who predicted trumps demise about a dozen times. Then he admitted he was out of touch with reality. What a loser.

I guess I give him credit for continuing to write, as I am sure he is not capable of doing anything else....even if he is clueless.

I have met David Brooks and read quite a bit, he may be a conservative but he is not an idiot

Or maybe because she has lied to us repeated times and conducts herself like 18th century French nobility.

I am chalking this up to your HHS diagnosis

[ExPatty 502]

A better question is what is there to like about her? She is patronizing, an established liar and opportunist, and deeply entrenched in an establishment that has continued to let the middle and lower classes of the US fall off a cliff in recent years.

Even a huge number of democrats think she is only relevant because her husband was president and she feels it is her turn owed to her. And now she is under criminal investigation. And people dare ask why she is disliked?

[N-o-l-a 7,167]

A better question is what is there to like about her? She is patronizing, an established liar and opportunist, and deeply entrenched in an establishment that has continued to let the middle and lower classes of the US fall off a cliff in recent years.

Even a huge number of democrats think she is only relevant because her husband was president and she feels it is her turn owed to her. And now she is under criminal investigation. And people dare ask why she is disliked?

I've been going to our democrat conventions and the people who don't support Hillary hate her so much that they might vote for Trump. These are people who are committed democrats enough that they've been elected twice in a row to be delegates and have dedicated several weekends so far this year.

The main complaint is that she's basically a Republican, bought and paid for by big business, and an oligarch. Those seem like valid concerns to me.

Also noticed was many of the Clinton supporters/delegates are retired or women who are 40+. There was a lot of anger towards them at our last congressional district convention and a lot of misinformation being spread by them to try and persuade people to support Hils.

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

And oddly enough the Republican is not bought and paid for

[We Keep Receipts 9,238]

And oddly enough the Republican is not bought and paid for

If you believe that, I got a bridge to sell you...

[GandD 5,966]

If you believe that, I got a bridge to sell you...