- I’ve spent the last few months on a longish essay about what kind of president Hillary Clinton would be. Writing about her record in government proved challenging. So did writing her name.
With most politicians, it’s easy. First reference: You write their first and last name. Second reference: last name, plus title if you’re feeling formal. With the former senator and secretary of state, however, it’s trickier. Calling her “Clinton” poses an obvious problem, especially if—like me—you’re simultaneously writing about the other Clinton who served as president. “Former Secretary of State Clinton” is cumbersome. So I did what many journalists do: I went with “Hillary.”
This is interesting, and something I've noticed since she's been around the media with her new book (which I'm dying to read).
Personally, I will always see her as "Hillary." I don't see that as sexist, because to me, the definition of "strong woman" has two pictures in my mind: my mother, and Hillary. She'll always be "Hillary" because that just says everything about her. I don't really know why, it just does.
"HRC" does have a nice ring to it though, I quite like it. If I get tired of typing "Hillary" over the next year or two as I'm blasting my full throated support across all of social media, I may start using it. It sounds much more militant, which is fitting since she was called an eagle of foreign policy.
- She'll always be "Hillary" because that just says everything about her. I don't really know why, it just does.
Can I ask why you are so taken with her? What is it about her foreign policy accomplishments that you find most appealing?
Her foreign policy isn't her top selling point for me, but I am more in agreement with it than I am against. I don't think Benghazi was 100% her or Obama's fault like quite a bit of the media has pounded out. As an International Relations student, pretty much every foreign policy move is a gamble to a certain extent. Especially when it comes to issues of the middle east, there's never a right answer.
I'm a bigger fan of her economic stances than I am of others. I'm not really going to go through every single one of her statements, but while I tend to be fiscally conservative, I've slowly migrated away from the Republican line because it's become - to me - more and more unhelpful. She's also been ahead on health care, like... way ahead. I've wanted a national health care system since I knew what health care was. As someone who's been turned down insurance because of a pre-existing condition, it's very important to me that a mechanism is in place to make sure I'm not refused care. I'm a bigger fan of Vermont's universal system than I am of the ACA, but I trust that over the years it will be honed, as all other laws have.
But there's also the reality that she's (at least at the moment) the only liberal candidate. I'm an Independent, but I tend to lean to the Democrat side of the spectrum. The Republican party has refused to put up someone who has a decently modern social view.
---
I also like Hillary because she's tough. She strikes me as someone who doesn't take a lot of shit, and she's seen it all before. I like that. Don't get me wrong, there's plenty I disagree with her on, but there's no other Democrat on the scene right now, and the Republicans haven't taken anything seriously yet. If Bernie Sanders runs, you'll probably see me on that boat instead.
Thank you for the response, I appreciate you clarifying your views on her. Its so early on that anything can happen. Who knows, maybe Bernie Sanders will be an option? If 2008 shows us anything it's that unexpected candidates can go the distance. I was sure that Jon Edwards would be our next president. -How wrong could I have been about his trajectory?
Definitely true, I hope he does, and I hope he runs on an actual Independent ticket (though, that will handicap him a bit). I also really hope the Republican party finds a juggernaut that's actually serious about real issues. The last Presidential election felt meaningless to me.
Edwards, there's a name I haven't heard in a while. I can't imagine being Kerry's running mate helped him at all, even without the trouble he ended up getting in. As much as I like Kerry, he really isn't an exciting speaker (I'm glad I wasn't paying attention for Bush v. Kerry, it must have been miserable for the ears).
I would argue that in our culture a woman's first name now personally defines her equivalently to how a man's last name defines him.
I'm listening....
This is when you present those arguments.
A man's last name will always stay with him. A woman's last name will change with marriage. And yes, I'm aware that marriage and is a choice as well as keeping/abbreviating/hyphenating a maiden name is. But her first name will never change, regardless. In the case of Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton is the one most associated with the name "Clinton." Hillary is using her first name as a way to make herself more recognizable as an individual away from the Clinton name.
- She also uses her first name to distinguish herself as an individual from her husband, who is also a politician.
This is the point that I am trying to emphasize.
I quite like HRC too, especially since it re-introduces her maiden name which she seems to like.