Challenging questions for Hilary Clinton and our society in an emotional intelligence meets politics moment — a Newsweek article (Hillary Tears Up: A Muskie moment, or a helpful glimpse of ‘the real Hillary’?) asks if Hilary’s display of emotion will be seen as a sign of weakness, or of honesty? And in any case, the emotion trumps the facts:
No one will remember the hour of detailed policy talk that preceded Clinton’s emotional moment
Will Americans confirm that:
anyone who needed to carry Kleenex in her purse was unfit for the highest office in the land
or will the conclusion come that emotion helps
a candidate who is seen as aloof and too tightly scripted appear more vulnerable, more human and more appealing
What do we really want in a leader? This brings up so many questions about trust and emotion — do we trust people who hide their emotions or show them? Do we prefer “false strength” to authenticity? I suspect that genuineness+moderate strength goes further than appearance of big strength.
I also enjoyed reading comments on this video on youtube – which raise the question: Was it real anyway?
What do you think? Fake or real tears? Weak or strong?
I found this genuine, but regret that implicit in what she said were subtle put downs relating to rival’s ‘lack of preparation and readiness’.