Of course, the next woman candidate will have to follow a different path to the nomination. It's doubtful that another woman will ever be able to parlay 30 years of riding the coattails of a serial adulterer into a Senate seat.

I'm beginning to understand why there's a generational divide among women over Clinton. The 60+ Gloria Steinem generation are freaking out that they'll leave this Earth without seating a pantsuit sworn in. Younger women dems are more confident that they'll be around to see a woman elected eventually. They're willing to wait for a woman candidate who isn't quite as deceitful, shallow, phony, and just plain power-hungry as Hillary.

Man or a woman, you have to be power hungry to even think about running for President of the United States.

Well said, Greatbear! It does smack of a mortality crisis--which would help explain the fevered pitch and desperation we are seeing.

A display of faith in the future, and faith in the ones you have raised and prepared to face that future would be welcomed. This apparent lack of trust is rather unsettling, and in my opinion, not helpful to the cause.

atlanticmo:

Man or a woman, you have to be power hungry to even think about running for President of the United States.

A little of that can give a candidate the confidence they need to win, but when power becomes the end in and of itself, it becomes dangerous. I think that's what Hillary has become: Someone who seeks power because she's so narcissistic that she believes she's entitled to it by divine fiat.

Jaxie:

Well said, Greatbear! It does smack of a mortality crisis--which would help explain the fevered pitch and desperation we are seeing.

A display of faith in the future, and faith in the ones you have raised and prepared to face that future would be welcomed. This apparent lack of trust is rather unsettling, and in my opinion, not helpful to the cause.

It also smacks of a kind of reverse sexism. They want a woman *any woman* elected president just so they can prove their central belief that the world would be better off with women in charge before they die.

It is naive to think that any of the other canidates are not narcissistic.

Some just hide it better than others.

It is just not possible to think you are worthy of being the leader of the free world and not be full of yourself.

Like I said, it's a matter of degree. Few other candidates approached the primary like they were going to an coronation.

atlanticmo,

I completely agree. Also, the claims to narcissism on the part of Hillary Clinton only appear when one thinks she, as herself, does not have the right to run for President. This, we all know, is ridiculous. She has two Senate terms, a long career in politics (outside of her marriage), a successful legal career, etc. etc. etc. She has the same credentials as most other Presidential candidates have ever had...but somehow we see her bid for the Presidency as "narcissistic." This makes no sense to me.

I never quite understood that claim and it is very hard not to see it as a product of misogyny. Why is Clinton narcissistic and not McCain? Why is she narcissistic but not John F Kennedy or even Ted Kennedy?

I think we need to check our own double standards, think about them, and be honest about their roots.

Greatbear,

Clinton did not approach the primary like she was going to a coronation--and if she did so, it was because all signs pointed to the fact that she would win and it would be easy. It's not narcissism--it's listening to what everyone is telling you.

Obama and McCain don't seem like they are going to a coronation.

McCain is more like a Roman senator waiting to be the next Ceasar and take over the empire and war.

Obama is more like a messiah figure with his followers asking him to heal their sick with just his touch. Anyone who is against him is a non-believer that wont get to go to heaven.

atlanticmo,

Obama actually more reminds me of the smooth-talker in high school who used his charm to get other people to do his homework :).

I don't really know how I could figure McCain...he seems like the detached, befuddled guy who can't believe that any of this is real.

Excellent.

I am a 54-year-old lawyer so I am not part of the 60+ Steinem generation of feminists, eh? I can easily believe there will be a female president of the USA in my lifetime. It just aint gonna be Hillary.

I agree with comments that suggest that anyone who thinks they could/should/oughta be president has to be narcissistic. Not just HIlary. McCain is a narcissist. Obama is a narcissist. You have to have a faith in yourself that far exceeds basic self esteem to think that you ought to be the one making the decisions a president has to make. Calling Hilary a narcissist is not sexism.

I have never liked Hilary but when I first heard that she was running for the Senate, from N.Y., I figured she'd seek the White House and I was ready to support her. Just the fact that she was female would have been enough for me to vote for her. But then there was the Iraq war vote.

I agree with Greatbear: Hillary is deceitful (sniper fire), shallow (I think all bleach blondes are shallow), phony and power-hungry.

There are plenty of better women than Hilary and these women will rise.

Calling Clinton a narcissist but not other candidates *is* sexist given that she has not displayed any behavior out of the ordinary for Presidential candidates. That is where the sexism lies. Not calling her narcissistic, but calling *only* her narcissistic.

If one does not want to be labelled sexist, then he or she must check his or her double standards at the door.

I think all politicians, including Obama, are deceitful. However, there are larger political sins--like being weak on policy and masquerading such weaknesses as "bipartisanship." If you're afraid to ask the, largely Democratic, Senate to pass big legislation, for fear that you won't get elected, then just say so. Will I vote for the person who is scared to make tough choices? No, but at least that person is being honest about their limitations.

A power hungry leader in an electoral system is a *good* thing. That leader wants to remain in power and will do what it takes to gain the approval of the electorate in order to stay in power for a second term. In a Fascist state, where the leader operates outside of the will of the people, it's bad. In a system that is dictated by the will of the people, it's good.

It's the ineffectual, "I-don't-care-if-I-actually-wi­n-this-thing," "Oh-my-god-am-I-actually-Presi­dent? How-did-that-happen?," leader that will lead the nation into further chaos--or at least get nothing accomplished.

Give me the hard as nails, calculating, do what it takes leader any day (as long as that leader is fighting on the right side of the fence). I can see why reactionary Republicans are scared shitless when they hear the name "Clinton."

You people are being idiots, but that's okay. It's hard to lose, and hard when you get beat by someone you underestimated, though just how or why you so seriously underestimated Obama remains unexplained.

Instead of asking why and how you made that mistake, you assume you were tricked somehow, yeah, that he's just one of those smoothies who cheats his way to the top without earning it fairly and...bla bla bla.

Nobody is talking about whether Hillary Clinton was a narcissist back six months ago -- what draws car-crash attention is the way both losses and victories (the latter coming too little and too late) make her every day more self-absorbed and blinkered. The Party has let her know they won't be bullied into giving her the numbers she wants coming out of Michigan and Florida, and why should they? There were legitimate reasons for what the Party did and no honest reasons for what Florida and Michingan did. If you have a giant pileup early, it will turn the money primary into the only primary that matters. Is that what you people want?

You want your Hillary. You want your MTV, you want to have it your way, you want to have it all. Well, if you WANT so much, then LEARN from your mistakes and next time don't let a bunch of college dropouts doing simple basic voter education run the table on you in the caucus states. Pay less attention to micromanaging image ( and forget mister soccer mom) and more to process.

And run a clean campaign, or at least cleanER, less obviously racist, less bizarrely deceitful about HRC's class background, career in public service and so on.

Mercadia, you claim that you can't vote for Obama because those dropout kids rubbed you the wrong way. I'm not all that crazy about them, but what about HRC's top-level campaign management? And what about her? As Dukakis said once, a fish rots from the head down.