The American political landscape is completely different as in the Netherlands.We have a large number of political parties in which people vote and the government is formed. This government provides a prime minister, but in addition we also have a head of state (the king).
America is a closed federation-and this model has been deliberately chosen during its creation-which ensures that political power does not attract the largest group of voters (majority vote), because the largest number of voters by definition is from urbanized Areas.States which are less urbanized have different needs and are represented in this way.
This model also attracts the presidential election.Each state can assign electoral men/women for the presidential election, and with it, the winner of most electoral persons is also the winner of the presidential election.
There are states that are hugely dominant in political preference, and there is little point in campaigning.The battle often also involves a limited number of States with floating voters-the so-called swing states.
The winner in these states wins the presidential election.
In The Netherlands we have a fairly positive picture of Hillary Clinton.This is because the media in our country tend more towards the liberal 芒 鈧?艗democratic 芒 鈧?thought and less towards the conservative 芒 鈧?艗republican 芒 鈧?thought.
Our political right is quite appropriate for the democratic idea, which makes it difficult for us to understand the political right in the US for many Dutch people.
Democrats fit better in our perception world as Republicans, and the media display reflects this as well.In addition, we hear little about domestic politics from both the Democrats and the Republicans, we are more interested in the foreign policy of the US. This while the U.S. elections are just turning to the domestic political agenda: 芒 鈧?艙what芒 鈧劉 s in it for me芒 鈧?
To understand the aversion for Hillary Clinton, we must therefore look at Hillary in the context of the elections in the United States and domestic politics.We must also keep a good eye on her past.
Hillary Clinton is of course not just anyone.It is a woman with a strong Career, and also the wife of a former president.
The latter can be seen as an advantage-Bill Clinton is also positive for us-but it can also work against Hillary.
The latter is the case, but not because she is 芒 鈧?艙the wife of芒 鈧?
Hillary has clearly come to the spotlight during the time her husband was president, and has always been clear that she is a self-employed-perhaps even free-spirited woman.
This produces a positive image in Europe, where we all have an opinion on the 芒 鈧?艙glass ceiling, but in the United States this is just a bit more sensitive.Not because of emancipation, but because it also creates distance to an important part of the voters which is more traditionally set. Voters who often live in the swing states. Her attitude to cheating Bill and retaining her surname also works a bit of alienation from these voters in hand.
In addition, Hillary芒 鈧劉 s past is not without blemish.There are some solid incidents (Benghazi, the email scandal) and some minor incidents (Whitegate and Travelgate for example).
Although this is not noteworthy-at least, according to the European media-it does provide an image: You can’t really trust Hillary Clinton.
With this, Hillary Clinton is at two points behind: her free image, and her untrustworthy image.
We can also apply this to Trump, but that has never called people to trust him.His slogan was: Make America great again.
The big problem of Hillary
Hillary however has a much bigger problem as her above image points.Hillary Clinton is part of 芒 鈧?艙the established Orde芒 鈧?
She is the wife of a former president, senator, and has been politically active for years.
In addition, she has quite close ties with Wall Street.
This makes it possible for an opponent-especially if it is driven from a strong political constituency-to set up a populist campaign based on three spearheads:
- Hillary is free fought
- Hillary is not to be trusted
- Hillary is part of the established order
Point 1 appeals to Conservative voters-who seek a more conservative representative, Point 2 provides a repelling reaction to orphaned voters and point 3 appeals to the dissatisfied electorate.
Don’t vote for Hillary: She wants irresponsible change, you can’t trust her, and she keeps the strings in the hands of the established order.
Furthermore, it is important to see this 芒 鈧?艙problem 芒 鈧?In larger context.
There is a very deep difference between conservative and liberal thought in the US. This difference is possible on a fundamentally different view of the world (I have to read Thomas Sowell芒 鈧劉 s 芒 鈧?艙A conflict or visions芒 鈧?still).If you look at the world in a certain way, you are looking for confirmation to reinforce this and you will close to a greater or lesser extent for opposing sounds. We all suffer from this.
A presidential candidate must have a limited group of voters who apparently float between the two visions.If they can convince them, they win the elections, but these people are not really liberal or conservative.
This creates very strong on the person polarizing elections, because people choose not or only limited on political (life vision) conviction.
As a result, you get campaigns with emotional load, which creates strong hatred and despiction feelings.
What we should not underestimate, however, is the image that the European media presents.
Because we seldom get the depth of something that I describe here briefly.And we probably don’t want to know it at all.
Then the presidential candidate who draws more outward, or is already popular, or politically better suits us, is the person who is positively portrayed.And Trump can’t do it well, he represents a political thought that we do not know (conservatism), he is a clubby farmer, a businessman, an outsider, a populist. And… that does not speak to us. And the media help reinforce this image.
This creates a relatively positive picture of Democrats and a relatively negative picture of Republicans, while this distinction is much less evident if you come to talk to Americans yourself.
All in all:
Hillary Clinton has from the past a baggage that you as a politician would rather not want.She is also part of the political movement that seeks change and therefore has a significant proportion of the voters (the Conservatives) in front of him. It is also part of the established political and economic elite.
Furthermore, in Europe we have a distorted picture of the political landscape in the United States of America, and also of the electorate.
All this leads to a question about Hillary Clinton, which is to a large extent because we cannot overlook this complex issue.
Democrats despise every Republican politician and Republicans despise any Democratic politician.In addition, Hillary Clinton has the disadvantage that she, as a senator and as a minister, has made policy mistakes and happens to be arrogant.
Yet it is not that Americans generally have a 芒 鈧?艙gigantic verachting芒 鈧?for her.Donald Trump probably enjoys even more disregard among Americans. Clinton achieved more than Trump in 2016 3 million votes. No doubt there will have been people who have been voting with a clenched nose on Clinton because they found Trump even more disgusting, but many of her voters will also have appreciated her.
All in all, the American society is deeply divided.There are two hostile cultures facing each other. The Liberal culture and the unservative culture. These two groups find fewer and more interfaces. Every presidential candidate will be hugely despised by half of the amrikanes.
Hillary Clinton has mainly suffered from her reputation.And a reputation you build yourself, or you are imposed.
When her husband Bill was president, he sometimes went over the crooked.There was a scandal. He would have had a relationship with a trainee. Hillary continued to support him.
After this period she had a considerable political career.She was Senator (US 1st chamber) for the state of New York. She made herself eligible as president in 2008 but the Democratic Party chose Barack Obama as a candidate. Under his presidency, she was Secretary of State (US foreign Affairs Minister).
As a Democratic Party member is reasonably right.But not right enough for the Republicans who simply don’t see her sitting. Reasons for this are plenty to be found. She was the wife of a Democratic president. She was a leading figure in the Cabinet of President Obama who fell very badly at Republicans. She is also a woman and a fierce champion of equal rights.
According to Republican propaganda, which demonizes nowadays much, it is part of the established order.Old politicians who can no longer represent ordinary people.
Because there is a two-party system in the US it is through the slanter campaigns of lately soon 芒 鈧?艙you are before or you are against ons芒 鈧?
Of course you can also be independent like Bernie Sanders, and there are other parties in the US like the Libertarian Party and the Green Party.However, these are too small to get one of the big batches out of the system.
Hillary Rodham Clinton is a breed politician, and politics in the US is harder than in the Netherlands.Small mistakes are inflated and sometimes your opponents just invent things like pizza Gate-Wikipedia.
But there are also supporters.For example, there is the 芒 鈧?艙I芒 鈧劉 m with Her芒 鈧?campaign.
It is not, moreover, that generalistic can be said that 芒 鈧?艗american芒 鈧?have a deesteem against Hillary.
The outcome of the elections was anything but unanimous for Donald Trump.
There were a lot of cons-Temmers who opted for Trump for the reasons I mentioned above.
Slanter campaigns, sometimes fueled by untruths on social media and 芒 鈧?艙fake News芒 鈧?fake news spread by Russian sources.
However, 65,853,514 people have voted for Hillary.For Trump, this was 62,984,828 people. However, by the electoral men or electoral college system in the US (see Electoral College (United States)-Wikipedia) Trump has been the winner.
We cannot say much of those of the 330 million Americans who have not voted.But I don’t think you can say that the 65 million voted for Clinton have a deesteem for Hillary.
Thank you guys for the responses to my reply.I appreciate the interaction. I see that there are many for and opponents of Hillary in the Benelux and among Dutch speakers too. Fine right? Everyone is entitled to his or her own opinion.
If you really disagree with my answer and you have facts and opinions that you want to share about this, you can also decide to write an answer yourself.I’m going to read it with pleasure.
See above.Her entire career and that of her husband has been a sphere of financial scandals and dubious constructions since the years 70. That coupled with an unpleasant and arrogant nature and the view that rules do not apply to it (with the top point of using the private e-mail server for state matters) make her not popular.
Very simple.She is part of the established political order that is very parasitifying. When she was in a dominant position, there were a huge amount of donations in the Clinton Foundation, which is an NGO for charities, which is doing very good goals for the pockets and lifestyle of the Clintons. Her daughter’s marriage is paid for it. There is no evidence of charities that the organization has done, it was the bank account where payments were made for favors. After losing the elections, donations dried up.
She is just a pay for favors politician, i.e. standard parasite.
They represented it 芒 鈧?艙establishment芒, not the Americans!Ever crossed from east to west and from north to south? North America is a melting pot of etnians whose different states offer you a sample card.
Since the only thing that I read here is deserving for the US.
Now I can get that too.It’s really not a country where everything is so good.
But there are other countries where it is still much worse than in the U.S. And I don’t see anything about that.
Hillary is just like any other politician.Is lying about everything. Probably because she is female it is less accepted.
‘, ‘ Not 芒 鈧?虄Americans ‘ have a deesteem for Hillary Clinton, they are the Republicans.That has to do with three things. In the first place, because of the enormous polarisation, republics have aversion to every democratic headpiece. The Clintons wanted to be hated by the Republicans in particular. Thirdly, Trump has greatly increased the contradictions.