Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

TomCADem

(17,378 posts)
Sun May 29, 2016, 01:19 PM May 2016

WaPo - Does Hillary Clinton face a different standard for honesty?

I think the real question is whether Democratic candidates are held to higher standard than Republican candidates?

For example, most of the statements by both Donald Trump and Ted Cruz were either Mostly False, False or Pants on Fire. Indeed, 20 percent of Donald Trump's statements qualify as "Pants on Fire," i.e., the statement is not accurate and makes a ridiculous claim.

http://www.politifact.com/personalities/donald-trump/

http://www.politifact.com/personalities/ted-cruz/

In contrast, "Crooked Hillary" scores about the same as Bernie Sanders in "False" and "Mostly False" statements.

http://www.politifact.com/personalities/hillary-clinton/

http://www.politifact.com/personalities/bernie-s/

Yet, the news media tends to push the narrative the Hillary is a liar while male Republicans who make patently ridiculous claims about global warming, terrorism, economic policy, etc., are given a free pass. Worse, statements by Bernie and Hillary versus Republicans like Trump and Cruz tend to be treated as of equal value, since false equivalency is what passes for objective news coverage.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/does-hillary-clinton-face-a-different-standard-for-honesty/ar-BBtC3db?ocid=iehp

THE FIX: Do voters expect female candidates to be more honest than male ones?

DITTMAR: Research on gender stereotypes has shown that women are often perceived as more honest than their male counterparts. For example, a 2014 Pew poll found that 34 percent of respondents believe that women in high-level political offices are better than men at being honest and ethical, while just 3 percent see men as better on the same traits.

These perceptions can be advantageous to women. Some research, like Kathleen Dolan’s 2004 book, ["Voting for Women"] has found that voters most concerned about honesty in government were more likely to vote for women candidates. [Editor's note: Kathleen Dolan and Julie Dolan are not related.] Political consultants I spoke with in my book talked about women’s “virtue advantage” as beneficial in crafting female candidates’ images and messages. However, opponents – especially men -- who are aware of that advantage are quick to develop strategies to eliminate it, raising questions about women’s honesty and integrity whenever given the chance. Those attacks may be more effective against women than men because women are held to a higher standard on honesty and ethics. In other words, since voters are more likely to expect women to be honest, the penalty to women for appearing dishonest may be greater than it is for men.

DOLAN: Voters typically draw on gender stereotypes in evaluating political candidates and tend to punish candidates who diverge from gender expectations. Because the generic female candidate is presumed more honest than the generic male candidate, voters judge a female candidate more harshly if she appears to violate the expectation of honesty. For male candidates, dishonesty is problematic but the critique is muted because generic male candidates are presumed to be somewhat less honest from the start.
18 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
WaPo - Does Hillary Clinton face a different standard for honesty? (Original Post) TomCADem May 2016 OP
Nnnnnnnnnnope. cherokeeprogressive May 2016 #1
So, You Don't Think Trump/Cruz Are Given a Free Pass Relative to Hillary? TomCADem May 2016 #4
If you want to attack Trump on his dishonesty GET AN HONEST Candidate pmorlan1 May 2016 #8
Just when you think the WP can't possibly become more pathetic voila! Skwmom May 2016 #2
If you want to call it that. I don't vote for lying republicans and Autumn May 2016 #3
And Bernie and Hillary Are Similar Compared to Trump/Cruz TomCADem May 2016 #7
With Regards to Honesty pmorlan1 May 2016 #9
Fucking similar doesn't matter, Hillary is is considered dishonest because she lies. The IOG Autumn May 2016 #16
It's all according to who is.... imari362 May 2016 #5
You know things are really bad pmorlan1 May 2016 #6
This message was self-deleted by its author cyberpj May 2016 #10
Very Obvious pmorlan1 May 2016 #13
This message was self-deleted by its author cyberpj May 2016 #17
All women lie. From Eve, to Shakespear to today comedians and laugh tracks. Nt seabeyond May 2016 #11
Exactly! LAS14 May 2016 #12
Nope. Fawke Em May 2016 #14
Hillary is a fucking liar. There is no way to sugar coat it. Bread and Circus May 2016 #15
No. 99Forever May 2016 #18

TomCADem

(17,378 posts)
4. So, You Don't Think Trump/Cruz Are Given a Free Pass Relative to Hillary?
Sun May 29, 2016, 01:34 PM
May 2016

Trump can barely make it a day without saying something that is completely fabricated, then doubling down, yet Hillary is the one with the honesty issue? Likewise, Ted Cruz would repeatedly lie to the point of being hated by most of his fellow Republicans, yet folks believe that he is a straight shooter relative to Hillary?

This is what I mean about a narrative. Donald Trump's voters like him because "he tells it like it is," even though he constantly spouts BS, yet Hillary gets attacked for her honesty? And you have no problem with that?

pmorlan1

(2,096 posts)
8. If you want to attack Trump on his dishonesty GET AN HONEST Candidate
Sun May 29, 2016, 01:44 PM
May 2016

What I have a problem with is that we may end up with a candidate who can't even call out Trump for his blatant dishonesty because she is viewed as being dishonest by a majority of Americans. Who the hell is going to believe her when she attacks him for his dishonesty? That line of attack is lost to us.

Autumn

(44,761 posts)
3. If you want to call it that. I don't vote for lying republicans and
Sun May 29, 2016, 01:33 PM
May 2016

I'm not about to put aside my integrity and support a democrat who lies. It's not a matter of presumption of dishonesty with Clinton anymore. The IOG report put that presumption to bed when it highlighted the lies she has been telling for over a year now. It's a fact. I would feel the same way no matter the gender of a politician telling me lies. It all come's down to trust.

TomCADem

(17,378 posts)
7. And Bernie and Hillary Are Similar Compared to Trump/Cruz
Sun May 29, 2016, 01:40 PM
May 2016

People like Trump because "he tells it like it is":

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/halim-shebaya/trump-tells-it-like-it-is_b_9836974.html

Yet, the narrative being pushed is that Hillary is dishonest, even though most of the statements that she has made on her campaign are true per Politifact. He scores are similar to Bernie. The difference is that the media tends to focus on those stories that support the narrative of Hillary being dishonest.

In comparison, look at Trump. He constantly spouts statements that are lies. His supposed early opposition to the Iraq War is bullshit. Yet, he is given a free pass.

I understand that it is politically expendient for Bernie supporters to support this narrative, yet it doesn't bother you how Republicans have gotten a relative free pass on the issue of honesty?

pmorlan1

(2,096 posts)
9. With Regards to Honesty
Sun May 29, 2016, 01:53 PM
May 2016

Bernie and Hillary are not similar at all. Sorry TomCADem but Hillary IS dishonest.

Bernie can attack Trump on his dishonesty because of Bernie's HONESTY and his reputation for honesty. She can't attack Trump on his dishonesty because she is dishonest and her reputation is that she's dishonest.

Autumn

(44,761 posts)
16. Fucking similar doesn't matter, Hillary is is considered dishonest because she lies. The IOG
Sun May 29, 2016, 02:25 PM
May 2016

report confirmed that. I don't support Trump or his fucking idiotic narrative. On top of being a fucking creep he's a liar, a known liar. I don't know what you do but I have never given a republican a pass for lying and I consider republican voters who give them a pass to be idiots, when they know they are lying. Now why should I give Hillary, a democrat, a pass when she is caught lying?

You bet your ass I hold democrats to a higher standard. Because I have voted for democrats all my life and I sure as hell am not going to defend or give any democrat a pass for lying. What bothers me is that lack of trust a person is left with when a politician talks to you and tells you they have your back and then they turn around and get caught lying. A persons words define them.

Republican lies are irrelevant to me because i know that's what they do, they lie. Democrats are supposed to be better than that.

imari362

(311 posts)
5. It's all according to who is....
Sun May 29, 2016, 01:35 PM
May 2016

...holding them responsible.
Each party and their supporters will stand behind their own the majority of the time.

Also, the Clinton name has been with us for decades which included a proven lie by Bill..that never mattered to me, their business...only with seemingly underhanded dealings in many matters that were never proven but still left nasty impressions and Hillary hasn't made it any better with her showing herself to be like a chameleon, so most of her bs is not considered outright lies.

pmorlan1

(2,096 posts)
6. You know things are really bad
Sun May 29, 2016, 01:40 PM
May 2016

When you have to write a piece like this to help Hillary.

You're either honest or you aren't. She isn't honest. No amount of spin will change that fact. And because she is so dishonest she can't very well go after Trump on his dishonesty because it's like the pot calling the kettle black. Great candidate we got there.

Response to pmorlan1 (Reply #6)

pmorlan1

(2,096 posts)
13. Very Obvious
Sun May 29, 2016, 02:04 PM
May 2016

It's very obvious what's being done here. What it all boils down to is that we may have a nominee who can't attack Trump on his constant lying because she has a reputation herself for lying. With her we've lost a HUGE line of attack. So to try to fix this obvious problem they are going to LIE about it and use their spinners in the media. Can you say compound the problem.

Response to pmorlan1 (Reply #13)

Fawke Em

(11,366 posts)
14. Nope.
Sun May 29, 2016, 02:15 PM
May 2016

In fact, she's been treated with kid gloves over the unsecure server up until the IG report.

That might be because most media keep conflating "emails" with "server," but that also maybe because they purposely did that.

If any of the security analysts I work with had done what she's ADMITTED to doing, they would be stripped of their security clearance immediately and probably would already be facing charges. The media could easily compare and contrast her treatment with that of average clearance holders who've been booted if they wanted to, but they don't.

99Forever

(14,524 posts)
18. No.
Sun May 29, 2016, 06:39 PM
May 2016

I hold ALL candidates to the same exact standard. I won't vote or support one that is a proven serial liar, regardless of what sort of genitals they have.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»WaPo - Does Hillary Clint...