Or at least he seemed to be choking back tears.
In any case, during the 1972 New Hampshire primary Edmund Muskie was more than merely exasperated with a couple of smear stories that appeared in the Manchester Union Leader. One attacked his wife, and the other proved to be a hoax.
He got so angry that his voice broke. It more or less went down in the books as a gushing sob and he was essentially tarred as a girly-man. Muskie was far from being a weakling, but the event ruined his campaign. Up until then, he had been the Democratic favorite for the presidential nomination.
He lost the primary and quickly became an also-ran in the process that eventually picked George McGovern.
Now we have gone through another New Hampshire primary and and yet another display of emotion from a supposed frontrunner in the Democratic sweepstakes. Of course, we’re talking about our good neighbor from Chappaqua, Hillary Clinton.
Lo and behold, her little cry actually helped her get the sympathy vote, mostly, it appears from women, and she defeated Barack Obama in the primary. Voters said Hillary looked human for a change.
It helped that she didn’t appear to choke up in anger like Muskie did.
Still, you can’t help but wonder how the voters would have reacted had it been Obama or John Edwards letting loose with a good cry—even in this era of feminization and the new Sensitive Male. It’s more than likely that they would have been consigned to YouTube hell and the damnation of eternal ridicule.
C’mon, are you kidding me?
There are those who believe that Hillary should have it both ways. After propping her up as the “inevitable” candidate, her handlers whined when Edwards and Obama allegedly ganged up on her during one particularly contentious debate. Can’t pick on a girl, after all. Even if she’s the self-annointed frontrunner.
But when she loses one round in the Iowa caucuses and breaks down, why, that’s OK. That’s not a sign of weakness. It’s a sign of authenticity.
Poor old Muskie must be rolling in his grave.