Should Hillary Leave Him Now?

Q: I have a question. For many years, a lot of people wondered if Hillary would leave Bill. It was a topic of much speculation by pundits and normal folk alike. Most people felt that she showed weakness by not walking out on a philandering husband. In fact, many women were so angry with her that they vowed to not support a woman for President who didn't seem to have the pride or courage to publicly chastise the man who publicly humiliated her.

So, this is my question. Why is no one asking the same question now that she is no longer in the race? Before it seemed to be the top question on everyone's mind and one of the major indicators as to how they viewed her character. Now all we hear are questions about what she will do in the future, how her loss to Obama changes her stature, how Democrats will fare without her, and why she waited so long to exit. But no one seems to care that she is still married to the man who many feel was a hindrance to her ambitions.

Why is that what was curious to people before no longer seems so interesting?

A: Good question! I have been wondering the same thing and your question gave me the opportunity to think things through. You're right. Not too long ago, Bill and Hillary's relationship seemed to be the top question in everyone's mind and a way for many people to judge her character. Now, though, as you said, all we hear are questions not related to their marriage. Haven't these people noticed that she is still married to the person who once loomed larger thnt she did?

Nevermind that I, for one, have always wondered why, for some people, fidelity was the one thing that seemed to matter most in a relationship -- the sole standard by which to judge its worth. I've always wondered, too, what any of this had to do with being chief executive. No doubt, we've seen with many famous couples like Kathie Lee and Frank Gifford, Eliot Spitzer and Silda Wall, and, of course, the ever-amusing McGreevy performers that public exposure puts strains that most people cannot imagine on a relationship. But in two out of three of these cases, the parties seemed to have invested the requisite time and effort to work through the issues, some of which almost certainly have nothing to do with infidelity. In these cases, the parties involved probably looked at their marriage as a package - some good things and some bad things, but still worth trying to keep the business going. Infidelity may not have outweighed everything else - assuming that there was a something else.

Obviously I look at everything not as much from the political point of view, but from a psychological one. All along, when it came to the Clintons, when everyone was questioning why she would stay, I theorized that they were a strong couple who shared so much and had a common vision - part of which, clearly, was alternating ambitions. Now, though, much has changed - if not in their marriage, then the public's perception of it. Why?

Interestingly, putting the question in the context of the shifting interest in Hillary's motivations gives you the answer. She is now more interesting as a politician in her own right than as the member of a power couple. Unconsciously, Hillary has managed to shed her role as wife, First Lady, cookie baker, and the little woman behind the man. Her long path of recognized accomplishments encompassing a legal career, involvement in community affairs, First Lady of the United States and two-term New York senator, was not enough to establish her as an independent person. From the very beginning, her run for the presidency raised questions about HIS role -would he help, would he hurt? Now, for good or bad, Hillary is finally seen as a separate entity. Any analysis of her failures would have to be put in the context of her own actions and not her husband's. So, whether or not she stays with him now is irrelevant -- the same way it was irrelevant if Geraldine Ferraro would stay with her husband when she was running for Vice-President.

Let's take a moment to talk about whether Hillary would actually leave Bill, and then we can return to people's shifting perceptions. I agree with you that there was no reason for her to leave Bill before. In her mind and, I am sure, in the analysis of a lot of her advisors, Bill was an asset that could help her in her race for the nomination. He could raise money. He could draw large crowds. He has a constituency of his own. He is a master of the process. It looks good if they're together--and he would entice voters who were not all that enamored of Hillary. If he could marry her, then they could vote for her. Good reasoning! Or not!!

Something went wrong. And since all of that didn't work out, now is the time for Hillary to re-analyze her marriage. Before, with shared goals and ambitions, infidelity on its own was not a deal-breaker. Now, though, being part of a couple is no longer necessarily helpful. So, are there enough other attributes in the marriage that will keep it going? Together, they seemingly did a wonderful job of parenting. It may be enough of a shared reason to remain a couple, but their parenting days are over. They will decide.

Whatever they decide, they are now two separate people on their own separate paths in life. The one victory for Hillary in this race has been the new perception of her in the minds of others. It seems she can now frame her path and pursue her goals independently. If people truly no longer care whether she's married or not, then Bill himself is no longer a help or a hindrance.

So, why did it take people so long to separate the two issues or entities? Because when Hillary had defined herself as attached to Bill, people then felt free to question her marriage. Now she has defined herself separately, so people are not as interested in her marriage. (Incidentally, I would assume that the people who are still transfixed by the Clinton marriage are saying something about their own struggles with and questions about their own marriage. But that's another column and question.)

I have written many times that it is not always the stated "issues" that are important in how we decide our political favorite. Rather, it is our unconscious perception of who they are and how they make us feel that usually determines who we choose. How Hillary handled her marriage was at first interesting to us, but then how she handled herself became more important to us. Maybe that's because this is precisely what became--and always has been--most important to her. Her shifting perceptions of self mirrored the shifting perceptions of the people asking "the question": "Why is she still married to him?" has become "Who the hell cares?"

Comments

[Underthematrix]

I'm not going to fancy it up. I didn't like Hillary in the 1990s and still I don't like her. I think taht's the real issue. People simply don't like Hillary. Anbd as far as the almost 18 million voters. I think the fearmongering and racebaiting she used to garner those votes speaks volumes about how many, many feel about her. I think most simply don't like her.

[ebanks84]

If she never needed him before, she needs him now. This is a hard blow to Hillary and it will take some time to regain her composure. And I'm sure she will NEVER let him live it down that he was the cause of her demise in more ways than one.

[Sir681]

Oh, we are such a sanctimonious, self-righteous, judgmental people. When are we ever going to learn not to stick our noses into other people's personal lives, even public figures? We feel that we are the moral arbiters, with the God-given right to be telling people how they should conduct their private lives.

Throughout history, the greatest human tragedies are caused by people imposing their systems of beliefs on others.

The nerve of even asking such a question. We should mind our own business!

[ebanks84]

Sometimes the ratings are more important than the people. It's a shame, but it's true. Peace to you Hillary.

[KathyIndiana]

Bill and Hillary are like two serial killers who separately would not amount to much, but when they get together they turn into the Hillside Stranglers. They need each other, they feed off each other, and they deserve each other.

[clevelandchick]

I'm an Obama supporter and was disappointed in some of the tactics by both Clintons during the campaign but I can't help feeling really skeeved out by people writing about what she should do with her marriage. I'd love for one person on this blog including the auther to truthfully answer that all of their romantic and personal relationships have been and are perfect.

They've been married for decades and I imagine are best friends like anyone married for so long. Hillary is an intelligent woman and is more than old enough to make decisions on her personal life without a bunch of busybodies on the internet chiming in. Geez, leave them alone.

[jjmn]

I don't agree with you that Hillary is seen as a separate entity than Bill. She pushed Bill out there during her campaign, and he was with her at every major speech, and was part of the wreckless part of her campaign that cost her the nomination. I changed to Obama after Bill's comments in South Carolina. It brought back the drama of the Clintons and all the nonsense that goes along with having a Clinton in the White House. Bill is integral right now. Having said that, I sincerely doubt if Hillary will ever leave Bill. She cannot apologize, cannot admit a wrong and obviously has no problems with his chasing any skirt that walks by. I would never tolerate being demeaned like that by any man, but she is the one who KNEW about all of this and still let it happen. I think it shows that Hillary doesn't have much self respect. She somehow thinks that this kind of behavior is not only OK but something that she has to endure. She doesn't and I think it would do a lot for her reputation to dump him. She never will.

[Vurz]

Whatever she and Bill decide is their own business. Hopefully the rest of the world will butt out for a while and in the interests of 'feminism' and 'equality' allow those two adults to make their own decisions without a lot of outside whining and invasion of privacy.

There are actual issues like the economy, health care, people's rights and responsibilities, climate change and energy use that we would be better discussing, as they will be more important to our lives and the lives of our family members for years to come.

And, as far as Chelsea saying "It's none of your business."­, she is correct. How Chelsea felt about it during and after the Monica Lewinsky thing is none of your business.

[marysandra]

I was thinking about Bill's finger wagging speech a few weeks ago, about how his wife had been treated with such disrespect by the press.. He seems to forget that he has been disrespecting her in front of the whole world for years...ki­nda hypocritical, don't you think.? As to Chelsea's remarks on the campaign trail "its none of your business" I beg to differ, the country was paralyzed for months and he was impeached over lying about Monica..I was a huge fan of President Clinton's but the man obviously has problems, I think that hurt Hillary in the end, more than "name recognition" helped her.She claims to be a feminist, but she seems to define it differently than most true feminists would.I do believe there is love there, but self respect has to count for something, too.

[Stagehnd1]

Um, why is the question her leaving him?? He should leave her !!!

[mebble]

Divorcing Bill and immediately would help Senator Clinton in her quest for power. It would make it all the more easier for Senator Obama to select her as a running mate. It would solve the problem of removing the lying, impeached, philandering, finger-wagging, self-righteous dilettante from the equation. It would help create a firewall over the dubious "baggage" and unknowns (where did all the money come from). And it would help redeem whatever's left of her own reputation.

[karenanne]

One thing I learned from the campaign is that the Clintons share a lot of ethical standards. I had assumed before that Hillary was better than Bill, but now I realize they are very much alike, and so probably suited to each other.

Also, if Bill's puzzling behavior is really a symptom of health effects of his heart condition as Vanity Fair suggested, I think Hillary is unlikely to abandon him as he declines. He is Chelsea's father after all, and for Hillary to do that would be very distressing for Chelsea when her father needs help.

[SanityClaus]

Why shouldn't Hillary do with Bill what Clintons always do sooner or later with everyone who gets involved with them - throw him under the bus and pretend like she never heard of him?

[ornovscot]

While Bill Clinton did some things that negatively affected Hillary Clinton in this campaign, I think the latter did things on her own that sufficiently alienated a large portion of the electorate.

Since the author wants to grant Senator Clinton autonomy or separateness from Bill Clinton--and I agree with that part of her assessment--let us examine how Hillary Clinton behaved.

The question has been and will remain: Do enough voters want her to be President?

But I think there are women who would fulfill the office of the President rather well, and there are women who have achieved greatness more independently and without the financial and political scandals that are part of the Clintons' legacy. That legacy has involved complementary and mutually reinforcing patterns.

[aristonice]

If she hasn't left him by now, she probably never will. It could be that it's easier to stay together given the combined political cache, the 9-figure assets, and the codependent thing they've got going on. I often hear the Clinton marriage referred to as an "arrangement" or an "agreement" - i.e. Hillary looks the other way at Bill's infidelities in exchange for his political influence. I personally would want more out of my marriage than that, but if it works for them, who's to say they should part? I do think that even if the romantic spark is long gone, they have a deep mutual respect for each other and view their relationship as a partnership.

[SonofLiberty1]

Number 1 ...

IT'S NONE OF OUR BUSINESS!

2) I can't stand Clinton haters and I can't stand

HART HATERS either!

Any questions?

[aquarius2001]

HART HATERS? Gary Hart?

[strifeknot]

Maybe he means Hart to Hart haters. Damn that Robert Wagner and Stefanie Powers!