Amazingly, or, well, maybe not amazingly enough, Hillary was on the news today. She got “emotional” during a campaign event in NH after a woman asked her how she did it (“it” referring to keeping up all of the female responsibilities plus be a high profile politician.) I saw and heard several news media accounts of it. Basically, after this woman asked Hillary the question, Hillary started off by getting kind of quiet, and then saying softly and with some sincerity, that it was difficult.

But it was after that when she had her emotional hill spell. She got almost sobby, (is that a word?) and some reporters said that while she “officially” did not shed a tear, tears welled up in her eyes, as she talked about how her campaigning was about the country not turning back, and that it was a personal matter for her to insure that this didn’t happen. But, the one time I heard the extended version of her comments, I discovered that she actually ended up the sobfest with the tired campaign rhetoric about having someone in the white house that is ready on the first day in office.

There are so many things weird about those statements. First, in the eyes of just about everyone, voting for Hillary is turning back the country. The Boston Herald tabloid, which apparently circulates widely in New Hampshire, put her on the cover of their paper today, with the headline, “Hillary is So Yesterday,” with a picture of her in the hole of the Beatle’s 45 of “Yesterday” on Capitol Records. Accompanying that sentiment was a double digit surge in Obama’s poll numbers over Hillary in the last 24 hours in New Hampshire, and lackluster crowds and excitement over her campaign, including appearances by former president and husband, William Jefferson Clinton.

The pundits punditized about whether or not Hillary’s sentimental moment, combined with her uncharacteristic outburst at the debate last night after John Edwards labeled her the candidate of the status quo and big money special interests, would help or hurt her. The null hypothesis was that with some people, these emotional flurries were welcome because it showed her to be human and not a robot, and therefore, helped her because it made her more “likable.” One network even purported to briefly interview a woman who said she was switching to Hillary from Obama because of her emotional showings. This legitimately raised the question over whether or not Clinton would gain or lose from this, according to some pundits.

I don’t think so. Hillary has staked her whole campaign on the fact that she was the most “presidential.” To someone like Hillary, that means, or should mean, not getting rattled by mere facts on the ground. Speak firmly, calmly, act decisively, and in process, lead your people to safety during dangerous times. To now switch and go from Ms. Stodgy political machine leader with nary a hair out of place, speaking calmly, firmly, and knowledgably about every subject under the sun (remember the incident not that long ago when a man held some of Hillary’s campaign workers hostage for a couple hours - how the prognosticators touted her “presidential” demeanor) to now Ms. Emotional, Sensitive female, who gets her “feelings hurt” by a questioner on a debate, gets angry when she goes negative and gets called on it, and now is almost tearful because she is so personally concerned about the country not “turning back, seems about as believable as her changes during the campaign as being the most “experienced” candidate to being the candidate of “change.” I think most people are going to see that and wonder about it, making it an easy choice to turn toward the excitement of being part of the Obama generation. It is going to hurt Hillary a lot more than it helps her in my opinion.

The fact is, though, that I do admire Hillary. In most circumstances, she would be a great candidate. She is aware and has detailed information about a myriad of governmental issues, is a very strong woman, has withstood the republican attack machine for going on two decades, and takes pretty liberal positions on a number of important issues. Unfortunately, she is not the right person at this time, at least that’s what a lot of people think. She is a polarizing figure, for better or worse, and many people feel that she will continue the gridlock in Washington at a time when we need to get some important changes through the government. The “Herald” was right on in their portrayal of Hillary as being “....So Yesterday.”

Hillary will stay in the Senate and be a decent senator, especially compared with Mitch McConnell or someone like that. I doubt if Obama will put her in his Cabinet, because I doubt if she would view a cabinet position as being more powerful and prestigious than her current senate seat, and I wonder if, although all of them being pro politicians, there isn’t going to be too much baggage from the campaign to allow that to happen. It all will be interesting, that’s for sure. Won’t tomorrow night be fun?