Does Hillary Clinton face a different standard for honesty?

[applegrove]

Does Hillary Clinton face a different standard for honesty?

By Janell Ross at the Washington Post

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/05/29/does-hillary-clinton-face-a-different-standard-for-honesty/

"SNIP..............


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.

THE FIX: How do those dynamics effect Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump?

DITTMAR: This week’s YouGov/Economist poll finds that Clinton and Trump are rated equally poorly when it comes to perceptions that they are honest and trustworthy. Less than one-third of voters view both Clinton and Trump as honest and trustworthy, while 57 percent do not view either candidate as holding these traits. These ratings may indicate perceptions of honesty and trustworthiness may have relatively little influence on outcomes this year, since no candidate appears to have an advantage. However, if women are held to a higher standard of honesty and integrity, Clinton’s honesty problem may actually have more detrimental effects than if she were a man.

Trump's "Crooked Hillary” moniker indicates that he will work to ensure that Clinton’s dishonesty is front and center in voters’ minds, contributing to these negative effects and deflecting attention from his own problems with truthfulness. Still, if voter surveys are any indicator, it’s likely that other considerations will matter more to voters’ decision-making in November. That may be why Clinton has focused more on Trump’s lack of qualifications to be president, emphasizing the risk of having him in the Oval Office.

While both candidates would do well to improve voter perceptions of their honesty, they face steep climbs in reversing reputations and will confront continued obstacles in the form of increasing negative attacks on past and present behavior. As a result, they may well have to find other sites on which to distinguish themselves from each other and position themselves as best suited to be the next commander in chief.




................SNIP"

[LexVegas]

1. Yes. nt

[CorporatistNation]

2. When It Comes To War And Peace, America Wants A President Whose Word Can Be TRUSTED... Agree?

MSNBC To the deniers... Watch THIS Video... It is not comforting to think that she may well be the Democratic Nominee...

Hillary really betrayed Andrea Mitchell... The entire context of this report was of a solemn nature... A Funeral so to speak...

Andrea Mitchell "I do not see this report as ...ANYTHING BUT... DEVASTATING!"

Chuck Todd "After this I don't think that she could get confirmed for Attorney General!"

Lots of FIBBING by Hillary here.. for more than a year!

[Txbluedog]

4. Your realistic choices in the GE are Clinton or Trump

So make your choice

[bobbobbins01]

3. Yes.

She has been given the benefit of the doubt way more than a normal person would ever hope to get.

[Autumn]

5. There's a history there with Hillary when it comes honesty. People view her as dishonest

and her actions and the contradictions between her own words and what the report revealed sure as hell don't help.