Online: | |
Visits: | |
Stories: |
Story Views | |
Now: | |
Last Hour: | |
Last 24 Hours: | |
Total: |
Appearing in South Carolina this week, Democrat presidential candidate Hillary Clinton addressed a gathering of the state’s Democratic Women’s Council Wednesday. Within minutes, reaction to her speech began pouring in via social media – however, the responses had less to do with the content of her remarks than the accent with which she delivered them.
Echoing criticism she received as a candidate in 2008, pundits on both sides of the political aisle asserted that the inauthentic southern accent she used in the speech appeared to be nothing more than an effort to pander to South Carolina voters.
Much of the criticism aimed at her perceived affectation centered around the fact that it was altogether unbelievable. Fox News commentator and actual southerner Todd Starnes offered some worthwhile advice on the matter:
Satarist Eric Williams also took a jab at Clinton with a fictitious account of the one woman in attendance who actually believed the former first lady’s pandering was authentic.
“Stacey Richter, a mother of three, made it to the rally and was initially pulled in by the performance,” he wrote.
After experiencing an immediate connection with Clinton, Williams imagined that Richter began hearing chatter from other attendees insinuating that the accent was fake, news she took like a knife to the gut.
Plenty of other Twitter users also saw Clinton’s performance as the perfect opportunity to have some fun at her expense.
Last month, The Federalist’s Mollie Hemingway identified Hillary Clinton’s penchant for forced posturing as one of the eight reasons she believes the scandal-plagued campaign is doomed.
“Hillary Clinton’s skill set,” she wrote, “does not include pandering with even mild convincingness.”
Do you think Hillary will attract new voters by changing her accent? Share your thoughts in the comments section below.
This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth