I really don’t know what to make of this.  I recall when she ran for the Senate she came on very strong with the Hillary Rodham Clinton moniker, in true liberated women fashion.  It didn’t really bug me though I thought it was fairly obvious why she did it on several levels.

Come to think of it, and a quick Google search confirms, she began using that name long before then, so I retract the implication that it was a campaign tool in 2000.  But is it a campaign liability now?

I wouldn’t think so.  I wonder if there is a focus group that thinks so though.  Maybe some survey said that some target demographic values the traditional name structure.

Or, does she perhaps want to promote a more unified stance with Bill, and now draw on his name appeal which remains strangly powerful, where she was (understandably) trying to make herself comfortably distant from him (and his hijinks) during her Senate run?

I don’t honestly know.   Regardless, according to this story, she is ready to lose the Rodham and just be Mrs Bill for a while, and all indications are that the focus of the ommission is her presidential bid..

All I will say is I think it says something about her, but Ii won’t say what.  You decide for yourself if it is relevant and if so to what measure. 

Via Hot Air:

According to Raw Story, Hearst Newspapers will report that Hillary Clinton will drop her maiden name “Rodham” in her campaign for President.

Here are a few excerpts via Raw Story:

# Clinton identifies herself as “Hillary Clinton” in her campaign press releases and on her campaign website. The lone mention of her maiden name is in a campaign biography that says “Hillary’s father, Hugh Rodham, was the son of a factory worker from Scranton, Pa.”

# She continues to use “Hillary Rodham Clinton” in her New York-focused press releases and in the Senate.

# Clinton appeared surprised last week when asked why her presidential campaign had dropped her maiden name. Clinton laughed, shook her head and replied: “I haven’t, I haven’t,” before dashing off.

# Howard Wolfson, a top communications adviser to Clinton, downplayed any significance to the change. Asked if it was a strategic decision to drop “Rodham,” Wolfson replied: “That’s a fair question, but there’s no plan behind it.”

Trackback URI | Comments RSS