# Hillary Clinton is NOT type 1



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

I've seen countless typing lists with Hillary Clinton as a type 1. In watching her in the Democratic Presidential debate standing next to Bernie Sanders (type 1), it was obvious her dominant type is not 1. Watching her in that debate I'd place her at type 8. I've included a poll for those who want to place their vote.

The problem with politicians however is that they're very often presenting an image that doesn't match who they really are. Has anyone run across a good interview video or such where she reveals her real self?


----------



## Remcy (Dec 19, 2011)

She strikes me as 8w9 3w2 6w7 so/sx. INTJ.


----------



## BroNerd (Nov 27, 2010)

I don't even like Hillary Clinton that much but I'd say she's a type 3.
She seems very guided by public opinion and wears many masks depending on where she is. An 8 is more likely to not change him/herself depnding on his/her environment.
Honestly, I think she was trying to copy Donald Trump (who is an 8) at some points of the debate. I'm not a Trump fan either but he has done well in the polls and gotten a lot of attention - so Hillary was probably thinking "Lolz, I'll copy some of Trump's mannerisms."

I agree with the OP that Sanders is more so a 1 than Hillary - a classic 1 actually.


----------



## charlie.elliot (Jan 22, 2014)

Really? to me she really seems like a 1w9. I'm basing that off just her body language. The "changeability" tendency could be related to wing 9. She has steady/stone-faced body language that seems typical of type 1. But, I dont really know much about her.

I would not guess Sanders to be type 1- he seems like too much of a crowd pleaser for that. He knows how to work a crowd. I would guess 8w7. 
Clinton, in contrast to Sanders, seems to not particularly care about what the crowd thinks-- she just says what she personally believes and leaves it at that. Which seems like type 1. 
You can see this in their body language: Clinton's face just faces openly, steadily, and kind of blankly out at the audience. Sanders, though, uses all these gestures, like he's embracing his audience, and really wants them to personally understand. He even seems like maybe a type 2, or maybe just an 8 with a strong 2 development.


----------



## o0india0o (Mar 17, 2015)

My vote (which I have previously stated on the Bernie Sanders typing thread):

*Bernie Sanders*: 1w2
*Hillary Clinton*: 1w9

Their differences lie in their wing type. Hillary does come across as a "classic" Type 1 (just a classic type 1*w9*). The fire and brimstone is more of a 2-winger trait. Icy cold-ish, removed, and reservedness (Hillary's "likability problem" as the media puts it) is more of a 9-wing thing (my 1w9 father is the *exact* same way).

Additionally, if I had to guess *Hillary Clinton's tritype* (in no particular order;; other than primary type):*1w9, 3w4, 5wX* (so/sp)

I bet most politicians are either a type 3, or have type 3 featured in their tritype. I would imagine type 3 would be pretty necessary to "play the game" of politics. The SO(cial) instinct as well, seems like it would be quite integral to most politicians.


----------



## Swordsman of Mana (Jan 7, 2011)

enneathusiast said:


> I've seen countless typing lists with Hillary Clinton as a type 1. In watching her in the Democratic Presidential debate standing next to Bernie Sanders (type 1), it was obvious her dominant type is not 1. Watching her in that debate I'd place her at type 8. I've included a poll for those who want to place their vote.
> 
> The problem with politicians however is that they're very often presenting an image that doesn't match who they really are. Has anyone run across a good interview video or such where she reveals her real self?


THANK YOU! she is an 8 or a Social 3 for sure


----------



## charlie.elliot (Jan 22, 2014)

I just think Threes and Eights would both be more personable than she is. Wouldn't Threes especially smile a lot more? We're American after all... smiling is what we do. Hillary, though, seems to smile only when she really has to and she doesn't exactly beam out light.


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

charlie.elliot said:


> I would not guess Sanders to be type 1- he seems like too much of a crowd pleaser for that. He knows how to work a crowd. I would guess 8w7.
> Clinton, in contrast to Sanders, seems to not particularly care about what the crowd thinks-- she just says what she personally believes and leaves it at that. Which seems like type 1.


Interesting that you see it so differently from me. I see it the opposite of what you said.

Sanders has had held to the same convictions for over 25 years.





While Clinton shifts her stance often for political positioning.
Sanders rips Clinton for inconsistencies on trade, Keystone | TheHill


----------



## o0india0o (Mar 17, 2015)

enneathusiast said:


> While Clinton shifts her stance often for political positioning.


I interpret Hillary's flip-flopping on issues, as stemming from her 9-wing (wanting to reach agreements and move forward - - type 9 peace-keeping tendencies;; though I don't think she's doing it to "keep the peace", so much as move policies forward; finding that middle-ground).


----------



## charlie.elliot (Jan 22, 2014)

@enneathusiast yeah you know what, I really dont know anything about Bernie Sanders personally so I probably shouldn't even be in the debate lol. I just threw out my first impression.


----------



## o0india0o (Mar 17, 2015)

charlie.elliot said:


> I just think Threes and Eights would both be more personable than she is. Wouldn't Threes especially smile a lot more? We're American after all... smiling is what we do. Hillary, though, seems to smile only when she really has to and she doesn't exactly beam out light.


I agree. I feel I tend to see that kind of "dryness" of spirit in certain type 1w9's, type 5's, some 6w5's + 3w4's, and sx-last individuals. It's especially common in the "competency triad".


----------



## charlie.elliot (Jan 22, 2014)

o0india0o said:


> I agree. I feel I tend to see that kind of "dryness" of spirit in certain type 1w9's, type 5's, some 6w5's + 3w4's, and sx-last individuals. It's especially common in the "competency triad".


Also 9w1s, yeah.


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

BroNerd said:


> I don't even like Hillary Clinton that much but I'd say she's a type 3.
> She seems very guided by public opinion and wears many masks depending on where she is. An 8 is more likely to not change him/herself depnding on his/her environment.
> Honestly, I think she was trying to copy Donald Trump (who is an 8) at some points of the debate. I'm not a Trump fan either but he has done well in the polls and gotten a lot of attention - so Hillary was probably thinking "Lolz, I'll copy some of Trump's mannerisms."


That's the thing with Hillary. It's hard to know her because she's hidden behind a public persona. It appears to me to be the opposite of what you say. Instead of a 3 trying to be 8-like. It seems more of an 8 trying to be more 3-like. I think she's had a problem with being likable when campaigning and struggled with softening the rough edges and presentation over the years.

BTW, I think we'll see Trump become more 3-like and more politically correct as the primary progresses.


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

o0india0o said:


> I interpret Hillary's flip-flopping on issues, as stemming from her 9-wing (wanting to reach agreements and move forward - - type 9 peace-keeping tendencies;; though I don't think she's doing it to "keep the peace", so much as move policies forward; finding that middle-ground).


But that 9 wing can be for 1w9 or 8w9.


----------



## o0india0o (Mar 17, 2015)

enneathusiast said:


> But that 9 wing can be for 1w9 or 8w9.


Yeah, I have conceded to that in prior discussions. The most I could see, is Hillary as an 8w9 (_never_ an 8w7 imo).
But, I still think 1w9.

BTW: What type is Donald Trump*?*
(I really _hope_ he's not a type 7 … I would die a little inside;; he cannot join)


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

charlie.elliot said:


> I just think Threes and Eights would both be more personable than she is. Wouldn't Threes especially smile a lot more? We're American after all... smiling is what we do. Hillary, though, seems to smile only when she really has to and she doesn't exactly beam out light.


That's why I have trouble seeing 3 as primary for her. It's not natural for her but instead feels more forced and rehearsed. I contrast it to Schwarzenegger's type 3.


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

o0india0o said:


> BTW: What type is Donald Trump*?*
> (I really _hope_ he's not a type 7 … I would die a little inside;; he cannot join)


Trump's dominant type is 8w7 (though I see 8w7 with the 7 being more 3-like than simply 7).


----------



## Swordsman of Mana (Jan 7, 2011)

charlie.elliot said:


> I would not guess *Sanders* to be type 1- he seems like too much of a crowd pleaser for that. He knows how to work a crowd. I would guess *8w7*


umm...._what_?


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

The more I think about the replies the more I think Hillary's dominant typing is SO 8w9. I'm not sure about the stacking though (SO/SP or SO/SX). Contrast that with Trump as SO/SP 8w7, Sanders as SO 1 (not sure about stacking and wing yet). Does anyone have thoughts on Ben Carson or the other Republican candidates?


----------



## Brian1 (May 7, 2011)

I think she's a 1w9 ,and, a 3w2. She oozes caution, perfection, which are 1 types, but, she also oozes ambition, pure ambition. These are 3 qualities.


I say this, because, a lot of pundits talk about she's going to be the nominee, but then they lament on why isn't she being more aggressive in campaigning. A successful campaign requires the candidate to get out there and work the crowd. Hillary, just comes across more skilled as a backroom strategist, than a pol who will go to the county fair ,and, eat fried fish ,and, watermelon and wash it over with some beer. And you can see it in interviews. Her husband, Bill, is the exact opposite.


----------



## Swordsman of Mana (Jan 7, 2011)

Brian1 said:


> I think she's a 1w9 ,and, a 3w2. She oozes caution, perfection, which are 1 types, but, she also oozes ambition, pure ambition. These are 3 qualities.


the caution supports a case for 3. the only cautious 1 is the Self Preservation 1.


----------



## o0india0o (Mar 17, 2015)

enneathusiast said:


> Does anyone have thoughts on Ben Carson or the other Republican candidates?


Nah. I have only been watching the Democratic debates, due to it being my party affiliation.

The only bits and pieces I have seen of Donald Trump (and occasionally Ben Carson), have come from clips making fun of either men, on the Daily Show, or otherwise.


----------



## o0india0o (Mar 17, 2015)

Swordsman of Mana said:


> the caution supports a case for 3. the only cautious 1 is the Self Preservation 1.


I don't know any type 1 that is _not_ "cautious" and "calculated", be they SO, SX, or SP. Self-Preservation type 1's just happen to be the *most* cautious (similar to a type 6 at times).


----------



## Remcy (Dec 19, 2011)

enneathusiast said:


> Does anyone have thoughts on Ben Carson or the other Republican candidates?


Carson - 5w6 9w1 2w1 So/Sp
Bush - 7w6 9w8 2w1 So/Sp
Cruz - 2w3 7w6 1w9 So/Sp (not sure of this one)


----------



## Bricolage (Jul 29, 2012)

o0india0o said:


> I interpret Hillary's flip-flopping on issues, as stemming from her 9-wing (*wanting to reach agreements and move forward - - type 9 peace-keeping tendencies*;; though I don't think she's doing it to "keep the peace", so much as move policies forward; finding that middle-ground).


OR saying anything to get elected...


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

This old interview of Hillary Rodham takes place a month after Bill Clinton was first elected as Governor of Arkansas. The video has a couple bad spots that you'll have to wait out if you watch it.





It's revealing to me in two ways.

1) Hillary is asked over and over by the interviewer about her image not fitting what people expect for 1st lady of Arkansas but she doesn't place much importance on it (IMO, indicating she's not a type 3). What's interesting however is the more historical background I discovered by watching a biography on her. Apparently it was felt by some that part of the reason Bill Clinton wasn't re-elected as governor after his first term was because his wife didn't take on the traditional image of 1st lady of Arkansas (the way she dressed and presented herself, she didn't take his last name, etc.). After his loss she changed her name to Hillary Clinton and took on the image that was expected and Bill won re-election that year. I was trying to figure out why it felt like she was trying to be 3-like when it didn't really seem natural for her. I think it was when Bill ran and successfully won his 2nd bid for re-election as Governor of Arkansas that this image awareness became part of Hillary's public persona.

2) Hillary's talking style in the interview is very reminiscent of Martin Luther King, Jr.'s style (SO 8w9). IME, the 8w9 interview style for some can be 5-like in it's intellectual demeanor.


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

Remcy said:


> Carson - 5w6 9w1 2w1 So/Sp
> Bush - 7w6 9w8 2w1 So/Sp
> Cruz - 2w3 7w6 1w9 So/Sp (not sure of this one)


I was considering Carson as 5 but also 9w1. I haven't looked closely enough to get a good read yet though.
Bush as 7w6? I have trouble seeing that one.
Cruz always seemed liked 6w5 to me, probably because he reminds me of Joseph McCarthy. It's hard to tell though because he seems so rehearsed in interviews, debates, and speeches.


----------



## Remcy (Dec 19, 2011)

enneathusiast said:


> I was considering Carson as 5 but also 9w1. I haven't looked closely enough to get a good read yet though.
> Bush as 7w6? I have trouble seeing that one.
> Cruz always seemed liked 6w5 to me, probably because he reminds me of Joseph McCarthy. It's hard to tell though because he seems so rehearsed in interviews, debates, and speeches.


Cruz shows a lot of 2 manipulativeness in this clip:


* *












I'm torn between 6w5 or 7w6 for his head-fix. It's something with a 6 anyway.

Bush is some decisive type. Not enough of a doormat to be a 9 core.


----------



## BroNerd (Nov 27, 2010)

enneathusiast said:


> That's the thing with Hillary. It's hard to know her because she's hidden behind a public persona. It appears to me to be the opposite of what you say. Instead of a 3 trying to be 8-like. It seems more of an 8 trying to be more 3-like. I think she's had a problem with being likable when campaigning and struggled with softening the rough edges and presentation over the years.
> 
> BTW, I think we'll see Trump become more 3-like and more politically correct as the primary progresses.


Interesting theory on Hillary. There's something about her which doesn't feel very 8-like though. 
She doesn't seem naturally like a "go with your instinct" type of person. 
However, it could just be a very well crafted public persona.


----------



## Swordsman of Mana (Jan 7, 2011)

@enneathusiast
interesting, based on this, I could see INTJ for her type


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

BroNerd said:


> There's something about her which doesn't feel very 8-like though.
> She doesn't seem naturally like a "go with your instinct" type of person.
> However, it could just be a very well crafted public persona.


That was the other side to what I was noticing.

Is 8 dominant and hidden by 3 or is 3 dominant pretending to be 8 or perhaps some combination of the two?

It felt like the 3 was a front and the 8 was kept private to me. When I saw that biography of her and that old interview it seemed to all make sense. She was always taking on leadership roles with social influence but she never seemed to care much about image until it helped get Bill re-elected. Here's the clip from her biography starting from when Bill is first elected as Governor of Arkansas.


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

Swordsman of Mana said:


> I could see INTJ for her type


I think another reason type 8 might be so hard to see in her is because it may be more introverted. I've never thought of that with the Enneagram types before but perhaps there's something to an introvert's type being more difficult to see from the outside (except of course those types where you may expect more introversion like 5). I suppose an extraverted type 5 and other types more typically introverted might be difficult to spot as well.

What's also interesting about what may be her introversion is how it plays against her dominant social instinct. It offers an interesting contrast that may illustrate how extraversion is not the same as the social instinct - how an introverted individual may also be social first.


----------



## Remcy (Dec 19, 2011)

INTJ 3s are usually more open and flashier about their success than Hillary is. Think of Jose Mourinho and Arnold Schwarzenegger for example:


* *


















Both extreme cases, but considering Hillary has had even more success than them, she's very humble in comparison (both Jose and Arnold have 8 in their tritype I think btw).


----------



## d e c a d e n t (Apr 21, 2013)

Remcy said:


> INTJ 3s are usually more open and flashier about their success than Hillary is. Think of Jose Mourinho and Arnold Schwarzenegger for example:


Are you sure they're INTJs though?


----------



## Remcy (Dec 19, 2011)

Distortions said:


> Are you sure they're INTJs though?


Jose, yep. Arnold, no.


----------



## Flaming Bassoon (Feb 15, 2013)

It's always been hard for me to like Hillary because while she's not a Romney-esque flip flopper, she still seems to cater a bit too much to popular opinion. That being said, she has never seemed to care as much about it as much as her husband, who's a pretty obvious 379.


----------



## RobynC (Jun 10, 2011)

8w9: Cold, power hungry


----------



## newbie const (Nov 26, 2015)

She strikes me as a social 3w2 with 8 or 1w2 fix.3w2>8w9>6w7 So/Sp imo.


----------



## QueenOfCats (Jan 28, 2011)

She SCREAMS unhealthy social 3w2 to me. 

3w2-8w9-6w7 so/sp


----------



## Figure (Jun 22, 2011)

Hillary is a 1w2, Social subtype. Bernie Sanders is a 1w9, Sexual subtype. 

I'm so freaking tired of people saying that Hillary is an 8 because she is power hungry. Hillary is power hungry, but hunger for power is not a unique identifier for type 8. I also don't think she is nearly as good at portraying an image (let alone a positive one) as people give her credit for. Nor are 1's in ANY way immune from telling public lies or covering up wrongdoing on their part, in fact they get into trouble for this quite frequently. 

Watching her defend her rhetoric in debates, I have noticed that she depends on basically two or three tactics when pinned with a difficult question:



Making the statement that she's someone who gets things done, and can be depended upon to take action and has been doing it for over 35 years
Angrily denying that she said something that contradicts what she said more recently and making claims that she hasn't done anything wrong
Chastising other candidates for having too negative a message, and propping herself up as someone who wants positive change and isn't acting like the Republicans (or George Bush lol); overall denouncing actions of someone else as wrong, and explaining how what she did was right

The only one of those three that picks a fine line with outright lying with direct facts to show inconsistency is bullet 2. When she lies about what she did and did not say, I don't think she is lying in the way we associate with type 3. 3's may have the Passion of "deceit," but this lying happens more at the level of who they are and how they self-identify than actual lying about factual information. I don't think Hillary has a lot of pretense to who she is, or frosting on the cake of her persona; she is basically an overt frozen bitch and thinks her experience and convictions make her more qualified and therefore more deserving, and if someone else is also qualified they must be less so than she. To the credit of those saying she is a 3, she does sometimes shape shift and she does gloss over or lie about things she has/has not _done_ in the past. However, I don't think the pervasiveness of her factual lies speaks to a habit of wearing persona masks to the extent that 3's do. I also don't think this leaves her without a sense of who she is or that she wants you to think positively of her (as most if not all 3's do). She's not unsure that she's experienced and "gotten things done"; she thinks she did that and deserves the candidacy because she's done more than Sanders. 

Hillary couldn't care less if you like her or not, she thinks she's right and wants to control ownership of who is right and who is not and put down people she thinks are wrong into a lower position. This is why her personal attacks never seem really well-grounded; they are out of fear of knowing she isn't perfect and may not being good enough publicly, and feeling a need to rip down someone else's credibility to be above them. Behind that is Anger, not Lust or Deceit. This is a core habit of Social 1's, who (trust me) tend to think they know better than everyone else and tend to impose wrongness on other people then compare to what they did correctly as a way of maintaining public exclusivity. For SO 1's high standards and correction occurs at the level of how you relate to others. The basic message is "I'm right, you're wrong, what I did or said was (insert cover up here) so it doesn't matter as much/isn't as bad as your issue, so overall you should see I did the right thing."


----------



## Grunfur (Oct 23, 2011)

I think she's probably 315. I know she's definitely a 3. She always changes her views to compete with other people's. She always changes her positon to appease the public. She's all image. I could see 1 in her tritype though.


----------



## mushr00m (May 23, 2011)

I went for the type 3. 3w2. Seems like the predictable response though. She doesn't even seem strong in the 1 department to be honest... And SX last. Flat as a pancake ^_^


----------



## Despotic Nepotist (Mar 1, 2014)

3w2 > 8 > 6w5 so/sp

Most accounts of her posit her as a power-hungry control freak, but her primary mode of operation is to go along with the public flow with her opinions for sake of keeping up a reputable image.


----------



## Toroidal (Apr 14, 2016)

I think Hillary is a 3. She is the stereotypical overachieving high school student that wants success for success' sake. 

I can see how people would say she is an 8 because she wants power however a real 8 is a challenger. Hillary Clinton is as status quo as they come. Trump is a real 8 (8w7) and she is nothing like him at all.


----------



## sfzachos (Jun 9, 2016)

If Hillary Clinton was a 1 she wouldn't flip on issues. Bernie is totally a 1 -- through and through. I think Clinton is extremely image-oriented and hell-bent on winning, even if she has to resort to deception. As such, I'm going with a 3.


----------



## incision (May 23, 2010)

enneathusiast said:


> Trump's dominant type is 8w7 (though I see 8w7 with the 7 being more 3-like than simply 7).


Trump's a posterchild for 7w8 (ESTP with heavy 3 flavour). Refer to his business dealings leveraging off bankruptcy laws (four of them) rather than solid business practices. Also look to his love life, trophy wife after trophy wife and his flashy, unapologetic consumer/branding style. All boom/bust and appearance/competence oriented.

As far as HRC is concerned, she's not an 8w7 since she's not challenger. Possibly an 8w9 or a 1w9. There's something seething beneath her calm.


----------



## cyamitide (Jul 8, 2010)

Bill Clinton is typed as 3w2, and him and Hillary for sure aren't the same type.

Bill - 3w2
Hillary - 1w2
Bernie - 7w8 (idealistic ENxP. How on earth does anyone type an ENxP as a type 1 is mind boggling.)
Trump - 8w7, but 7w8 is also a nice guess.


----------



## mistakenforstranger (Nov 11, 2012)

Hillary - 1w2 so/sp 



> Social/Self-pres
> 
> When the social instinct is dominant in enneatype One, the fear of not being perfect manifests with regards to their connection to others. The social instinct is satisfied when others follow their rules or hold up their standards of justice.
> 
> ...


Bernie - 1w9 so/sx 



> Social/Sexual
> 
> The social/sexual One will have the same concerns as the social/self-pres types, however those concerns center more on individuals. Rules aren’t quite as important. They will zero in on what they want to make better and the intensity of their conviction is more obvious. Along with this, they are more personable, somewhat “lighter” and don’t generally take themselves as seriously. They can have a great sense of humor.
> 
> On the down side, their sensitivity can cause them to hold grudges. Because the self-pres instinct is last, this subtype could easily be mistaken for other enneatypes. Along with the sexual/social subtype, they can even be somewhat sloppy. Usually, there is still a sense of organization and a desire to do the job right, but there is much less emphasis on perfectionism in the material, physical environment. Most of their focus is on people and society. With this as their focus, they can be quite persuasive when it comes to their chosen causes. On the down side, when this extra outward energy is taken too far, they can approach the world with the attitude that they need to be right at all costs.


Trump - 8w7 sx/so



> Sexual/Social
> 
> This subtype of Eight manifests as the alpha male and alpha female. They demand everyone’s attention, and usually get it. They can be very charismatic. The assertive energy of the Eight combines with the assertive energy of the sexual instinct. With the self-preservational instinct least developed, this subtype has a lot of extroverted energy. This type isn’t afraid to go after what they want in life. The fixation on lust and the emphasis on control combine with great intensisty. At times, it’s almost as if their energy gets ahead of them, which can cause problems. They often have a vision of the future, but they have their blind spots too. They can harness a tremendous amount of energy for change, but at the same time be unaware of the fallout they might encounter because of their sometimes excessive self-assertion.


From Info from the Underground instinct descriptions: https://oceanmoonshine9.wordpress.com/


----------



## Daeva (Apr 18, 2011)

sfzachos said:


> If Hillary Clinton was a 1 she wouldn't flip on issues. Bernie is totally a 1 -- through and through. I think Clinton is extremely image-oriented and hell-bent on winning, even if she has to resort to deception. As such, I'm going with a 3.


What if her ideal lies in her long-term planning? Type 1's are very much capable of changing stance on a current issue, especially if it serves a higher purpose -in the 1's mind-.

Do what it takes for the idealized end-goal to manifest, or in other words: "The ends justify the means."


----------



## Swordsman of Mana (Jan 7, 2011)

mistakenforstranger said:


> Hillary - 1w2 so/sp
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Bernie: yes
Trump: yes (could be 7w8)
Hilary: ......no. she constantly lies and shifts her positions for personal gain. definitely not a 1 (I'm going with 3w2>8w9>7w8 So/Sp)


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

There's a whole angle on Hillary Clinton that a lot of people don't consider. This is something that libertarians tend to talk about, but nobody else ever talks about it, or so it seems to me.

Hillary Clinton studied under Saul Alinsky, a "radical" who wrote the book Rules for Radicals. The premise of the book was that "radicals" like him should stop bombing buildings, causing chaos etc, and instead, should take over the government. But how could they do that when they were such outliers, and nobody would ever vote for them? Rules for Radicals was basically a manual on how to do that. I am not comparing his character to Hitler, but the rules he outlines are very similar to the ones Hitler talks about - infiltrate the media, infiltrate the schools, fill the minds of the young with the ideas - because the youth is the future. Sure enough, the "radicals" took steps to infiltrate schools, media and so forth, with their ideas. George Soros - a philanthropist on the outside, but a born Jew in Poland who at age 15 turned on his own people and killed them along with the Nazis, and says he feels no guilt because he "did what he had to do" - and is known to have broken the bank of England and a few other countries etc - is also involved in this scheme - he owns portions of many major media stations; even the ones that appear to oppose each other. What was "democrat" before Alinsky's work, is now considered "conservative" or "centrist" - like Romney, for instance - and what was "radical" back then, is now considered "democrat" - like Obama and Clinton.

Clinton was a direct student of Saul Alinsky. She followed his teachings and agreed with his then radical ideology. She now is mainstream, because due to Alinsky's work, that ideology has infiltrated the media and the schools.

So - now, where am I going with this.

Clinton is working for her ideology - which was once radical and is now somewhat mainstream. To put a label on it, it's sort of "socialist-leaning" .... it's about raising taxes on the rich, expanding government to offer services to the poor, enforcing the ideal of equality, disarming citizens etc. Much like Machiavelli, who was also a 1, she believes that _The End Justifies The Means._ Despite how "wrong" it might look at a glance, this is a solidly 1 concept. This is not 8 or 3. "The end justifies the means" indicates that the END - the result, the ideology, the ideal - is what is important, and anything in between is_ in service of that ideal_. This is a straight-up super-ego concept. Hillary Clinton is working in service of an ideal, and that ideal will become clear when you read Rules for Radicals by Alinsky, study Alinksy's work and look into her history with him as her mentor.

(This may be obvious, but I'll state it just for the sake of being thorough - working in service of an ideal does not mean that someone actually sticks to that ideal. As reality sets in, the ideal falls apart, and the idealist clings more and more tightly to it to justify their actions to themselves, all the while losing the meaning it held in the first place, which is why the unhealthy 1 archetype is that of the hypocrite.)

The flip-flopping is part of the "means" by which she achieves an end. She flip-flops to get ahead. Sure, she has a 3 fix, she knows how to get ahead. But getting ahead, doing something "right" or "wrong" in terms of a small, momentary stance - is okay for her because what is REALLY RIGHT is her ideology, so these small flip-flops and apparent hypocrisies don't matter to her, since they are in service of her greater ideal. Also, while we're on the subject of 3 - Obama is a better example of a 3. He is more careful about his public image - keeps himself looking 9ish, likable, hiding his flip flopping and keeping the "dishonesty" very well hidden, acting cool, showing a face that gets along with people and makes them smile, all the while, beneath it all, being extremely ambitious.

Beyond that are the things that other people have pointed out - her stiff body language (3s are much more charming), her absolutely sucking at crowd pleasing (MLK is an 8w9 and really knew how to appeal to a crowd - that's a social 8 for you. Also, Trump , who is an 8w7, has this kind of charisma - love him or hate him, but he attracts attention. Ditto with Muhammad Ali, another 8 SJW who you can't ignore).

Therefore, I vote 1w9 for Hillary Clinton. @*enneathusiast* 

Also, @*mistakenforstranger* 
I agree with 8w7 for Trump, but I'd put him at So/Sp. Hillary Clinton, I think, has a 9 wing.. she's too cold. I agree with this post on page 1 by @*o0india0o* - Bernie Sanders has the "heat" of a 1w2.


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

Does anyone have an opinion on another famous person who is similar to Hillary Clinton? I can't think of anyone at the moment. It might be interesting to do a video comparison though.


----------



## Kintsugi (May 17, 2011)

Well, she always struck me as a 1 "gone-wrong".

I think you have to consider culture. America does have this 3, 7, 8 "flavour" to it which might make her appear "8ish".


----------



## Swordsman of Mana (Jan 7, 2011)

Trump is not Sx-last. he is an impulsive, lusty womanizer with flamboyant, extravagant tastes. I vote Sx/So


----------



## vandieu (Aug 22, 2015)

Animal said:


> There's a whole angle on Hillary Clinton that a lot of people don't consider. This is something that libertarians tend to talk about, but nobody else ever talks about it, or so it seems to me.
> 
> Hillary Clinton studied under Saul Alinsky, a "radical" who wrote the book Rules for Radicals. The premise of the book was that "radicals" like him should stop bombing buildings, causing chaos etc, and instead, should take over the government. But how could they do that when they were such outliers, and nobody would ever vote for them? Rules for Radicals was basically a manual on how to do that. I am not comparing his character to Hitler, but the rules he outlines are very similar to the ones Hitler talks about - infiltrate the media, infiltrate the schools, fill the minds of the young with the ideas - because the youth is the future. Sure enough, the "radicals" took steps to infiltrate schools, media and so forth, with their ideas. George Soros - a philanthropist on the outside, but a born Jew in Poland who at age 15 turned on his own people and killed them along with the Nazis, and says he feels no guilt because he "did what he had to do" - and is known to have broken the bank of England and a few other countries etc - is also involved in this scheme - he owns portions of many major media stations; even the ones that appear to oppose each other. What was "democrat" before Alinsky's work, is now considered "conservative" or "centrist" - like Romney, for instance - and what was "radical" back then, is now considered "democrat" - like Obama and Clinton.
> 
> ...


lol Where did you get this? Hillary has always been a neo-liberal opportunist and attempt to spin it otherwise is delusion. She was never a student of Alinsky, she wrote her senior's thesis about him and basically criticized his ideas. If you had actually read _Rules for Radicals_ you would have realized the real "student" of the populist-socialist Alinsky is Sanders. Also, Obama and fricking Bill Clinton are socialists? George Soros is a literal Nazi ('cause muh horseshoes, right)? MACHIAVELLI IS A 1?! You just don't know how laughable and idiotic this is.


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

vandieu said:


> lol Where did you get this? Hillary has always been a neo-liberal opportunist and attempt to spin it otherwise is delusion. She was never a student of Alinsky, she wrote her senior's thesis about him and basically criticized his ideas. If you had actually read _Rules for Radicals_ you would have realized the real "student" of the populist-socialist Alinsky is Sanders. Also, Obama and fricking Bill Clinton are socialists? George Soros is a literal Nazi ('cause muh horseshoes, right)? MACHIAVELLI IS A 1?! You just don't know how laughable and idiotic this is.


It's not hard to look up and find facts and videos about this. I'm not here to debate politics though, so I'll let you have the last word. Believe what you want


----------



## Drops of Jupiter (Jun 9, 2016)

I would agree that Sanders is far more likely a type 1 idealist. Clinton seems to very image focused. She says what people want to hear in a given moment, and it doesn't seem Fe derived, but more about creating an image for success. Type 1s, even 9s with a strong 1 wing like myself, are far too dogmatic to change our views entirely depending on the audience. I might tone something down for a certain audience, but I would never compromise my values.


----------



## cyamitide (Jul 8, 2010)

Swordsman of Mana said:


> Trump is not Sx-last. he is an impulsive, lusty womanizer with flamboyant, extravagant tastes. I vote Sx/So


Trump's approach to women has always been trite, userly, and materialistic -- he's not someone burning with passion, but instead he always went for the combo of looks and status, and searched for "trophy" model wives to an SO/SP or SP/SO businessman and politician like himself. He's so much a stereotypical SX-last that it hurts to even think about it.


----------



## tanstaafl28 (Sep 10, 2012)

No way she's an 8, she's not aggressive enough. Her husband is a 3w4. She's definitely a 1w9.


----------



## Scarlet Eyes (May 15, 2015)

If I assigned a tritype for her, I'd say 1w9 / 3w2 / 5w6 (so/sp)

Compare her with Bernie who's possibly a 1w2 SO/SX. She's much more stiff and conservative, due to her wing and being SX-last.


----------



## Helios (May 30, 2012)

Swordsman of Mana said:


> THANK YOU! she is an 8 or a Social 3 for sure


Social 3 but definitely 8 fixed.


----------



## jennybee (Jul 28, 2016)

Curious tonight about what the forum consensus might be regarding Hillary. As a 1w9, it's been interesting to read all your thoughts about this type. It just goes to say "speak for yourself" unless you identify as One, and there are huge variations on instinct. As a self-pres 1w9 introvert, running for public office so tenaciously and ambitiously would never happen. My life revolves around my mission, whatever it is in that particular decade, and there is in fact huge tenaciousness on that front. I don't care about my own advancement if the mission makes progress; putting myself central would just detract from the mission. Could totally see this in Bernie. OTOH, the social instinct and 2 wing is a different expression. I agree with others Hillary is likely a 3 but might be a social 1w2.


----------



## kirsten.j (Jul 12, 2016)

I agree with the people who've said Clinton is a 1w9 and Sanders a 1w2. Clinton is trying to build up her image with the "love and kindness" thing, but it's very awkward and forced... definitely seems 1w9-ish to me. And for what it's worth, I've never seen her typed as anything else in literature (and she often pops up in the literature).


----------



## DAPHNE XO (Jan 16, 2012)

I don't see how Killary can be a 1. I thought 1s are focused on morality or at least right and wrongs.

Killary has no sense of right and wrong, lies, is corrupt and avoids indictment by bribing people. Thinks she is _above _the law as opposed to a defender and enforcer of it.

I just can't see 1 at all.

All I see is (extremely unhealthy) 3. She is a fake-ass psychopath in disguise through and through - she preaches about how she's all for women's "rights" yet accuses all the men that accused her husband of rape, of lying. Some feminist. 

I seriously, don't, get, how, anyone, can, see, 1, for, Killary the Shillary.

edit: She even lied BARE FACED IN FRONT OF THE CAMERA about what happened in Benghazi. Like this woman just has NO morals whatsoever, and that is not something I would associate with any gut type. Not saying that 3s don't have morals, more that 3s don't really have an internal guiding compass, until they reach more healthier and maturer states in their lives.


----------



## Felipe (Feb 25, 2016)

Remcy said:


> She strikes me as 8w9 3w2 6w7 so/sx. INTJ.


3w2, I agree. She is too worried about image to be an 8


----------



## mistakenforstranger (Nov 11, 2012)

She's a 1w2 so/sp with a 1w2-3w4-6w5 tritype.


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

Could someone please explain why people type Hillary Clinton at type 1? For the life of me I just can't see it. There is nothing about her that jumps out as type 1 for me (even after watching her campaign and debate for the last 9 months since I started this thread). I don't want to argue the point. I'd just honestly like to know specifics on what you're seeing.


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

enneathusiast said:


> Could someone please explain why people type Hillary Clinton at type 1? For the life of me I just can't see it. There is nothing about her that jumps out as type 1 for me (even after watching her campaign and debate for the last 9 months since I started this thread). I don't want to argue the point. I'd just honestly like to know specifics on what you're seeing.


I am rethinking my typing of her at 1, so I may get back to you.. I think I explained some of my reasoning on how she COULD be a 1 in an earlier post.

A 3 on another forum made a pretty good case for her being a 3; that was just very hard for me to buy because she's so stiff and unlikeable, and her image is not very well crafted. But now that she's explained it a bit more, I can see her point.


----------



## Animal (May 29, 2012)

This is the kind of thing that makes me think.. "3?? What 3 would behave this way?"

https://imgur.com/wFovN4O


----------



## mistakenforstranger (Nov 11, 2012)

Animal said:


> This is the kind of thing that makes me think.. "3?? What 3 would behave this way?"
> 
> https://imgur.com/wFovN4O


:laughin:


----------



## Quernus (Dec 8, 2011)

Felipe said:


> 3w2, I agree. She is too worried about image to be an 8


but she is so bad at image


----------



## Quernus (Dec 8, 2011)

Animal said:


> This is the kind of thing that makes me think.. "3?? What 3 would behave this way?"
> 
> https://imgur.com/wFovN4O


LOLOLOL.

Well, perhaps one who is just really bad at acting? She fakes emotion so much that she has probably forgotten what they really feel like. Yet she was trying to seem "surprised", the socially acceptable response. No clue if she's actually a 3, though. (Oh, my partner just said she was joking around, being sarcastic because obviously she was going to win. I don't know, I didn't watch the DNC or RNC this year. Not enough guts to puke up before I'd start turning inside out).


----------



## Quernus (Dec 8, 2011)

I think whatever her type is, it to the pathological degree. 

I think the pathological type that makes most sense for her is pathological three.

Even when her husband was president and making awful, exploitative decisions... she tried to even take credit for it, to look good to the right people. The thing is, I don't *feel* in bones like she struggles with identity the way I can often feel it with other heart types... but that's not a good method for typing. 

She changes her mind on stuff the way any politician does, and I think she gets more slack for it because she's a woman. But she seems to truly not know how to act, when it comes time to show emotion. BUT that could just be due to being a T without Fe. When it comes time to talk actual policy or whatever the heck, she knows the right things to say in the moment (even if she's falsified or changes her mind later on).

But that could just be due to a lifetime of being in politics, not due to being a three.

She is willing to go to great lengths to get what she wants --- like most corrupt politicians -- but that could be a lot of types.

I... am so confused about her type. She doesn't seem obsessed with power for power's sake, the way an 8 might be. I mean, she IS, in a politician way... but not in an 8, "I CANNOT BE VULNERABLE I WILL DOMINATE YOU" way. It's so calculated and seems in line with whatever values she takes for granted. Maybe she is a three, but her identity issues are mainly concerned with big corporations, lobbyists, and all the important people, not the little people she exploits as minions and peons to get what she wants, and that's why it's harder to pick up on when she's not behind closed doors. She doesn't care what nuisance peons thinks of her image, from an identity standpoint -- just wants to coast off the endorsements she manipulates out of us to coast further into territory where her image really matter. 

All speculation. I think she is very complicated. You can tell how I feel about her (but don't take that to mean I'm supporting Trump!)


----------



## Quernus (Dec 8, 2011)

DAPHNE LXIV said:


> I don't see how Killary can be a 1. I thought 1s are focused on morality or at least right and wrongs.
> 
> Killary has no sense of right and wrong, lies, is corrupt and avoids indictment by bribing people. Thinks she is _above _the law as opposed to a defender and enforcer of it.
> 
> ...


Yeah, 1s aren't actually more moral than anyone else and their ideas of "morality" are subjective. Ones think they know better than everyone else, that they have the answers, that they are most competent, that everyone else is wrong and inferior (unhealthy Ones). They might very well think that the ends justify the means, and do "immoral" things to obtain their ultimate goals/visions. 

The more I read and think, the more I'm seeing One. I honestly don't think she cares what people think of her except for how far it will catapult her politically. I don't think she is obsessed with protecting anyone or not being vulnerable - just eradicating whatever stands in the way of her doing what she thinks she should do, making things be what they should be.

Some people type her husband as a 3, and next to him, no way she is a 3. Though some say 7 for him. I have no idea. The point is, I'm becoming more convinced she is a One, which never ever necessarily means being more objectively or even _reasonably _moral than anyone else.

Would also help explain her stiffness and difficulty expressing certain emotions, how contrived she is. Very repressed.


----------



## 1000BugsNightSky (May 8, 2014)

She has an obvious 3 in there.


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

What I find particularly interesting in trying to determine Hillary's dominant type is that the people within the current arena offer such contrasts. Opinions tend to place her at type 1, 3, or 8, but when you compare her to Sanders (1), Bill (3), and Trump (8), it's hard not to question any of those typings for her because she comes off so different from them. 

She's either none of those types or Sanders, Bill, and Trump are other types or there's some nuance somewhere that explains it (e.g., wings, instincts, introversion, etc.) or there is simply something lacking within the Enneagram type system (there are many other famous people that are difficult to get agreement on type as well). Personally, I think it's a combination of the latter two - some nuance + some lack in the system (and no I don't think the MBTI or Jungian functions provide the missing piece so please don't turn it into one of those threads).


----------



## Quernus (Dec 8, 2011)

enneathusiast said:


> What I find particularly interesting in trying to determine Hillary's dominant type is that the people within the current arena offer such contrasts. Opinions tend to place her at type 1, 3, or 8, but when you compare her to Sanders (1), Bill (3), and Trump (8), it's hard not to question any of those typings for her because she comes off so different from them.
> 
> She's either none of those types or Sanders, Bill, and Trump are other types or there's some nuance somewhere that explains it (e.g., wings, instincts, introversion, etc.) or there is simply something lacking within the Enneagram type system (there are many other famous people that are difficult to get agreement on type as well). Personally, I think it's a combination of the latter two - some nuance + some lack in the system (and no I don't think the MBTI or Jungian functions provide the missing piece so please don't turn it into one of those threads).


Well, they're different people, after all. I think it's especially hard when comparing politicians because their images are so contrived, plus how media presents them can be so selective and distorted... they are geared for pandering, shock value, emotional appeal. Megacorporations literally conspire against them to make them out to seem certain ways, positive or negative. So-- More so than any other type of famous person, they can never afford to fully be themselves. Depending on the political system, the climate can be so volatile and so competitive and *so illogical*, it's hard to make sense of everything. They just need to keep up, stay ahead, while everyone else's head is still spinning.

That said, the *way* these people deal with this sort of thing can reveal much about their type. Bernie is clearly a One despite all of this, but he's also been in politics a very long time, has his place and his style. Bill, well, whatever. Threes are going to be especially good at playing this kind of game, so it makes sense. Trump isn't actually a politician, so.

Hillary has been around for a long time in a variety of different roles, and has very strategically had to work through and play through all of them to make the history she just made (not congratulating her, I think she doesn't deserve it and that it was rigged, but that's not the point - she still had to do a lot of reptilian political work to get here). I do think gender is a factor here, not in regards to enneagram but just with media representation and social expectations. She cannot, and does not, get away with everything male politicians can get away with. She can be just like them and be scorned for it. She can be different from them and then compared as lesser. She's had to become very, very, strategic in a very special way -- but she's not fully disadvantaged either. She is very, very cozy with all the right people... the Clintons have a LOT of power, and so she had a lot of help.

*sigh*

One similarity I see between Hillary and Bernie. They are not very great at expressing deep emotion***, and they are irritated with anything that detracts from "the point"*** (discussions of their goals, their vision, blablabla). I don't think either of them seem to really care what anyone thinks of them as people. I just see no evidence, and get no feeling, for any sort of true identity issues from either of them. Not even when they're forced to comply with the demands of politics to get air time or whatever. Bernie can get away with being a bit more callous and direct, for a number of reasons. Hillary has to pretend to be warm and fuzzy when she's making appearances with, say, children -- but clearly with an agenda. Then there's that gender expectation, too.

Both Bernie and Hillary have been around a long time, been very persistent in going where they need to go (even though Bernie's ideals have remained more consistent, Hillary seems to take an 'ends justify the means' approach which is no less a solid ideal/strategy). Only thing is, I feel Bernie really believes in a more ethical, moral way to go about society --- whereas Hillary just thinks she knows best and that everyone should comply with her views. You can see where my biases lie, but if this were a political debate thread, I could back it up... heheheh. Either way, still One, for both.

***I have some videos in mind that display this, I will try to find after I finish my homeowork


----------



## BroNerd (Nov 27, 2010)

mistakenforstranger said:


> She's a 1w2 so/sp with a 1w2-3w4-6w5 tritype.


After watching the Democratic Convention, I think this is right.
I think I previously posted on how she wasn't a 1 but a 3, however, I see it in her mannerisms and lifelong attitudes.


----------



## DAPHNE XO (Jan 16, 2012)

Quernus said:


> Yeah, 1s aren't actually more moral than anyone else and their ideas of "morality" are subjective.


Didn't say they were more moral or imply that. 



> Ones think they know better than everyone else, that they have the answers, that they are most competent, that everyone else is wrong and inferior (unhealthy Ones). They might very well think that the ends justify the means, and do "immoral" things to obtain their ultimate goals/visions.


this sounds like 3 narcissism.




> The more I read and think, the more I'm seeing One. I honestly don't think she cares what people think of her except for *how far it will catapult her politically*. I don't think she is obsessed with protecting anyone or not being vulnerable - just eradicating whatever stands in the way of her doing what she thinks she should do, making things be what they should be.


so she's image obsessed then.



> The point is, I'm becoming more convinced she is a One, which never ever necessarily means being more objectively or even _reasonably _moral than anyone else.


This isn't what i said at all.



> Would also help explain her stiffness and difficulty expressing certain emotions, how contrived she is. Very repressed.


makes no sense for 1, but tonnes of sense for a 3.


----------



## mistakenforstranger (Nov 11, 2012)

BroNerd said:


> After watching the Democratic Convention, I think this is right.
> I think I previously posted on how she wasn't a 1 but a 3, however, I see it in her mannerisms and lifelong attitudes.


Yeah, I feel confident she's a 1w2 so/sp. See video at 3:57. Someone else told Clinton, "Dare to compete"...Would a 3 need to be told that? And would they deliberate on it the way she does in the video, (which also shows her 6 influence)? No, they want to be the star. I can't see her as a Type 3, but it's in her tri-type. Mitt Romney and Marco Rubio are 3s. So shiny. Hillary doesn't shine. And look at her in her early years at school, just a perfect, goody two-shoes: "I was a predictable, good-girl." Well, gender roles too, but I think it's telling nevertheless.


----------



## Quernus (Dec 8, 2011)

> _
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I thought you said that Ones are more concerned with morals, and used "lying to the camera" as an example of a Not One thing to do. 

_



Ones think they know better than everyone else, that they have the answers, that they are most competent, that everyone else is wrong and inferior (unhealthy Ones). They might very well think that the ends justify the means, and do "immoral" things to obtain their ultimate goals/visions.

Click to expand...

_


> this sounds like 3 narcissism.


Yes, it sounds like entitlement of a 7, 3, or 1. But all with different motivations. You're right, unhealthy Threes will bulldoze anyone who gets in their path to justify the end, in order to seize what they want for themselves. A One also might, if they see it being in line with their values/the right (or correct/most efficient/superior) thing to do.

_



The more I read and think, the more I'm seeing One. I honestly don't think she cares what people think of her except for *how far it will catapult her politically. I don't think she is obsessed with protecting anyone or not being vulnerable - just eradicating whatever stands in the way of her doing what she thinks she should do, making things be what they should be.*

Click to expand...

_


> *so she's image obsessed then.*


Or she happens to be a politician who is using politics as a way to get what she wants and do what she thinks she has the right/duty to do. I know Ones who would be willing to take on roles because they genuinely believe they are best for the job - often to the point of even seeing it as a burdensome duty (not saying that's the case here, I think she does genuinely hunger for power as well). She's been in politics for a long time, it makes sense she would use this platform. It's the tactic she knows and has most access to. Also she is probably 3-fixed anyway

Plus, caring about image does not equal core self-worth and identity related issues etc 


> *
> 
> 
> 
> ...


It makes perfect sense for a One. Ones are very repressed. Threes can be repressed in emotion, though are often better at *acting *congenial and charismatic because it's more socially appealing. Schmoozing, etc. Look at Bill and other famous 3s. I'm not saying he's not actually dead inside but you wouldn't know it if you didn't stop to think about it/learn about his history. Hillary tries to be congenial but really sucks at it, with the general public (is better at appealing to lobbyists and powerful people behind doors, probably by appealing to mutually beneficial "deals" but it is hard to say because the records rarely come out. All I know is she gets most of what she wants when she does her thing in private, not when in public (hold the disgusting, misogynistic jokes, people)).


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

Quernus said:


> Both Bernie and Hillary have been around a long time, been very persistent in going where they need to go (even though Bernie's ideals have remained more consistent, Hillary seems to take an 'ends justify the means' approach which is no less a solid ideal/strategy). Only thing is, I feel Bernie really believes in a more ethical, moral way to go about society --- whereas Hillary just thinks she knows best and that everyone should comply with her views.


Bernie seems to have had a consistent set of beliefs as long as he's been in politics. Hillary doesn't have that. In fact, she's shifted to many of Bernie's "progressive" beliefs as the primary progressed and finished up. The only thing I've seen Hillary hold to throughout her career is her fight for children and families which started in the early days of her career. That's one thing that made me consider type 8 (fighting for those who can't fight for themselves).

There's just too much shifting in Hillary's positions to indicate type 1 to me. There doesn't seem to be much self-referencing but more a playing to the crowd. Social type 1 has much more rigidity in their beliefs like Bernie.

I'm also thinking that her awkwardness in the public arena and desire to just do the work instead of deal with the public has to do with an introverted nature.


----------



## Felipe (Feb 25, 2016)

Quernus said:


> but she is so bad at image


come to think about it I think she's a 2, one time I saw an interview where she said putin asked her to ask her husband (Bill) to go hunting with him and she said she could go hunting with putin instead lol.


----------



## Quernus (Dec 8, 2011)

enneathusiast said:


> Bernie seems to have had a consistent set of beliefs as long as he's been in politics. Hillary doesn't have that. In fact, she's shifted to many of Bernie's "progressive" beliefs as the primary progressed and finished up. The only thing I've seen Hillary hold to throughout her career is her fight for children and families which started in the early days of her career. That's one thing that made me consider type 8 (fighting for those who can't fight for themselves).
> 
> There's just too much shifting in Hillary's positions to indicate type 1 to me. There doesn't seem to be much self-referencing but more a playing to the crowd. Social type 1 has much more rigidity in their beliefs like Bernie.
> 
> I'm also thinking that her awkwardness in the public arena and desire to just do the work instead of deal with the public has to do with an introverted nature.


I completely agree that she is not consistent. I will address that later. As for your argument about 8: I think she fixates on the family/children thing because she can play to that as a ~female politician~(especially with how feminism and feminist politics looked when she emerged (which is to say white feminism (and to make it clear, I am a feminist, but I am an intersectional feminist which is different than what she is))). it fits with her societal expectations and gets her the female vote. In reality she is as exploitative as any politician, and she certainly doesn't care much for families who aren't white and middle class. She's a protector of those who cant help themselves?

Tell that to a Syrian child who has lost their family in the bombings that Hillary orchestrated. Tell that to the Palestinian brutalized and murdered at a checkpoint in the Israeli apartheid state that Clinton so vehemently defends. Tell that to the indigenous rights activists who are murdered in Honduras as a result of the coup she threw her weight behind. Tell that to the people being consistently deported every day under the Obama administration (which has deported more immigrants than ANY other presidential administration in history) which she stands behind firmly. Tell that to the Haitian women working in textile mills, making a mere 30 cents an hour, something that Hillary (along with many other economic elites) fought to preserve.

Now, every politician is gonna be messed up. And all those examples CERTAINLY do not point to someone who has some sort of vision to make life better for people, she does not have very clear ethical guidelines. That is true. But perhaps her ideal is simply to do X Y Z with America and believes she is justified in doing whatever it takes to get there. Believes she knows best. Blablabla.


https://medium.com/@discomfiting/youre-not-voting-for-hillary-to-protect-me-73754a9b189e Just one loosely relevant article

Whatever the enneagram type is, I just wanna point out that she only cares about a very select number of human beings. Lol. But no politician is going to have the perfect answers for all these problems, and I realize that. Honestly I see Three before Eight with her, and am going back over some of the things she did and stood for during her husband's presidency that are making me reconsider Three again. But why Eight? Does she ever seem to fear being vulnerable, or not being in control/power? To me it seems she feels more entitled to power than she fears NOT being in power.


----------



## angelfish (Feb 17, 2011)

I can't see why she would be anything but 1. Her body language says it all. Certainly not an Image type, lack of external feeling-affect. Little fear to indicate Head type issues. Gut seems clear, but no brazen 8ness, nor intuitive, easygoing 9. Rigid, tenacious 1. And Social first. She's really not charismatic but I rather like her. I think she's quite genuine often even though she's bad at demonstrating it. Anyway, she's got a good brain and a good set of plans. I'm tired of people calling her bitch and liar because she's a woman who openly seeks power. (Go ahead... argue with me... she is easily more criticized and vilified than her male peers.) I think she would be responsible and respect that power, though, unlike her competitor. I really would like to see her become our next president.



enneathusiast said:


> Social type 1 has much more rigidity in their beliefs like Bernie.


My experience with 1s and rigidity is not that they necessarily are unchanging. My experience is that the _principle_ does not change, but the behaviors/actions taken to comply with that principle or goal may very well change. Bernie IMO is not just a 1, but a combination of 1 and very stubborn Fi and Si - who would therefore be particularly unchanging. But I have a 1 manager right now who I believe is ISTJ and she will change tactics when she thinks that it will be more effective to achieve her goal. The same was true with an ESTJ 1 director I had a while back, and I'm fairly sure she was soc/sp. I don't think 1s themselves or their actions are necessarily static so much as their principles/values are static. Whether the way they demonstrate that outwardly is static or not may depend greatly on their MBTI and any number of other factors. Hillary's values seem fairly consistent, as evidenced by her history (straight out of the Wikipedia article, but easier to read hopefully): 

- On high school student council
- President of college Young Republicans
- President of college Government Association
-- Organized student strike following MLK assassination
- Yale Law School
-- Editorial board of law school paper
-- Worked at child study center
-- Researched migrant issues with health, sanitation, etc.
-- Postgrad study on children and article advocating children's competence
- Worked for Children's Defense Fund
- Worked on committee to research impeachment for Nixon
- Became law professor & director of new legal aid clinic at school
-- Cofounded rape & crisis center
- Joined law firm doing patent/property law; child advocacy pro bono
-- Published articles advocating for children's rights in law
-- Cofounded family & children public policy advocacy NGO
-- Appointed to board of directors for nonprofit funding legal assistance to those in need
- Became First Lady of AR
-- Chair of Rural Health Advisory in AR (appointed by Bill)
- Became full partner of law firm
- Campaigned for Bill
-- Chair of AR Educational Standards Committee, pushed for reform
-- Established program for children's literacy
-- Member of liberal & women's advocacy groups
-- On board of children's legal nonprofits, on Walmart board
- Became First Lady of US
-- Chaired task force on healthcare reform
-- Worked on children's healthcare program
-- Helped create Office of Violence Against Women at DoJ
-- Traveled as diplomat, advocated women's rights
- Became NY Senator

I'll stop here, since that's where her overtly political career began, but it seems to me that her priorities have been fairly consistent. She's always been a Methodist Christian. She's always advocated for reform in healthcare and education. She's consistently worked to improve conditions via policy for children, those in need, women, and families. She's clearly interested in law and seeks influence in politics.


----------



## Quernus (Dec 8, 2011)

Felipe said:


> come to think about it I think she's a 2, one time I saw an interview where she said putin asked her to ask her husband (Bill) to go hunting with him and she said she could go hunting with putin instead lol.


Lol. Two, that's a funny thought.

I never saw that but it sounds like she was just trying to be like "I'm just as competent, you don't need my husband".


----------



## DAPHNE XO (Jan 16, 2012)

Quernus said:


> I thought you said that Ones are more concerned with morals and used her lying to the camera as an example as a Not One thing to do.


Implying someone is MORE moral =/= stating someone CARES about morality more than most.

No, her lying on camera was an example of something a three would do. I gave it as evidence for her being a three, and not that 1s wouldn't lie - you are twisting what I have said to fit an argument I did not give.



> Yes, it sounds like entitlement of a 7, 3, or 1. But all with different motivations. You're right, unhealthy Threes will bulldoze anyone who gets in their path to justify the end, in order to seize what they want for themselves. *A One also might, if they see it being in line with their values/the right (or correct/most efficient/superior) thing to do./ *


Hillary only wants power for power's sake, not the bold.



> *Or she happens to be a politician who is using politics as a way to get what she wants and do what she thinks she has the right/duty to do*. I know Ones who would be willing to take on roles because they genuinely believe they are best for the job - often to the point of even seeing it as a burdensome duty (not saying that's the case here, I think she does genuinely hunger for power as well). She's been in politics for a long time, it makes sense she would use this platform. It's the tactic she knows and has most access to. Also she is probably 3-fixed anyway


That is most definitely NOT her motivation.

She does NOT think she is best for the job, she clearly says it all the time when her only reason that people should vote for her is that if they don't, Trump will get in.



> Plus, caring about image does not equal core self-worth and identity related issues etc


Never even mentioned that so I don't know why you are bringing it up, unless it's your own sidenote to your own argument.



> It makes perfect sense for a One. Ones are very repressed. Threes can be repressed in emotion, though are often better at *acting *congenial and charismatic because it's more socially appealing. Schmoozing, etc. Look at Bill and other famous 3s. I'm not saying he's not actually dead inside but you wouldn't know it if you didn't stop to think about it/learn about his history. Hillary tries to be congenial but really sucks at it, with the general public (is better at appealing to lobbyists and powerful people behind doors, probably by appealing to mutually beneficial "deals" but it is hard to say because the records rarely come out. All I know is she gets most of what she wants when she does her thing in private, not when in public (hold the disgusting, misogynistic jokes, people)).


What are you talking about, she only gets what she wants in private because she screams at people and bullies them into submission. Or if not that, she will threaten them or bribe them.

Threes who are conceited cannot act socially graceful no matter how hard they try.

Anyway I'm bored of this now, I won't change my opinion and you won't change yours. So this is done for me.


----------



## mistakenforstranger (Nov 11, 2012)

enneathusiast said:


> Bernie seems to have had a consistent set of beliefs as long as he's been in politics. Hillary doesn't have that. In fact, she's shifted to many of Bernie's "progressive" beliefs as the primary progressed and finished up. The only thing I've seen Hillary hold to throughout her career is her fight for children and families which started in the early days of her career. That's one thing that made me consider type 8 (fighting for those who can't fight for themselves).
> 
> There's just too much shifting in Hillary's positions to indicate type 1 to me. There doesn't seem to be much self-referencing but more a playing to the crowd. Social type 1 has much more rigidity in their beliefs like Bernie.


I wonder if it has to do with their wings, as I think Bernie's 1w9 and Hillary's 1w2. Bernie's more above the people-pleasing politics that might be a result of Hillary's 2-wing. Bernie's also more abstract in his vision for change than Hillary. I would agree that Bernie has more integrity than Hillary, but I don't think that makes them different types. 



> Unhealthy Ones with a Two-wing may be intolerant of and condescending to those who disagree with them. They may attempt to manipulate others emotionally, making them feel guilty for being less perfect than they should be. *These people have a tendency toward self-deception about their own motives and self-righteousness when their motives or actions are questioned. They can be high-handed and hypocritical, guilty of the very faults they condemn in others. Self-deception and feelings of entitlement make their defenses particularly difficult to break.* There is a tremendous amount of covert aggression in persons of this subtype, both from the repressed aggression in persons of this subtype, both from the repressed aggression of the One and the indirect aggression of the Two. Unhealthy Ones with a Two-wing may have physical problems (conversion reactions), compulsive habits, or nervous breakdowns as the result of the anxiety generated by their contradictions.





enneathusiast said:


> I'm also thinking that her awkwardness in the public arena and desire to just do the work instead of deal with the public has to do with an introverted nature.


I'm actually rethinking her MBTI type from ESTJ, as she does seem very introverted in her earlier interviews. It seems she's learned to be more extroverted over time, unlike her always extroverted husband.


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

Quernus said:


> But why Eight? Does she ever seem to fear being vulnerable, or not being in control/power? To me it seems she feels more entitled to power than she fears NOT being in power.


All I'm saying is that I'd been seeing hints of type 8 over and over. I'm not sure if that's dominant though. Type 3 looks like an interesting option as well. I don't see type 1 at all.

What I hear a lot from Hillary is about fighting for things and being tough. It's a theme I noticed early in the primary. Her political life has also been one of constantly taking attacks from Republicans and those who don't like her. Her attitude about it nowadays reminds me of the type 8 attitude of "I just won't let them get me." Type 8 can play out in different ways (e.g., Trump's more thin-skinned and image conscious approach is to counter-punch).

In the video that @mistakenforstranger posted on a previous page you can hear things like "rough and tumble" and "if you get knocked down get back up" which might be ascribed to type 8 or type 3 even.

It's interesting that like Trump (8w7), she's viewed extremely negatively by the opposing side. Type 8 often has that polarizing effect. Love me or hate me, with me or against me - doesn't seem to be much middle ground.

At this point in the campaign I'm not seeing an 8 assertiveness from her as much which has me wondering whether it's because type 3 is a more appropriate typing or it's a 9 wing surfacing or she's trying to soften her image or something else.


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

mistakenforstranger said:


> I wonder if it has to do with their wings, as I think Bernie's 1w9 and Hillary's 1w2. Bernie's more above the people-pleasing politics that might be a result of Hillary's 2-wing. Bernie's also more abstract in his vision for change than Hillary. I would agree that Bernie has more integrity than Hillary, but I don't think that makes them different types.


It's interesting that you bring it up. I've often seen people assigning the wings opposite to what you wrote (Hillary 1w9 and Bernie 1w2). 

I just don't see type 1 period. A 2-wing without the 1 would just make it 3w2 or 8 with a connection to 2. I'm getting some sense of 9 lately. Throw that in and you get 8w9 or 3 with a connection to 9 (or even back to 1w9 for those seeing 1). 

IMO, the wings don't add any clarity. Strangely enough, the types being discussed (1, 3, 8) can include either wing equally well.


----------



## Quernus (Dec 8, 2011)

DAPHNE LXIV said:


> Implying someone is MORE moral =/= stating someone CARES about morality more than most.
> 
> No, her lying on camera was an example of something a three would do. I gave it as evidence for her being a three, and not that 1s wouldn't lie - you are twisting what I have said to fit an argument I did not give.


Not on purpose. I may have misunderstood, but it just seemed like you were like "Uhh how is she a one, I thought ones care about moral things, but she did blabalaba". Either way.





> Hillary only wants power for power's sake, not the bold.


You might be right, but you haven't stated why.



> That is most definitely NOT her motivation.


Maybe not but I am just saying there are different potential motivations for gaining power, and it can look different by type.



> She does NOT think she is best for the job, she clearly says it all the time when her only reason that people should vote for her is that if they don't, Trump will get in.


...obviously. That's her best argument. No one would elect her if she had basically any other opponent. It's a very good political move to continue reminding people that Trump is scary as hell.



> Never even mentioned that so I don't know why you are bringing it up, unless it's your own sidenote to your own argument.


Yes I was.


> What are you talking about, she only gets what she wants in private because she screams at people and bullies them into submission. Or if not that, she will threaten them or bribe them.


Yes, just as a secretary of state does. She also has made so many paid speeches (paid by special interests), the transcripts of which are rarely released. My point is that she doesn't get her way by being charming, publicly (which a three generally does - or at least they have some idea of what people want to hear). She has not climbed to power by being like... her husband, a 3, who makes people think he is a good guy when he's a trash r*pist etc.



> Threes who are conceited cannot act socially graceful no matter how hard they try.


Hmm, I don't agree. Though I have definitely seen pathological/Narcissistic threes try this and fail, that is true.



> Anyway I'm bored of this now, I won't change my opinion and you won't change yours. So this is done for me.


I could change mine, but not by the arguments you're making. Perhaps someone else will convince me. There wasn't even a particular type for her that jumped out at me initially... and it's weird, because even if I'm ultimately wrong about someone, I usually get a gut feeling at first. The only gut feeling I get about her is "lizard person". I don't know why you are acting annoyed as this thread is made for discussing her type.


----------



## DAPHNE XO (Jan 16, 2012)

Quernus said:


> Not on purpose. I may have misunderstood, but it just seemed like you were like "Uhh how is she a one, I thought ones care about moral things, but she did blabalaba". Either way.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You say she doesn't know how to tell people what they want to hear because she's too repressed or whatever, you also say she doesn't know how to get what she wants by charming people. You then say in a previous post that she is not consistent, "*I think she fixates on the family/children thing because she can play to that as a ~female politician~ ... **it fits with her societal expectations and gets her the female vote. In reality she is as exploitative as any politician, and she certainly doesn't care much for families who aren't white and middle class. She's a protector of those who cant help themselves?*"

Your post is jarring and you move goal posts, just to pretend you don't know what you are doing :bored: .

I'm done, honestly. Your opinion is irrelevant to me, and I don't really care enough to change it either.


----------



## Quernus (Dec 8, 2011)

DAPHNE LXIV said:


> You say she doesn't know how to tell people what they want to hear because she's too repressed or whatever, you also say she doesn't know how to get what she wants by charming people. You then say in a previous post that she is not consistent, "*I think she fixates on the family/children thing because she can play to that as a ~female politician~ ... **it fits with her societal expectations and gets her the female vote. In reality she is as exploitative as any politician, and she certainly doesn't care much for families who aren't white and middle class. She's a protector of those who cant help themselves?*"
> 
> Your post is jarring and you move goal posts, just to pretend you don't know what you are doing :bored: .
> 
> I'm done, honestly. Your opinion is irrelevant to me, and I don't really care enough to change it either.


:shocked::shocked::shocked::shocked::shocked::wink:

No, I have a VERY STRONG opinion on Clinton as a person and a politician, which I will defend fiercely. I do not, however, have a strong grasp on what I think her enneagram type is. Nor do I really care that much, aside from the puzzle aspect. And I don't think the things you quoted from my two different posts are inconsistent with one another at all. She flips about on all kinds of topics. She remains "consistent" in theory by pretending to stand up for women, but her actual policies say otherwise. And that's only one arena of politics.

Anyway.


----------



## enneathusiast (Dec 15, 2012)

I'm leaning very strongly towards 6w5 for Hillary. 6w5 has elements of both types 1 and 8 with a connection to 3. It's the only type that fits in a consistent way.

6w5 can be 1-like in an awareness of how things should be done but type 1 holds an internalized and more enduring sense of what that is (e.g., Bernie Sanders has held many of the same values since he first started out in politics decades ago). 6w5 is more respondent to what the environment and collective are saying about that, creating more of a compensating and ongoing shift to things. 

6w5 can also be 8-like at times but not as steady and consistent in their assertiveness. 6w5 seems more like it gets triggered as a response to things rather than a persistent and direct push against what's in the way.

The type 3 seems to come out in the political campaigning and such but feels awkward and unnatural for her. It's too much of an effort to be her dominant type.


----------



## O_o (Oct 22, 2011)

She seems SP 3 to me. 


> It can be hard for a Self-Preservation Three to be recognized as a Three. They may be easily confused with Ones or Sixes. This Three looks like a One in that the type is rigid, responsible, and self-sufficient. These Threes, like Ones, try to be a model of virtue in the things they do. The can be distinguished from Ones in that they move at a faster pace, pay attention to creating an image (even when they don't acknowledge it), and conform to a perfect model of how to be as judged by social consensus, not according to internal standards of right and wrong (as Ones do). They differ from Sixes in that they are fundamentally image-oriented and work harder in response to insecurity, while Sixes find protection in other ways. And while Threes may question their sense of identity, they generally don't allow their productive to get slowed down by too much doubt or questioning.


Bernie seems like an obvious gut type to me. Competency triad, so 1. 
* *




mind you that I'm also hella bias because his argument style is incredibly relatable to me






Other option after that _maybe_ SO 8... but eh


----------



## Stellafera (Jan 19, 2015)

O_o said:


> mind you that I'm also hella bias because [Bernie Sanders'] argument style is incredibly relatable to me


I don't have an opinion on Hillary's type (although I do lean 3ish), but this actually turned me off on Bernie a bit, lol. I say "WOAH there please hedge your statements a little more...". 

Hm, come to think of it, Obama might be a 6w5. His speaking style in interviews feels very familiar and persuasive because it's similar to how I would phrase things, if not always with the same opinions. The complaints that he was too cold always baffled me for this reason.


----------



## Trent James (Jun 19, 2016)

I tend to agree with o0india0o. Hillary 1w9, Bernie 1w2.

I wrote a blog post on both of them doing the Type 1 'finger wagging'. And another blog post extensively looking at Hillary's Type 1 patterns. 

I'd post the links, but I'm not quite legit yet on PC.... soon.


----------



## Mad Scientist (Jul 31, 2016)

I don't know mainly, because she still is a politician so how do we know this the real her. A 1,3,4,7,8 all could fake a role so well to accomplish something. I hope she's not a 1, because I don't want to be seen as the same type with her at all... Liars don't deserved to be typed &#55357;&#56861;


----------



## d e c a d e n t (Apr 21, 2013)

Mad Scientist said:


> Liars don't deserved to be typed &#55357;&#56861;


But then most people would be untypeable.


----------



## Mad Scientist (Jul 31, 2016)

Distortions said:


> But then most people would be untypeable.


Correction: people that lie and it affects our country's security don't deserved to typed, narrows down to the politicians.  Hope people aren't lying to themselves as they type though...


----------

