| hillary clinton |
| intj, 5w6 social, coa!en |
| no preference | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| e | i | |||||||||
| n | s | |||||||||
| f | t | |||||||||
| p | j |
| Hillary can't really be anything but an INTJ and I would guess she's most likely a 5w6, even though I've considered 3w2 in the past. I think she's direct, pragmatic, realistic, and a go-getter, but in no way does she show off those traits in a way that would suggest she's an extraverted sensor. Hillary is an academic at heart and awkwardly shapes herself to suit the character who she needs to be to win the presidential election: the to-be first female president of the United States. But I don't really even think she's a 3 (she'd be wing 2 if she were, not wing 4) and feel like it's more "situational" for her than it is ingrained in her personality. Being a politician, Hillary knows how to act and plays a safe campaign because she is aware of how politics work and how nominees are elected; you may look at this as "Si" but this is exactly where function theory and types begin to disconnect from one another. Hillary is a very strong judger: she's disciplined, she knows the rules, and she looks at the world in a way that is "set" with conventions and the status-quo triumphing over new and radical ideas, but sensing would only come into play if she truly had a lack of consideration for such ideas and avoided them because of their intrinsic sense of absurdity rather than, perhaps, her looking at these ideas and deprioritizing them because she doesn't believe they'll be accepted by the world around her, something I'm inclined to believe she's more like. Hillary is a pragmatist but there's no reason to believe she's naturally oriented toward pragmatism in a way that "sensing" would necessarily behest rather than her just being logical, practical and aware of social boundaries like a introverted, thinking judger would be. Where I think sensors are naturally oriented toward realism and see stretching out into the ideational side of things second, intuitives see orient themselves toward ideas and think of pragmatism as a secondary trait, something I see Hillary having an easier time doing being both strongly "thinking" and "judging." "I am not a natural politician, in case you haven't noticed, like my husband or President Obama." Interpret it how you will, but I will assume she's being honest because she has demonstrated signs of discomfort as a politician to the point where I would even say she's not really made to be on stage--where other politicians live and own it, Hillary is a step removed from her audience and doesn't connect with them in a way which would suggest she's inherently oriented towards the outer world. Have you ever noticed her natural gawkiness when public speaking? I see her as a cerebral, reticent, rehearsed, and even reserved personality forced onto the stage by her own drive and volition, and she therefore lacks a politician's charisma. There are people out there who relish, live and learn about the world through engaging with it and being a part of it; this is something Hillary is certainly not. She's bookish and internal, showing off herself to the world in a restricted fashion she puts herself into both as a consequence of the field she is working in and as a consequence of her personality. I think with her being introverted (and judging), this is something that comes to her more naturally than her competitors and makes her able to cope with her sphere's demand for being "perfect." Hillary Clinton really strikes me as an introverted intuitive ruled by her thinking and judging side to act in a way which would make her fit in the world of politics with the image of being a character resembling an "extraverted sensor." I don't think she's particularly image-oriented at all but does have a strong sense of knowing what's right (which isn't overpowered by her detached, academic and information-gathering side -- yes, I think she without a doubt has this when you consider how she's built up her image). |