It remains an interesting question: did Hillary's emotional moment swing everything her way in New Hampshire? Germaine Greer thinks that even if it did, that's not a good thing.
I'm not sure. It sure got John Edwards all fired up and sexist, which itself has been revealing in a contest which is refreshingly opening up all sorts of deep rooted questions about race and gender in the US. Thatcher became Prime Minister nigh effortlessly nearly three decades ago, yet Hillary still gets heckled by people demanding she iron their shirts? As Bill Clinton said - give me a break! Does that mean though that she used a soft option to get what she wanted, or was it a rare demonstration of humanity in someone often accused of having none, who's trying to supplant a president who couldn't even spell the word? There don't seem to be any definitive answers to any of these questions in this contest, which itself I find interesting.
A lecturer of mine once described us as being in a post-modern age of claim and counter claim - there were no more unifying truths. I would be inclined to agree. That can yet come back to bite her or Obama on the ass.