“For cryin’ out loud!” screamed the NY Post headline after Hillary Clinton's second stab at emotional high drama.

The Democratic hopeful’s teary moment at a child care centre in Connecticut left some sceptics distinctly unmoved, whatever the reason behind her eye-moistening performance.

The Post claimed it was “another two-hanky day on the campaign trail” for Mrs Clinton, who first showed her softer side last month when she burst into tears during a discussion about what drove her to fight for the presidency. That was widely believed to have endeared her to female voters, and as a result helped her to win the New Hampshire primary.

"Whenever [Barack] Obama picks up steam, she seems to open up the waterworks," one ‘Democratic operative’ told the NY Post.

Margery Eagan, the Boston Herald columnist wrote: “The first time I bought it, now I’m suspicious … are we looking at the first candidate in our history to weep her way to the White House?”

Times online readers were divided on the matter.

“Americans in general are cryers (sic) even the men. I see nothing wrong in it,“ wrote Doone, from New Orleans.

“Show me a male candidate with the courage to cry when he feels like it, and I would vote for him. If I had performed like President Bush, I'd be crying like a baby. Every day,” wrote Ron Goodman of Brisbane, Australia.

However the tears didn’t win over Stacy from Atlanta, Georgia, who wrote:

“Give me a break. I don't want a sappy president. What if Obama cried? How would that be looked upon. Hillary is a fake, and this is just her strategy to try to make people sympathize with her."

Times Recommends

• UN may halt 400-year-old 'freedom of the seas'
• Where the Rosetta belongs can’t be set in stone
• Gas deal on hold, but Ukraine may pay in the end