Is America ready for a female President?

Female USA president: "Do you think I'm fat?"

response from other country: "Not really?"

Female USA president: "So you DO think I am fat!"

Female USA president: "I believe you have some WMD laying around in your country!"
 
Yet another thread totally ruined by the racist lunatic formerly known as cierdan. I was hoping for some insights in reading through this thread. Did I get many past the 3rd or 4th page? :shakehead There should come a time when you folks should just ignore such rubbish for the sake of decent discussion. It's like visiting a funny farm reading through this.
 
MobBoss said:
By your wink I think you know what I meant. No woman has ever been the frontrunner of either the Republicans or the Democrats. Third party losers need not apply.

Elizabeth Dole would have stood a very strong chance of getting the Republican nomination in 2000 had she not decided (for personal reasons) to drop out of the race.
 
That was cierdan? He wasn't usually so obvious under his former name.

Anyway, I think a good proportion of the country is ready for a female president, and even a small few so over-ready that they'd vote for anyone female who's not actually wearing devil's horns. There is also that "never, no way, I'd die first" minority to consider, though, and I don't think either party has enough of a monopoly on those sorts that the other would have an easy run with a female candidate.
 
MobBoss said:
I dont think the US is ready for a female president. Remember, we havent even had one run for the office yet, much less win. And I dont think we will elect one the very first time one runs either, so tuff for Hillery, if she runs.

didnt mondale have a female running mate? Or maybe it was Dukakis. I get them mixed up...so similar and bland
 
MattBrown said:
didnt mondale have a female running mate? Or maybe it was Dukakis. I get them mixed up...so similar and bland

Mondale. Geraldine Ferraro was his running mate.
 
wit>trope said:
He never AFAIK claimed to have had any supernatural vision.

It's not like visions must be supernatural, y'know.
 
Of course, this may seem totally unrealistic, it's just to throw it in there..

There's always this talk of how a person has to appeal to so and so voters because it's like a cake to slice, and if you step on the toes on too many in the middle you don't stand a chance. But in the US the percentage of people actually voting is extremely low, there's an enormous amount of potential votes out there that no one is even fighting over because they're considered impossible to reach.

Perhaps with some adjustments to the system more people could be encouraged to vote, which may open up new possibilities for who can run.
 
ironduck said:
Of course, this may seem totally unrealistic, it's just to throw it in there..

There's always this talk of how a person has to appeal to so and so voters because it's like a cake to slice, and if you step on the toes on too many in the middle you don't stand a chance. But in the US the percentage of people actually voting is extremely low, there's an enormous amount of potential votes out there that no one is even fighting over because they're considered impossible to reach.

Perhaps with some adjustments to the system more people could be encouraged to vote, which may open up new possibilities for who can run.

Define extremely low. The 2004 election had just under a 60% turnout rate. While I agree that there is potential for the other 40% to get out and vote, there is not much history behind it to suggest it would ever happen. National elections seem to hover between the 50% to 60% mark historically, so, in order for that to change, some type of history changing event will likely have to take place.
 
Renata said:
That was cierdan? He wasn't usually so obvious under his former name.
It was in his signature, and the posting style is the same anyway.

Anyway, I think a good proportion of the country is ready for a female president, and even a small few so over-ready that they'd vote for anyone female who's not actually wearing devil's horns. There is also that "never, no way, I'd die first" minority to consider, though, and I don't think either party has enough of a monopoly on those sorts that the other would have an easy run with a female candidate.
I think so as well. Though I'm still worried about the media effect. We do seem to have a lot of sheep out there.
 
ironduck said:
Of course, this may seem totally unrealistic, it's just to throw it in there..

There's always this talk of how a person has to appeal to so and so voters because it's like a cake to slice, and if you step on the toes on too many in the middle you don't stand a chance. But in the US the percentage of people actually voting is extremely low, there's an enormous amount of potential votes out there that no one is even fighting over because they're considered impossible to reach.

Perhaps with some adjustments to the system more people could be encouraged to vote, which may open up new possibilities for who can run.
There were "get out the vote" campaigns in 2004. It increased turnout...but not as much as you or I would hope.
 
Apparently, Hillary's made some noise with comments that the House of Representatives is run like a "plantation." The good thing for her is that this is 2006 and not late 2007.

Which makes me wonder...in this environment...will a woman be elected if the electorate is this divided? If Hillary is as divisive as she is and Rice, if she turns out to be just as divisive? Or will it take someone that will be able to capture numerous votes from the other side? Would she even be able to make it through the primaries and caucuses the way things are today?

I mean...a lot of people love McCain...but it's not certain that he would get through the Republican primaries.
 
The Yankee said:
I mean...a lot of people love McCain...but it's not certain that he would get through the Republican primaries.

If by "not certain" you mean "completely impossible"...

Will a woman be elected? Maybe. Hillary Clinton would have a chance to pull it off. However, she is very divisive, and is the only woman likely to run any time soon.
 
Cuivienen said:
If by "not certain" you mean "completely impossible"...

Will a woman be elected? Maybe. Hillary Clinton would have a chance to pull it off. However, she is very divisive, and is the only woman likely to run any time soon.
If she does, that would confirm her as one of the best politicians in our history*. If she does, and the republicans still control both houses, I forsee a repeat of the Clinton 1 administration.

EDIT: *(or that she is very very lucky)
 
Kayak said:
If she does, that would confirm her as one of the best politicians in our history*. If she does, and the republicans still control both houses, I forsee a repeat of the Clinton 1 administration.

EDIT: *(or that she is very very lucky)

Good at playing politics, anyway. Or is that what you mean?
 
Cuivienen said:
Good at playing politics, anyway. Or is that what you mean?
Thats what I mean. And I would be way impressed. I also might have to vote for her just to see how :mad: some people can get.
 
ironduck said:
Why can't McCain get through the primaries?
Too many further right-wingers that see McCain's independence as some kind of threat.
 
Cuivienen said:
If by "not certain" you mean "completely impossible"...

Will a woman be elected? Maybe. Hillary Clinton would have a chance to pull it off. However, she is very divisive, and is the only woman likely to run any time soon.
Her advantage is that there is probably just as many that would automatically vote for her than vote against her.

Her more immediate problem would be the primaries, if there is a strong opponent.
 
Cuivienen said:
Good at playing politics, anyway. Or is that what you mean?
She's excellent at politics. She's been more of a consenus builder in the Senate than anyone would have guessed. And she's managed to avoid angering too many people further to the left as of yet.
 
Top Bottom