A female president??

[Rank Amateur]

Of course women can, should, and one day will be President. Off hand I can''t think of one I like. The real shame is that there''s been a leveling off of women in the highest levels of office. It''s mostly 50-something career politician white guys at the top.

Maybe we''ll get a young woman Prez who wants 12 weeks off under the FLMA while she has a baby.

 

[luckystar112]

Date: 11/23/2007 8:20:47 PM
Author: CrookedRock

I just always felt that that the women in this forum are strong intelligent women, and to hear some say that they would never vote for a woman saddens me.

I hope that you still consider those that don''t agree with you strong and intelligent...
I mean, I really hope I''m reading that wrong!

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Ever? Not sure about that, but not this time. It really would depend on who it was and who else was running. I''m having trouble even picking one of the men, thus far, for the next election.

I do think there are certain things women are better at and some things men are better at. Sorry if that is not PC.

 

[CrookedRock]

Date: 11/23/2007 10:26:32 PM
Author: luckystar112

Date: 11/23/2007 8:20:47 PM
Author: CrookedRock

I just always felt that that the women in this forum are strong intelligent women, and to hear some say that they would never vote for a woman saddens me.

I hope that you still consider those that don''t agree with you strong and intelligent...
I mean, I really hope I''m reading that wrong!

You did read it right... Never said I didn''t view them as strong and inteligent, I said the opposite. I do view them as that. But yes it is sad to me to hear that women would not support another woman if she was best qualified for the job, just because she is a Woman! Must be a grenerational thing... It sounds a little old-fashioned to me. As I am entilted to my opinion, so are they... Thought that''s what this thread was all about.

 

[MoonWater]

I don''t think anyone should ever vote for anyone based on something such as gender. That''s just...silly. So no, just because it''s a woman, I would not vote.

One of my law professors stated that she believed a black man would have to be president before a woman could be. I''m inclined to agree with her from a historic prospective. Black men earned their full rights as citizens in this country even before white women did. It seems to be the way this nation progresses. Men first.

 

[luckystar112]

Date: 11/24/2007 8:33:38 AM
Author: CrookedRock

Date: 11/23/2007 10:26:32 PM
Author: luckystar112

Date: 11/23/2007 8:20:47 PM
Author: CrookedRock

I just always felt that that the women in this forum are strong intelligent women, and to hear some say that they would never vote for a woman saddens me.

I hope that you still consider those that don''t agree with you strong and intelligent...
I mean, I really hope I''m reading that wrong!

You did read it right... Never said I didn''t view them as strong and inteligent, I said the opposite. I do view them as that. But yes it is sad to me to hear that women would not support another woman if she was best qualified for the job, just because she is a Woman! Must be a grenerational thing... It sounds a little old-fashioned to me. As I am entilted to my opinion, so are they... Thought that''s what this thread was all about.

I never said you weren''t entitled to your opinion....I don''t know where you got that from?

As for your original comment, I read it as you saying that those who wouldn''t vote for a female president were no longer strong and intelligent in your eyes. In other words, I read between the lines. But you clarified, and all is well. Now, get that opinion on!

 

[Skippy123]

Date: 11/24/2007 8:33:38 AM
Author: CrookedRock

Date: 11/23/2007 10:26:32 PM
Author: luckystar112

Date: 11/23/2007 8:20:47 PM
Author: CrookedRock

I just always felt that that the women in this forum are strong intelligent women, and to hear some say that they would never vote for a woman saddens me.

I hope that you still consider those that don't agree with you strong and intelligent...
I mean, I really hope I'm reading that wrong!

You did read it right... Never said I didn't view them as strong and inteligent, I said the opposite. I do view them as that. But yes it is sad to me to hear that women would not support another woman if she was best qualified for the job, just because she is a Woman! Must be a grenerational thing... It sounds a little old-fashioned to me. As I am entilted to my opinion, so are they... Thought that's what this thread was all about.

It was what the OP wanted (not based on this election) just in general, that's how I read it. I agree w/you CrookedRock that a persons sex should not matter; it should be about qualifications but I guess some people do not see it that way.

 

[CrookedRock]

Thanks Skippy! I was starting to think I was standing alone! (Not that I can''t hold my own!

)

 

[Selkie]

Date: 11/24/2007 7:10:42 PM
Author: CrookedRock
Thanks Skippy! I was starting to think I was standing alone! (Not that I can''t hold my own!

)

You''re not alone at all. I felt like checking the calendar to see what century it was when I first saw the title of the thread. When I read Samantha''s question I realized it was a pretty thoughtful query, and not the simple topic I assumed at first. I played with a lot of responses, both snarky and serious, and almost didn''t write anything at all, but decided I felt too strongly not to. And I do think ALL the women that have responded, whether or not I agree with them, are intelligent and articulate and strong, just from all the other posts I''ve read by them. It does interest me to ask why we disagree. Hilary Clinton is SO polarizing, is it the fact that she is a current Dem frontrunner coloring all of our responses even though Samantha wasn''t asking about her, specifically?

If there was a QUALIFIED and viable Republican female candidate, would conservative women be inclined to vote for her?

I think that any woman who runs for the Presidency is going to have to be tough as nails, because the attacks she will face from the opposition will make the mudslinging attacks that Kerry and McCain experienced look like a game of Patty-cake.

 

[hlmr]

I didn't open this thread until now because I assumed it was about Hillary, and I assumed wrong.

I would like to see only the 'best' people performing in the roles of firefighters, police officers and most especiallly, leaders of countries. I don't make any snap decisions about anyone based on gender, ever! Granted, there are a lot of men and women out there in roles that they do not deserve to be in. Do I want someone that is big and strong enough to rescue me from a burning building? Of course I do. BUT, it is more important that the same person have the intelligence to figure out how to best get me out of that building, when brute strength alone won't be enough to save me.

My sister graduated at the top of her class in the police academy, and is smarter, fitter and much more in tune with people than many that she works with, both men and women. So I guess she is one of the top guns in policing, albeit a woman. Many of her peers (men included) have the upmost respect for her abilities (including physical) and her ability to work with all types of personalities.

My opinion is that to discount anyone based on gender alone really doesn't look at the big picture.

I have a lot of respect for many of the world's past and present female leaders, but in an election, I would always vote for the best person for the job, regardless of gender.

 

[zoebartlett]

Date: 11/24/2007 9:50:13 PM
Author: Selkie

Date: 11/24/2007 7:10:42 PM
Author: CrookedRock
Thanks Skippy! I was starting to think I was standing alone! (Not that I can''t hold my own!

)

You''re not alone at all. I felt like checking the calendar to see what century it was when I first saw the title of the thread. When I read Samantha''s question I realized it was a pretty thoughtful query, and not the simple topic I assumed at first. I played with a lot of responses, both snarky and serious, and almost didn''t write anything at all, but decided I felt too strongly not to. And I do think ALL the women that have responded, whether or not I agree with them, are intelligent and articulate and strong, just from all the other posts I''ve read by them. It does interest me to ask why we disagree. Hilary Clinton is SO polarizing, is it the fact that she is a current Dem frontrunner coloring all of our responses even though Samantha wasn''t asking about her, specifically?

If there was a QUALIFIED and viable Republican female candidate, would conservative women be inclined to vote for her?

I think that any woman who runs for the Presidency is going to have to be tough as nails, because the attacks she will face from the opposition will make the mudslinging attacks that Kerry and McCain experienced look like a game of Patty-cake.

Well said. Margaret Thatcher was tough as nails, to paraphrase Samantha. I''m not sure we have a woman in the political arena who resembles Margaret Thatcher in that respect. Condoleeza Rice, Hilary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi, Christine Todd Whitman...those are the only ones who I can think of who are major political figures, in one way or another.

 

[Rank Amateur]

Date: 11/24/2007 11:01:37 PM
Author: zoebartlett

Well said. Margaret Thatcher was tough as nails, to paraphrase Samantha. I''m not sure we have a woman in the political arena who resembles Margaret Thatcher in that respect. Condoleeza Rice, Hilary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi, Christine Todd Whitman...those are the only ones who I can think of who are major political figures, in one way or another.

Elizabeth Dole was the closest we ever had to Thatcher. She would have made a better President than her husband.

 

[movie zombie]

i am disappointed that this country has not yet had a woman president.

it was my dream that barbara jordan of texas would have had the honor.

movie zombie

ps ms hillary won''t get my vote because of her politic and neither would condi, christi, or nancy for that matter. i''ve also worked for male vp''s that i''ve seen cry......

 

[HollyS]

Date: 11/23/2007 8:32:25 PM
Author: Rank Amateur
Of course women can, should, and one day will be President. Off hand I can''t think of one I like. The real shame is that there''s been a leveling off of women in the highest levels of office. It''s mostly 50-something career politician white guys at the top.

Maybe we''ll get a young woman Prez who wants 12 weeks off under the FLMA while she has a baby.

Well, that would make the male establishment have a bit of a hissy, wouldn''t it?

 

[HollyS]

Date: 11/24/2007 10:22:44 AM
Author: MoonWater
I don''t think anyone should ever vote for anyone based on something such as gender. That''s just...silly. So no, just because it''s a woman, I would not vote.

One of my law professors stated that she believed a black man would have to be president before a woman could be. I''m inclined to agree with her from a historic prospective. Black men earned their full rights as citizens in this country even before white women did. It seems to be the way this nation progresses. Men first.

I think this country would be well served if we elected a very smart, middle-of-the-road, African-American male. And I mean someone who is not too left or right of center, because that''s where the majority of Americans are politically.

 

[Circe]

Er ... are you refering to Obama specifically, or simply to a candidate possessing those characteristics? If it''s the latter, could you say a bit more about why you feel this to be the case?

 

[Samantha Red]

Date: 11/24/2007 9:50:13 PM
Author: Selkie

Date: 11/24/2007 7:10:42 PM
Author: CrookedRock
Thanks Skippy! I was starting to think I was standing alone! (Not that I can''t hold my own!

)

You''re not alone at all. I felt like checking the calendar to see what century it was when I first saw the title of the thread. When I read Samantha''s question I realized it was a pretty thoughtful query, and not the simple topic I assumed at first. I played with a lot of responses, both snarky and serious, and almost didn''t write anything at all, but decided I felt too strongly not to. And I do think ALL the women that have responded, whether or not I agree with them, are intelligent and articulate and strong, just from all the other posts I''ve read by them. It does interest me to ask why we disagree. Hilary Clinton is SO polarizing, is it the fact that she is a current Dem frontrunner coloring all of our responses even though Samantha wasn''t asking about her, specifically?

If there was a QUALIFIED and viable Republican female candidate, would conservative women be inclined to vote for her?

I think that any woman who runs for the Presidency is going to have to be tough as nails, because the attacks she will face from the opposition will make the mudslinging attacks that Kerry and McCain experienced look like a game of Patty-cake.

Thank you Selkie. As you have pointed out I deliberately did not say ''what if Hilary Clinton'' was president? I was interested in the views of the people of the most free nation of the world. Personally, provided they are qualified, I think women are fantastic in any sphere. To me the point is, equally qualified people should have an equal chance at anything. Maggie Thatcher was amazing, whether you agreed with her politics or not. She stood at her party conference and addressed her party a matter of hours after the IRA had bombed her hotel and killed friends and colleagues.

Significantly I think we all should be grateful that we live in countries where we feel free to hold and share our views

Thank you all for your contributions, it has provided truly fascinating reading

 

[HollyS]

Date: 11/27/2007 2:53:31 AM
Author: Circe
Er ... are you refering to Obama specifically, or simply to a candidate possessing those characteristics? If it''s the latter, could you say a bit more about why you feel this to be the case?

Nope. Not Obama. Just not feeling it with him.

This future first AA may have to be Republican in order to have a broader appeal.

 

[strmrdr]

Lady president?
Sure why not too bad there isnt one running.
Now there have been some classy first Ladies recently, Nancy and Barbara come too mind and by all accounts Laura is nice.
But Hillary and Tipper sure aren't.

 

[movie zombie]

no, not a lady president but a woman president...... being a gentleman has never been a criteria for being president and our current white house resident certainly doesn''t qualify as a gentleman: a gentleman does not lay hands on a female unasked for and in public, expecially if that woman is a german female head of state. if we insist that the female be a lady, then we must insist that the male be a gentleman.

movie zombie

ps while i certainly didn''t like tipper for her anti free speech stance re music, i''m not charmed by any of the women you''ve mentioned. each to their own as the saying goes. my reasons for not supporting hillary have nothing to do with her gender, whether she''s a lady or a woman, or whether she throws things: its her politics.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 11/30/2007 1:05:05 PM
Author: movie zombie
if we insist that the female be a lady, then we must insist that the male be a gentleman.

as well we should on both counts.

 

[surfgirl]

Date: 11/29/2007 11:38:18 PM
Author: strmrdr
Lady president?

Sure why not too bad there isnt one running.

Now there have been some classy first Ladies recently, Nancy and Barbara come too mind and by all accounts Laura is nice.

But Hillary and Tipper sure aren't.

I'd rather have a tough, intelligent, free thinking woman as a President any day. "Classy" doesn't equal "Presidential" for me.

 

[chrono]

How strange is it that even muslim countries have no problems with females leaders (Pakistan and Indonesia) whereas the USA still hasn''t had a female president.

I would vote for any capable candidate; I do not vote based on gender, race, age, yadda yadda yadda.

 

[HollyS]

Date: 12/13/2007 1:24:10 PM
Author: Chrono
How strange is it that even muslim countries have no problems with females leaders (Pakistan and Indonesia) whereas the USA still hasn''t had a female president.

I would vote for any capable candidate; I do not vote based on gender, race, age, yadda yadda yadda.

Our whole culture is about the traditional roles of men and women. That''s why people like myself, who didn''t marry young, endure years and years of questions like "why aren''t you married yet", "why don''t you have children", "why did you wait so long to marry", "when are you going to get married", and countless variations thereof. I''ve actually had a few questions like "you''re going to try right away to have children now, right?" (Uh no, not at 48.)

We think we''re sophisticated; a feminist culture; we''re not. We had about a decade of progress (the 70''s) and then we were right back into the whole marriage and mommy culture by the eighties. (That''s when Martha became Queen of Homemaking.) Let me make myself clear -- there is nothing wrong with being married and having children -- but it does not, and should not, by itself, define your role in this country as a woman.

And until we all, Republicans or Democrats or Independants, determine that being "nice" is not a requirement for either a man or a woman running for high office, but principals and character, as well as big brass you-know-whats are, there will be a parade of subpar nitwits in our Oval Office; never mind their gender.