Would you want a woman president after obama. and why yes or no.
If she looks like you - hell yeah! LOL
Okay seriously, it depends on the platform for which she takes a stance. I'm not a fan of Sarah Palin, so she certainly wouldn't be one to get my vote. That is not to say that every female politician is to be judged by my judgment of her. Would I "want" a woman president, is asking me to choose her because she's a woman. Would I accept a female as president, is the more appropriate question to which I say a resounding yes. Again, solely based on her political platform...I'm sure you'd want it no other way.
I'm not from America but I think Hilary would possibly make a good one as she is very much "in the know" - Just one Term.
We've had Margaret Thatcher, so its about time you had a Lady up there.
sure! anyone who is qualified and a strong leader...gender would not be a factor at all.
Maybe it's time to have one to know the difference between a woman and a man president.
Misha, I can't keep up with your changing avatars. I like this one better than yesterday's, very nice.
yes, why not, but i think being president is not easy task. why in the fist days of the nation a commander-in-chief would go in front of battles like George Washington. Would women be interested in a job like that?
Iam a woman maybe as a woman not George the man, in those times never even go to battle. Iam defiantly stooping all killing from happening,except killing chickens and beef iam not that nice. Iam saying, i think a little different from a man with no agenda. I know that. I want love and compassion to be the future of our kids not wars.
Oh, gee, I don't know. Aren't there any women in the military?
I'm Canadian but I say, "Yes!"
My friends and I have said for years that a woman should be running the country (ours). It was said tongue-in-cheek but I think it would be very interesting to note whether or not there is a discernible difference between male and female leadership. The right woman could lead any country.
Just my opinion.
exactly, i don't think men would mind do you lol?
Ummm, no. No, of course not. Men would go along with it, I'm sure. Uh-huh.
Shirley, even though your Canadian you can still vote!
Just contact an Acorn representitive, they'll set ya right up!...lol
Will she show her toes?
New Zealands Prime Minister was a woman and she led the country for 8 yrs...
Dont think the USA is ready to let a woman be President (yet)
not yet after obama. Its interesting his name reminds me of someone. Women always were ready but no chance, see till now. soon. love all.
I liked her. I thought she was smart and decent.
to all women: Do you think Peace or War. Would you forever try to stop war, or is war apart of life. Whats your view on the whole women president. Do you think it can be different with a woman.
Women rule! I mean why not? We already had 2 here (with varying results, not really positive at that). I'm sure the US has more women leaders who are much, much better and have more experience in governance than our lady presidents.
Ey Misha, do you have a closer shot? We all like this one but I like the close-up pic of yours more .
I think most normal people want peace and would do whatever they could to promote it. Still, it is the President's job to make sure the Nation is defended; so, woman or not, there would be the reality of the possibility that unwanted war might be necessary.
There are realities to the Presidency; and any woman or man worthy of that particular office needs to leave his/her gender at the door and function as a responsible, capable, leader. I don't think war HAS TO be a part of life; but as long as it is, a capable, responsible, woman President is not going to be able to guarantee peace. In fact, if you think of how mother cats and other animals react when anyone tries to do anything to their new babies, it is clear that women - sometimes more than men - are more than ready to defend what they treasure.
Well will just have to wait and see when a 1st woman steps up the game, Do you agree than men and woman think differently but agree on a lot. Wouldn't you expect a woman to be a little different at her tactics compared to a man not saying better or worse.
I don't think how a person thinks necessarily depends on what sex they are. The reason I think that is because I read the famous, "Men Are From Mars, Women Are From Venus" book; as well as other books; that neatly categorize (so the authors believe) how women think and how men think. What made me seriously doubt the validity of such things, however, was that most of my own thinking traits fell under the "men's" category. My husband's, on the other hand, often fell under the "women's" category. Also, besides the men and women I know well in my life, I have two sons and a daughter; and they don't neatly fit into any categories either.
It's probably not for me to second-guess any science that says women and men often reach similar conclusions through different mental processes; but I think it's pretty safe to say that, regardless of a person's sex; a well adjusted, intelligent, mature, individual may think similarly with another well adjusted, intelligent, mature, individual of the other sex (that is, at least, on the important, larger, issues).
This is odd...but also proof of what you are saying, Livelonger. You really have made no reference until now if you were male or female (that I'd noticed), but I thought you WERE a man given the voice and diction that comes through in your writing. But I also, lol, thought you might be gay.
Funny! And how fitting with your analysis of Men are From Mars, Women Are From Venus (I even hate the title).
I think there may have been cross-looking at screen names, so I'm not really sure if you meant me (Lisa HW) or Livelonger in your remarks. In case you did mean me, in the past people have often commented that they couldn't figure out if I am a man or a woman (from some of my writing). I'm a woman, and I'm pretty much a feminine-looking/sounding one. I don't happen to be gay. In spite of the fact that my kids' father, in many ways, fell under "from Venus" category, he's a pretty masculine guy. Based on just the people I know, I think a lot of how anyone thinks is related to whether he has had two loving parents to whom he was equally close and whom he equally admired and/or emulated.
Having said all that, though, I really believe that even if I had the qualifications and experience to run for US President it would be unlikely I'd be elected, because so many people still believe that women and men "are from Venus and Mars".
Oh, Lisa! No. To me you have always come across as a woman, and a feminine one...not that THAT has anything to do with the assumptions in Venus/Mars, either. And anyway, I remember that conversation we had about clothes and your daughter, etc.
I don't know why I thought that was Livelonger's comment.... So maybe he is a guy and is gay? lol haha, or maybe not.
I think a woman would do a great job as POTUS! She couldn't be any worse than some of the males we've had.
Misha, I like the new pic, too!
I wonder, when we do have our first female president, will every criticism of her by a man be deemed an expression of sexism?
I would guess mostly those criticisms that actually ARE an expression of sexism. We can't pretend that it won't exist or occur, anymore than we can deny that some of the tension toward Obama is racially driven. Operative word is "some" (before you jump on the run-of-the-mill argument train).
Germany is going into the second term with a lady chancellor, lets face it, she did just as good or bad a job as a man would have. In the end, it really doesn't matter who's at the helm, the ship is too big to steer most of the time anyway.
You do realize the only way a woman would be president, is if she is first the vice president.
NO WOMAN is going to be elected directly to the White House. You will never see it happen.
The reasoning: there are too many men in America and most of them with any form of an ego, isn't going to let it happen. Sorry, it's built in, just like racism and discrimination.
A Woman would have to serve a full term as Vice President before she would be able to sway any men to her side. If she remained through 2 terms as Vice President, then she is likely to then make it.
But otherwise, forget it. The "good ole boys" club isn't about to let a woman gain that power quickly. Trust, women are still not equal, even though law(s) might say otherwise.
You can trust in that.
I absolutely do not trust in that. Did you even watch the last election?
That's crap. Other countries have elected women to the highest office in the land. Americans aren't SO much different than others. And the good 'ol boys club will die out sooner or later--preferable sooner.
If the boys let in obama. and as i can see it its nothing but an act or show, i mean the boys still push their agendas, why would they not let a women in? At least women would feel more confident in themselves. I think its about timing and it will come in the next election.
To win in this country, the woman would have to be a former beauty queen. Seriously. Most of the garbage thrown at Hillary (even among left-leaning people!) had to do with her looks (the fact that she didn't have a model-like figure at aged 60). Most of Sarah Palin's support - admittedly among a bunch of loud Jacksonians - would have evaporated if she weren't as photogenic.
I would argue you have to be fairly good-looking as a man, too - or at least physically fit (was the case for both Bush Jr & Obama).
While I'd agree that attractiveness of a sort...or just 'presence'...has something to do with the likelihood of success, I disagree that only a former beauty queen is likely to become president. (Case in point, look at what happened to Sarah Palin.)
Only arguing 'looks' or presence/charisma now, I'd say Hillary really didn't have enough presence, in my book, to carry it off. There is a huge difference between her as a speaker, in example, and a woman such as Maya Angelou...or even Margaret Thatcher (though personally, kinda..yeck). Obama also has that kind of presence, as did Bill Clinton.
Though she is smart (obviously), Hillary does not come off as having this quality. She didn't seem comfortable in her skin at all times (don't blame her)...and that hurt her more than anything else, I think. Some of the hard ball stuff she threw at Obama also didn't seem normal or natural.
Yes, but there are *so* many (straight) men I've met that have had a visceral hatred for this woman that predates the runup to 2008. I'd imagine seeing a politician that looks uncomfortable in her own skin might provoke a bit of unease about her, but not this. And when asked to articulate exactly what they didn't like about her, these guys either couldn't point to anything in particular or they said words like "cankles" and "wide ass." I'm not kidding, and these are highly intelligent, educated people. I've seen far worse among the barely-literate online.
Beauty isn't the only necessary ingredient (thankfully...Nov was a scare) but it is an essential one. An Eleanor Roosevelt or even Maya Angelou wouldn't have a prayer in today's political climate.
You might be right. I, lol, admit to being somewhat intellectually sheltered (hiding out and going to school in very liberal places, too, during the Bush years). The 'political discourse' or, uh, whatever you may want to call it I've found online IS something of a shocker.
The odd thing is that for 60, she's actually attractive...as a person. The fact that (straight) men would consider sexual desire (? What IS that...honestly, I 'd like to know. That thing where they are affected by photographic images? It's not as if they are actually going to sleep with this person...so what IS that?) as important to matters of policy and leadership is enough to make me lose my lunch. ...enormously stupid.
I'm also entirely sure that what those certain men objected to is just her power level...her proficiencies. I'd be willing to bet they were older, too. Younger men can be prima donnas towards women, but there is more of an egalitarian acceptance, at the same time, that I see.
Yeah, making judgements and comments (direct and indirect) about a person's appearance that are obviously motivated by one's feelings about that person's politics is indeed enormously stupid. Yup, pretty stupid. But when it comes down to it, most people are emotionally five years old, even if they have been trained to couch 'nya-nay!' in other terms (most often empty, meaningless jargon that was drilled into their heads via an education that imparts posturing and ideology more than real thinking).
Ridiculous, and barely makes grammatical sense as prose. Reminiscent of Palin's rambling verbiage. No wonder you defend her vehemently.
Yes, and I realize, since you spray almost everyone with your 'words,' you have another, uh, agenda, to put that in about the most benign way humanely possible, OTHER than discussing politics or ideas.
It was Livelonger that suggested the idea that female politician may have to be a beauty queen to win an election. Perhaps you should address him rather than than females you 'enjoy' attacking. And yes, that is a meta analysis of your uh, actions, here at Hubpages.
Yeah, pretty out there.
And my opinion remains that those who cast votes on matters of leadership and policy due to a pol's sex appeal is stupid. There was absolutely no cloaking of that idea in what I was saying. It was also pretty clear that Palin was being used in that way.
It would be more productive to address the issues than to attack me directly. Don't forget the rules.
You should mind them yourself. That was a snarky, indirect-yet-clear insult you lobbed in Lita's direction in your prior post.
It was not intended to be. I'm terribly sorry if it seemed so.
That was snarky and indirect? lol
Yeah, he should stick to calling people 'bitches,' and 'hags.' Otherwise he ends up in linguistic tangles that resemble pretzels.
Ok so I'm 22 now. That gives me 13 years to work on my campaign... hmm.
Yeah, as if the Liberals can argue a point without ad hominem.
I was under the impression that the rules applied to all, but...
hee hee. Liberals mean well. Their personal attacks are justified because they know what's best for you.
I guess you missed the part where I clued you 'conservatives' (I'd argue most of you are another thing) in to the fact that I am a libertarian.
It is certainly not my fault that I don't have a proclivity towards using profanity and calling those of the opposite sex names.
Simply repeating a matter of written record and offering a suggestion as to why his 'argument' is never all that.
I see no ad hominem.
Unless you're 17 or younger "all that" is the verbal equivalent of a 'mature' woman trying to prance around in a miniskirt.
I never sincerely ever thought about it. Especially (absolutely) not in regards to anyone who would use the face of a dog in a probably psychologically suggestive way.
This entire conversation is indicative of a sociopath who would think in such a way due to various frustrations. Perhaps even of someone who would pretend to be a teenage girl online.
Are you being a (very oddly misguided) stalker again? If I had any idea what that strange reference you keep repeating was I might better respond, but I will remind you again that personal attacks are against the rules. Do you feel you are above those rules?
Remember Margaret Thatcher? England didn't sink, so neither would the US.
But would we be any better off ...
More and more, I see the president as a figurehead, placed out on the chopping block as the real politicians in Congress hand over the ax.
Am "I being..." I'm sorry, but the inference in that tone is too familiar.
And as for my take on the rules, I take a common sense, multi-faceted letter vs. spirit interpretive approach. You may read my hub on this matter if you want an answer to your disingenuous question.
Well, there it is. Somebody's special and everyone else is expected to follow the rules directly. Interesting.
No. Some people, due to certain tendencies or because they honestly have no feeling in this regard...or no awareness, as would fit the description laid out in the DSMV, think they absolutely are above general codes of commonly held decency.
It is interesting as something of a case, yes. And in how new technology comes into play with the same old human frailties.
You should read the hub. Lots of stuff in there about Javert.
Some people aren't even happy when they are agreed with. It's a shame really...
Disingenuous...and absolutely not clever. Care to define a 'sociopath' as given by the DSMV?
That's another personal attack. Please follow the rules.
Now, don't make me have to break out the peace pipe ...
Never mind ... I'll keep the peace pipe to my self ... carry on
You know how that ended up for the Indians, Yoshi. I do: I live in major Indian territory.
Anyway, I'm done,
I got tired of all the wars of words today, so I infiltrated all the anger I could find with some insane nonsensical fun - and I must say - thus far, I think I have won the battle.
but alas, I must go to sleep soon, so if I don't get to talk to you before then, sleep well and have good dreams.
I'm going to go back and read Livelonger's posts. I'll be back to dare to make a guess.....
Hard to guess. The one thing that made me wonder if Livelonger is a woman is the reference to "these guys". That does make the point that whatever someone's sex is, it is not always reflected in their writing/thinking. (In my "non-gender-associated" type of writing people have often mistaken me for a guy. )
Whether Livelonger is a guy or a woman, I'm not sure I agree that only a "beauty queen" could be elected President. I almost think the way people "factor in" women's looks is a kind of secondary way if people don't like her personality. If a woman is really attractive, and people don't like her they seem to tend to go for things like, "She's dumb," or "She's shallow," or whatever other negative factors they can think up. (Most people seem to leave alone the matter of looks, as if it's a given that a woman should be attractive.) If she's not particularly "beauty queen material" and they don't like her, though, it seems as if looks are the first thing they'll attack. (It's almost like people don't like someone, decide they want to be as mean as possible about her, and go for the "low blows" that are most cutting.) It's almost like people can be meaner to people they don't consider "beautiful"; and if they don't like the person to boot, it really brings out the "mean". I think Hillary was a victim of that. She had plenty of followers, but I think if her personality/history was just a little different she would have had a lot more. In other words, I think she could have been elected, even if she isn't a "beauty queen".
On the other hand, I think someone who is noticeably attractive may have some challenges (in a world that still doesn't seem to buy that a pretty woman may also be brilliant); but I think if she came across as capable, solid, and of substance; maybe had the kind of dignity/demeanor of, say, a Condoleeza Rice; and wasn't acting as if her appearance was "the main thing" - I think that kind of woman could be elected too.
by ngureco 8 years ago
Time Has Come For America To Have First Woman President?
by MomsTreasureChest 2 years ago
If you could pick any woman,who would you pick to be the first woman President of the United States?If you could pick any woman,who would you pick to be the first woman President of the United States?
by SA Shameel 2 years ago
Is USA ready for a woman President?I am just wondering of United States of America is ready for a woman President?
by jaydawg808 2 years ago
How would you feel if we had a woman president?
by Michael McNabb 2 years ago
Who is on the radar that you think could become our first Woman President?I am not personally a Hillary Clinton supporter but the notion that we could have had our first female President is intriguing and I would like to see it become a reality in my lifetime. Just wondering if there is...
by Mina131 7 years ago
When do you think we will have a woman president in the United States and why?Hilary, Palin, and women in high places in our government...so when will one make it to the very top?No sexist jokes, please.
Copyright © 2019 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|