Can you think of a woman who is qualified to be president of the United States o

1. 72

   davenmidtownposted 12 years ago

   Can you think of a woman who is qualified to be president of the United States of America?
   
   Not pro or con on this subject... just looking for opinion, rants, etc. It would be nice to see female leaders promoted so ... have at it... or voice your opinion in the opposite direction...

   replyreport
2. 59

   darklandposted 12 years ago

   Honestly, I can't think of a woman who isn't better qualified than the person we have as president now, except maybe Hillary.  I'd certainly be willing to vote for either Mickey or Minnie to get the present Buffoons out of the White House
   I think history will view this presidency as the worst and most damaging to American interests and the common good, it would be hard to top unless he gets re-elected.

   replyreport
   1. 72

      davenmidtownposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      we had a celebraity govener in CA... I'm not sure Mr. Nor Mrs. mouse would do... but Dee Dee from Dexters Lab?

      replyreport
   2. 60

      umbertoobrianposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      California's trouble wasn't Arnold.  california's problem is obviously its electorate.  Nothing underscores this more than rejecting two fine women, Meg Whitman and Carli Fiorina and returning that idiot Jerry Brown to office.

      replyreport
   3. 59

      darklandposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      There have been two celebrity Governors, Arnold and Ronald. I think it would be preferable to have mice in Sacramento then the rats that are generally there.  Good point Um, Brown might be the most incompetent rat of all

      replyreport
   4. 72

      davenmidtownposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Ronie was not the greatest Governor.... The man closed mental institutions and turned truely mentally ill people out into the California streets... and Arnold... I can not think of anything he accomplished...

      replyreport
   5. 59

      Xenonlitposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Is this another Koch Brothers canned ad hominem attack on President Obama? What does this have to do with identifying a viable woman president?

      replyreport
   6. 59

      darklandposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      you have a point Xen, we digress.  I was only saying I would vote for Minnie Mouse as well as I would Mickey and either seemed a suitable replacement to who is in the White House.  This message neither paid for by Koch nor Disney influences.

      replyreport
3. 60

   duffsmomposted 12 years ago

   HIllary Clinton, and Jean Kirkpatrick come to mind.  Not promoting either one but they are certainly as qualified as the current president.

   replyreport
   1. 72

      davenmidtownposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      There was also Ann Richards From Texas...

      replyreport
   2. 60

      umbertoobrianposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Ironically Ann Richards and Jean Kirkpatrick are both more qualified than the current President and dead.  Poor Barrack no one loves him.

      replyreport
   3. 72

      davenmidtownposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Besides Rice, I am really surprised that more Republican women have not been named. I was trying to think of any but have not. I remember when Dole's wife was going to run... but not what her name is.

      replyreport
4. 72

   Mazzy Boleroposted 12 years ago

   That's an interesting question, davenmidtown.  We in the UK famously had a female Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher.
   
   I always felt it would be much harder for a woman to become President.  It's a very macho role, representing the most powerful country in the world, and while American women are on the whole confident, assertive souls, it's still hard for people to see a woman in that job.  Hilary Clinton is a competent politician and very intelligent, but somehow I knew she wouldn't win.
   
   Apart from Hilary Clinton, Condaleeza Rice and Madeleine Albright, I can't think of many women in powerful roles. Appointing a woman as Secretary of State is still in itself a political move and very few reach that level. Maybe woman are reluctant to go into political careers, seeing it as an area geared entirely to male ways of operating?  Or do they go into it and find themselves undermined?  It would be interesting to know.

   replyreport
   1. 59

      darklandposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      I think most women are smart enough not to want to put themselves through that.  Even the best presidents had it rough. Americans don't tend to trust or like politicians, it's the same all the way back in history, it's a dirty business really

      replyreport
   2. 72

      davenmidtownposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      @ darkland: That is where leadership comes into the role of the president. People rallied behind a few presidents and much was achieved...

      replyreport
   3. 59

      darklandposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Even Lincoln was terribly abused during his terms, and he was probably the most inspirational president we ever had and possibly the greatest visionary

      replyreport
5. 75

   TIMETRAVELER2posted 12 years ago

   Yes, I can.  Hillary Clinton and Condoleeza Rice are both experienced, intelligent, educated women with strong political backgrounds.  Either one would be a great President and either would do a much better job than the people now running for office...problem is, neither one of them wants the job!

   replyreport
   1. 72

      davenmidtownposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      It would be Interesting to See Hillary and Condoleeza on the same team... Pres and VP...

      replyreport
   2. 59

      Xenonlitposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Condoleeza Rice is a snake. she tried to show up on the news shows taking claim for killing Bin Laden, and she got trounced. I would not vote for her on a bet.

      replyreport
6. 60

   umbertoobrianposted 12 years ago

   Given the threshold for qualification set by the current occupant, what woman isn't qualified to be President?

   replyreport
   1. 72

      davenmidtownposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      The current occupant did not set the qualifying threshold... it was the people who elected him... and while I am not thrilled with OB... I can not stand Palin. At least if OB were removed... Bidin would at least know where the White House was located

      replyreport
   2. 60

      umbertoobrianposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Yes the White House is right next to the pile of chains the GOP is reserving for some Americans - just ask old "foot in the mouth" Biden. If the people elect Palin than she would be qualified for the office-you swerved into the truth.

      replyreport
   3. 72

      davenmidtownposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      true... but fortunately for me... they did not....

      replyreport
   4. 59

      darklandposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      I wish you would give Palin a second, honest look, midtown.  She did a terrific job in Alaska.  She just got chewed up by the political/media machine when she went to the states.  It would have been a different story if she'd remained govnr

      replyreport
   5. 79

      Nathan Orfposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Palin left the Governorship halfway through her term. How does that qualify her to be President? Palin is an airhead, pure and simple. Of all the women McCain could have picked, why did he not choose Olympia Snowe?

      replyreport
   6. 59

      Xenonlitposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      He is better than anything you would come up with, so live with it. He gets my vote, which is a vote against the Koch brothers and their forum shills.

      replyreport
7. 61

   34th Bomb Groupposted 12 years ago

   Don't shoot me - Hillary.
   Condaleeza Rice.
   Madeleine Albright, though I think she's too old.

   replyreport
   1. 72

      davenmidtownposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Good Answer... but tell us why...  I am interested in the who and the why.

      replyreport
   2. 61

      34th Bomb Groupposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Sorry - just saw this -
      Hillary has REAL experience, particularly in the Senate - and she's brilliant. Same with Rice although nix the Senate. She proved herself as SecState. Albright's life story, in addition to public service would serve us well.

      replyreport
8. 59

   Xenonlitposted 12 years ago

   Hillary Clinton is the most qualified, but it takes the majority of voters, not the majority of her supporters, to get her elected.  Sadly, the majority of voters do not like her. There is also the growing discomfort over political "dynasties" that recycle the same old family to the top positions of power in America.
   
   There are a lot of "unknowns" out there who have quietly been in the House and the Senate, but the American anti-woman crowd (which includes plenty of women) would immediately start the ad hominem attacks.
   
   It is amazing how many countries now have women presidents or prime ministers, leaving America to wallow in the dark ages.

   replyreport
   1. 60

      umbertoobrianposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Wallow in the dark ages?Where is their black President?When given the chance liberals and Democrats voted for the man and not the woman in the 2008 primaries.

      replyreport
   2. 72

      davenmidtownposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      @ Xenonlit: It was the same when women finally got the chance to vote here in America. Many other nations  had already given women the right to vote.
      @umbertoobrain: We are kind of in the dark ages over the role of women USA.

      replyreport
   3. 60

      umbertoobrianposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Really? It is the Democrats who rejected the oh so qualified Hillary infavor of the man. The Republicans had a woman on the ticket in 2008 and Condaleeza Rice was, momentarily, considered for the post of VP this time around.

      replyreport
   4. 72

      davenmidtownposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      @umbertoobrian: I refer to the role of the woman in the household. Many still consider the role of women to be homemakers.  While I see value in that, I think it should be the choice of a women what to do with her life and not the weight of society.

      replyreport
   5. 59

      Xenonlitposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      DUh, Asian nations  aren't likely to have a white or black president, so that made no sense.   We need a woman candidate who will run. There will be plenty of supporters for a qualified woman.

      replyreport
   6. 60

      umbertoobrianposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Latin America?  Europe?

      replyreport
9. 80

   junksellerposted 12 years ago

   Technically, any of the high-level politicians are qualified (Senators, Congresswomen, Governors, etc.) Unfortunately, most of them are just as bad as the men. I'd love to have a more representative government, but at the same time I don't want to promote crappy female politicians just because they are female. We need good politicians period. I don't care if they have 10 balls and 4 tits. I wouldn't vote for Clinton or Rice for President, or for any other female currently in the federal government, but they are all qualified.

   replyreport
   1. 72

      davenmidtownposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      @junkseller: a valid statement... expand it please to tell me what would make a candidate male/female not crappy.  Personnally, I think the definition of qualified might be more inline with what you consider to not be crappy...

      replyreport
   2. 80

      junksellerposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Not Crappy = a politician versus a partisan, responsive to their constituents, working to remove the influence of money in politics, and maintains integrity in the legislative process (no earmarks, no stuffed bills, no insider trading, etc.)

      replyreport
   3. 72

      davenmidtownposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      awesome!

      replyreport
   4. 59

      darklandposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Well said Junk, but I think it's a catch 22 no one that's new has enough clout to fix anything and anyone else is already part of the game.  The voters need to be very clear with Washington to get anything done

      replyreport
10. 79

    Nathan Orfposted 12 years ago

    Hillary Clinton, surely. She is experienced in foreign policy. She knows how Washington works, and how to get things done. The problem is, though, that with any new President, male or female, not much will be done, anyway, because politics is too divided. I don't see how it would be nice to see a woman become President. It is hard to watch men become President. I just do not wish the job on any sane person.

    replyreport
    1. 59

       darklandposted 12 years agoin reply to this

       The problem is she "knows her way around Washington".  She's part of the ongoing problem

       replyreport
    2. 79

       Nathan Orfposted 12 years agoin reply to this

       The problem in Washington is that no one gets along because they are too polarized. Washington has a bad habit of chewing up and spitting out any outsiders. But those on the inside know how it works, and how to manipulate it.

       replyreport
    3. 72

       davenmidtownposted 12 years agoin reply to this

       @Nathan Orf: I do not see that changing unless voters are willing to start recallling their senators and representatives. When they understand that they are removable... then and only then perhaps change will occur.

       replyreport
    4. 79

       Nathan Orfposted 12 years agoin reply to this

       This Congress is less popular than cancer. Literally, the 112th Congress polls somewhere around 10% which is an all time low. Of course voters are going to replace the buffoons we have in Congress now.

       replyreport
    5. 72

       davenmidtownposted 12 years agoin reply to this

       I think it is one thing to replace them during an election and quite another to expell them before their term is up... For my state which is California... I can see getting rid of both of them.

       replyreport
    6. 59

       darklandposted 12 years agoin reply to this

       I agree with daven and hope you're right Nathan, I think only a really strong message will change things

       replyreport
11. 60

    TheSingularityposted 12 years ago

    Oprah. For two reasons. First, she is not a politician and having a humanitarian idealist in the government would be refreshing. Second, she is a master of media, and media is a huge part of the American political process. A high level of media presence enables a greater sense of communication between a president and the people, as well a greater opportunity to include individuals in the decision making process.

    replyreport
    1. 61

       34th Bomb Groupposted 12 years agoin reply to this

       I must disagree. B.O. has the media at his feet yet he doesn't use it as effectively as he could & did. She has no legislative experience, quite like B.O. She's an entertainer and businesswoman-very successful -  you're starting to win me over. l

       replyreport
12. 59

    LensMan999posted 12 years ago

    Hilary Clinton is the first name that comes to my mind. She is very intelligent and has got great experience in the political background.

    replyreport
13. 40

    H P Roychoudhuryposted 12 years ago

    Hilary Clinton is the right choice as she had already experienced a lot of the politics of the Globe by the time.

    replyreport