2006-09-23 14:15:01 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
okay, to rephrase, is it not odd that we have not had a woman and/or minority as President, since demographics in an unbiased society would theoreticly indicate that one would have been, by now. No, the surface is not what matters, unless it is what keeps you repressed. In this case, keeps you from being electable.
2006-09-23 14:27:34 · update #1
Obama - 2008!
He's the best spoken, brightest, and most reasonable politician in a generation. He has wonderful ideas, is capable of working with a variety of political groups, and he's the first person I've seen in ages who truly should be president.
2006-09-23 16:02:52 · answer #1 · answered by Steve 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I think that a woman or a member of a minority group would be a good candidate for president at this point. Personally, I admire anyone who would want to take on the job. The only concern I would have if a woman or member of a minority group were elected is a possible increase in assasination attempts. Not everyone in this country shares an open mind.
2006-09-23 21:25:11 · answer #2 · answered by completelyunzipped 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Here in the UK we had a female prime minister and what an absolute disaster that was. She was downright evil. She created an "I want and I want it now" mentality. She turned worker against worker. However it is up to the public to vote for whoever they want. Before a woman or member of a minority can become president they have to stand for election. Watch out for Hilary Clinton you unlucky people. The problem is that a member of a minority would not be elected by the majority. It is human nature.
2006-09-27 19:06:12 · answer #3 · answered by david c 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't think a person's gender or ethnic background is a qualification for any elected office.
I think we should elect a president that has the character and philosophy we support regardless of gender or ethnicity
To believe that a person's gender or race should be considered in choosing a president is bigoted and racist.
Martin Luther King had a dream that a person would be judged, not by the color of their skin, but by the quality of their character.
Sounds good to me.
2006-09-23 21:27:18 · answer #4 · answered by enginerd 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The great thing about living in a democracy is that no one person decides when it's time for something. As a collective, we vote on things, such as who is to be president, and in that way we can evolve at a pace comfortable for our citizens. Personally, I am not a believer in electing a minority just because he or she is a minority. Elect the best person, regardless of race or gender.
2006-09-23 21:20:38 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
The only way to know if it's time is if a woman or "minority" is elected.
Condileeza for President, 2008!
2006-09-26 01:26:55 · answer #6 · answered by nacmanpriscasellers 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think a woman or a minority can be as good a president as a men can be. The gender or race has nothing to do with it. We need someone with integrity and good morals. Someone that has the best interest of the people and the country in mind. That is what makes a good president regardless of what race or gender they hold.
2006-09-23 21:19:11 · answer #7 · answered by Ness 4 · 5⤊ 0⤋
The real answer to this is electability. I am sorry to say that neither could carry the Democratic South. The good ole boy's club will not vote for a female nor a minority. Sorry.
2006-09-25 02:31:47 · answer #8 · answered by tiffany s 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not if a minority/woman is the not the best candidate in the election...people need to vote on issues and not surface things like race or gender. Race or gender will not automatically make someone a good leader.
2006-09-23 21:22:45 · answer #9 · answered by james p 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I don't care if a woman or minority gets elected as long as whoever it is has morals that are better than the one currently in office.........
2006-09-23 22:24:15 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋