I don't think there should be a women president. There are too many countries that look down on women and consider them a sign of weakness. If we have a women president then we will have ALOT of problems.
But if I had to choose which is very painful. But Rice. Clinton is the biggest B*tch in the world! Pure evil
2006-11-23 14:18:08
·
answer #1
·
answered by D'reux 5
·
0⤊
5⤋
Earlier in Rice's recent past I would have thought so. But not now. The 2006 election is full proof of this. No Democratic incumbant lost his or her bid for reelection. But 30 Republican incumbants did. Most of the American voters will associate Rice directly to Bush's failed policies with the war in Iraq.
Who would be a an effective candidate against Hillary in 2008?
We can make a pick who he or she might be able to beat Hillary by looking into what sort of Democrats defeated the Republican Incumbants. Most of these Democrats were in the middle to consertative candidates. Otherwise known as the "Blue Dog" Democrats. This tells me America is more moderate than they are to the right or the left.
The Democrats would be committing political suicide if they chose a candidate for President that was more left than most of the voters. The Republicans would be doing the same if they chose someone to the far right. For this candidate would be supporting the failed policies of Bush and the former Republican Majority that the voters rejected by their votes which we all now know the results of.
I am a Democrat and a Blue Dog at that. I believe the best bet for the Republicans against Hillary clinton would be MA Governer Romney. But of course that is just my humble opinion.
2006-11-23 22:29:31
·
answer #2
·
answered by rev_dane_eidson 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
It's been a long time since anyone who has never held office before has become president. Besides Ms. Rice always tells anyone who is interested that she is not interested in being president-she wants to run the NFL?! We don't know Ms. Rice's views on anything other than foreign policy. Maybe she's a liberal on social issues-we don't know. As for Mrs. Clinton, she's not liberal anymore, she has become a centrist.
2006-11-24 00:09:40
·
answer #3
·
answered by michinoku2001 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Rice is not as conservative as you think, and Hillary is not as liberal. The only good thing about such a matchup is that it would remove not voting for a woman from the things holding Hillary back. As for Rice:
She was unqualified to be National Security Advisor. Of what use was a Soviet Specialist in a post-Soviet world?
She did a lousy job as NSA-- demoting Richard Clarke, the Terrorism Expert, ignoring memos of an impending Al Qaeda attack, and not mediating the conflict between State and Defense. The only reason she got promoted to Secretary of State is because of her worshipful loyalty to George W., an utter failure that should have caused her to resign and attack his ineptitude. I can't wait for her to depart from public life and return to her Ivory tower.
2006-11-23 22:50:48
·
answer #4
·
answered by kreevich 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
Margret Thatcher will always be the toughest lady in my eyes. I think conservative is always the safest bet cause liberals get extreme and carried away. So my bets would go on Rice as she has class, knowledge of the affairs of the world, she's tough yet a lady, and doesn't have a long history of scandle.
2006-11-23 22:37:40
·
answer #5
·
answered by Brianne 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes, because some people these days go for gender roles, but on the other side they are 2 powerful intellectuals and thinkers. Imagine if they got same electional and popularity vote, I'll be damned by our society. Maybe they would improve the social and political futures.
2006-11-23 22:15:32
·
answer #6
·
answered by Red Panda 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
They may be two of the most powerful women in the US, but not in the world. Margaret Thatcher and Queen Elizabeth are pretty big in the power department. But it would certainly be an interesting race.
2006-11-23 22:14:21
·
answer #7
·
answered by old lady 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
Nope. I'd rather see Mrs. Clinton and Barack Obama as a team. It's about time that our country really gets an opportunity to see the diminsions of color and creed in our political arena. We are not fairly represented many times because FINANCES continue to separate us.
2006-11-23 23:23:23
·
answer #8
·
answered by THE SINGER 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
It is a tough question. I think the next election will be as much competetive as the Kerry-Bush competition (so will be the level of interest among the American publics).
I really do not want to make a prediction of who will likely win, because both sides have strong fans of their own; but funny, both sides have very strong critics of their own ( and those people swear themselves they will not vote for one another).
I think the next election will be like a war.
2006-11-24 04:05:12
·
answer #9
·
answered by davegesprek 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes I do because there is no way Rice could ever win... There are a lot of Washington analysts that would eat Rice alive if she ever ran. Their main point is that she failed to do her job by not questioning the intelligence nor questioning the president.
Not to include the 'race card' and 'gender card' which would cause a division in the Republican southern states while Hillary would win the northeastern blue states with no problem.
2006-11-23 22:16:20
·
answer #10
·
answered by BeachBum 7
·
2⤊
2⤋