Regardless of whether America is or not,the "World" isn't...There are simply TOO many countries that show little to no respect for the spoken word of women, their actions go unnoticed ,for the most part, and for them to suddenly place "great" meaning in the choices of a woman,be her President,or what-ever, would be quite a lot to ask for, so unless we're trying to empower the enemies at large,then do not put a woman into the leadership role
2007-01-22 01:19:53
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
I believe most voters are ready to test the waters, however, I doubt that the parties will take the risk. Both parties lean to white male candidates and while a female President might be the best answer to our problems in the public view, I doubt we'll ever get the chance to express our views at the ballot box. The primaries seem to have a way of discarding many a good candidate and not always for the best of reasons.
2007-01-22 01:33:12
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Makes no difference. Election are about money and power. No longer about "the person". GW Bush is my example. Hillary has the money and power. A Hillary/Edwards ticket will give Democrats 8 years in control of the White House. Obama does not have the money, never will. It will take $500 million.
2007-01-22 01:27:22
·
answer #3
·
answered by jl_jack09 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
If I see this question in Politics one more time, I'm going to scream!!!!!!
What's to be ready for???? Any woman who has the cojones to run for that office probably has lost all of that "femininity" that people think would be detrimental in a leader--she's probably more "masculine" than the males she'd be running with!
I would love to see a woman president, but I can't think of one right now that would fill my bill of requirements. 'Course, I can't think of any male, either.....
And, before you call me a conservative Hillary-basher, let me say that I am a liberal feminist!
EDIT:
to Recruiter: Can you imagine how half the population feels having been subjected to all this masculine crap for the past 200 years??? You're lucky we ever allowed you to think you were the leaders!
2007-01-22 01:24:34
·
answer #4
·
answered by Joey's Back 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
i imagine the yankee human beings want a change, and that i do trust we "the human beings" are waiting for that regulate. notwithstanding, i'm skeptical of that regulate taking position given the historic custom of the yankee presidency being held by technique of all white adult males (or a minimum of they seem white, lol). intervening time, I merely sit and wait to work out the outcome of this presidential race. surprisingly on the grounds that i have discovered a wide lesson in the course of the 2000 presidential election. the position Gore received the most difficulty-free vote and lost the election. What many voters do not recognize is we bypass into that revenues area to vote for a particular man or woman who's on the poll, to develop into the president (so we assume of). yet we are no longer honestly vote casting for that honestly man or woman to win. Our vote is in reality a vote to verify on the Presidential electors from each and every of the 50 states plus D.C. that's the vote from the presidential electors of each and every state that count number and determines the subsequent president! Our votes are in user-friendly words used to pick "Presidential electors" from our state and that is their votes that are offical, no longer ours...Does all of us see some thing incorrect with this procedure? i have discovered my lesson that 3 hundred and sixty 5 days...i become deceived. i have also discovered that that's demanding for human beings to chop loose from custom, and that i recognize there are some those who might want to somewhat die earlier they see a lady or black guy develop into president of the U.S. for this reason, I received't carry my breath.
2016-12-02 21:34:01
·
answer #5
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes, and I think it's a shame that we even have to ask this question. We're ready for black coaches in the Super Bowl, Muslims in government, and homosexuals in committed relationships.
If anyone answers no, they don't believe in equality and the basic tenet of the Constitution.
I asked this question before and got these answers:
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Al70AlawuHayxdflhej0b9Tsy6IX?qid=20070114093620AA9c3Og
2007-01-22 01:26:15
·
answer #6
·
answered by ? 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
No, at least not during wartime. We don't want World War III to start because our president made poor decisions as a result of her "time of the month".
2007-01-22 01:29:12
·
answer #7
·
answered by AngryAmerican82 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
YES, America has been ready a very long time.
2007-01-22 01:15:19
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
No, and although I think Hillary will win in 08, she will NOT win in 2012. In fact lose in dramatic fashion and then it will taint women from the office for some time. JMO
2007-01-22 01:14:46
·
answer #9
·
answered by fade_this_rally 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes it should be anyway. Although i dont know if hillary would be the best pick here.. she already reighned when her husband was the president.
2007-01-22 01:14:38
·
answer #10
·
answered by Joyce R 4
·
1⤊
0⤋