English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

15 answers

I believe we would. Women are more nurturing, and I think this country could use a great deal of that , after the Texan who killed so many for oil.

2007-01-23 05:29:43 · answer #1 · answered by Black Rose 4 · 1 1

The gender of the President should not be an issue.

What we need to be concerned about is the ability of the person to run the country. If our Constitution had provided, it would be more in the country's interest if our President was selected from among the 50 eligible Governors. That would give us a person who has run a State and has experience in management.

A lot of the candidates have no experience in managing anything; most have nothing more than a pleasant smile and nothing to back it up. Do we really want some happy-dappy clown with no managerial experience to run the most powerful nation in the world?

Think about that when you get ready to vote for a President.

2007-01-29 11:56:58 · answer #2 · answered by Mr. Been there 4 · 0 0

Thats hard to say. It depends on who the woman is. I think because of motherhood that a woman would be less likely to take us into a war, which in turn could be bad for the country.

Most women I know would prefer to discuss problems rather than fight out a problem and I see that as a good thing, but there are those who have no desire to talk or even to seek peaceful purposes. I feel a woman might hesitate to make a decision quickly enough and seek other dilogue instead of acting.

On domestic issues I don't think a woman would be better or worse than any man. The fact is that she like a man will most likely follow her Party's agenda.

I have read the reports that claim women are smarter but I have seen no "proof" of that. You have to look at who puts out these reports and what their own agenda is. I've lived over 50 years and I have seen nothing to indicate that any gender or race or nationality is any more intelligent than any other. In every society there are those who are intelligent and those who are woefully unintelligent. I will say that women are smarter in some areas but to be fair men are smarter in other areas. Intelligence is no indication of common sense. Neither is an indication of ethical behavior. One of our greatest Presidents had little education. Abraham Lincoln. He did however have a great deal of common sense and was highly ethical. On the other side of the same coin one of our most intelligent Presidents, Bill Clinton, had no common sense and was the most unethical leader we have ever had.

Overall I doubt it would really make much difference one way or the other.

2007-01-29 22:56:00 · answer #3 · answered by Steve O 2 · 1 0

If you really believe that we shouldn't discriminate against people based on gender, then your answer to this question would be No, we wouldn't be better off with a woman president than a male president.

Isn't selecting a president a bit like a job interview? You're trying to fill a job opening when you vote. If employers are not allowed to use gender as a factor in choosing their workers, should voters be allowed to do so?

However, if your question is would any female president be better then Bush, I would have to say YES (unless you can find a female that actually still supports Bush today).

2007-01-23 05:39:33 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

Compared to what we have now, an armadillo president would be better.

Seriously, I am tired of gender still being an issue. Let's just look at candidates for what they can offer as President, and stop categorizing everyone by race, gender, creed, etc. I don't believe that all who oppose Hilary Clinton do so because she is female. I am a feminist, but she does not have my support.

2007-01-27 09:03:59 · answer #5 · answered by Pamela B 5 · 1 0

It is time for America to grow up and admit that a woman can hold down this job the same as a man can!

2007-01-31 05:29:10 · answer #6 · answered by Pamela V 7 · 1 0

female or male it doesn't really matter.when we as people vote for a president we always have to be good judges ot whether or not they are fit to do be leaders of a country.

2007-01-30 19:59:08 · answer #7 · answered by sweet is my code name 2 · 1 0

No, I think the problem is emotions, I don't want someone to throw a hissy fit with the ability to launch nuclear weapons. I like predictable men, you know like Bush.

If you don't agree just read the posts above from:

Pamela B.
Black Rose
Laura C.

Then tell me they are rational humans who could run the country.

BTW, I do like Condi

2007-01-30 11:05:47 · answer #8 · answered by impalersca 4 · 0 1

I've said this over & over....guess what...Other foreign countries do not give women the same rights that we have, & women over there do not command the same respect that we get over here. They have to walk 10 steps behind a man, are not allowed to vote, & must be covered head to toe.....These countries will NEVER respect a woman in power in the United States & it will be seen by them as a sign of weakness, & a totally laughable offense to what they practice & believe.....Right up there with John Kerry wanting to "sit down & 'talk' to the North Koreans....HA!

2007-01-29 11:06:33 · answer #9 · answered by texasgirl32967 2 · 0 2

A woman whose new to the Whouse - NO.
Hillary CLinton - I'd vote for. She's been there, knows the ins and outs. She'll probably be the best one we've ever had. She has balls and really doesn't care who dislikes her. I think she'd be great. Can't be any worse than these past few nimrods we've elected.

2007-01-23 05:31:19 · answer #10 · answered by photocritter 3 · 1 1

fedest.com, questions and answers