A female President is a good idea, Hillary Clinton is a bad idea.
2007-12-23 20:11:02
·
answer #1
·
answered by Steve C 7
·
3⤊
1⤋
I am of the belief that any woman who could do the job will never be elected to the position. I think a woman can be elected, but not one capable of doing the job.
A major part of who we vote for depends on who we like on a personal level. The position requires that you sometimes talk tough, be ready to go to war and send thousands of people to their death, and often to compromise.
Unfortunately, if a woman talks tough or is ready to go to war, then she flies in the face of what we want a woman to be. We want a woman who is like our mother or our wife/girlfriend; someone who'll take care of us and support us. But that is precisely the kind of person who couldn't do the job.
And if she can get past that, she is still required to compromise sometimes (its the only way she'll get enough people to agree with her). If she compromises though, many people will say she doesn't have the personal force that a man would have had in the situation and therefore she is a bad president, even though if a man had done the same thing he'd be fine or even lauded for doing so.
I think Hilary Clinton will fail in her presidential bid. She is too unlikeable, she really looks like a b*tch. She does because she does have the personal force to handle things, she can make the tough decisions, and she can present a front that convinces others she is willing to do so. But because of that she looks like an unlikeable b*tch. I think too many people think that for her to get the majority and win. I believe she will lose the primary, and even if she doesn't I see her losing the main election. Sad thing, because she would be good for the job.
I believe the type of woman who could make it would be more along the lines of Barbara or Laura Bush (mother and wife of George W. Bush respectively). These two are obvious mother types. I could also see Condoleeza Rice. She seems likeable than Hilary Clinton. But the reason why is far more ominous. Most people don't realize this, but Condi Rice is actually fairly moderate. But she saw what happened to Colin Powell (who she rather holds close to on a political level), and learned the lesson. You don't rock the boat.
Her more moderate views were constantly overridden by the more influential Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld, and she quit pressing the issue on her beliefs behind the Oval Office Doors. Basically she shut up when the men were talking. This may make her more palatable than Hilary Clinton with male voters (the biggest voting bloc, especially among whites), but it is also precisely the kind of woman who cannot handle the job of president. You find similar reactions with Laura and Barbara Bush, who stayed out of their husbands' terms in office; a stark contrast to Hilary Clinton, who was a major part of her husband's time in office.
There are plenty of good women out there who could do the job and do it well, but none that can get voted into office. And there are plenty of women who can get voted into office, and those are the ones who would fail miserably. I believe it will still be a long time before you see a competent woman in the White House (other than a first lady).
2007-12-24 04:23:47
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Well, there are a lot of views that people have on it. Some people think that a change in gender is an actual change in character(Some believe it's better, some believe it's worse) and could actually bring about a change in government.
Some use it as a guilt card, some believe it's empowering.
Personally, I don't care one way or another. When you start to categorize individuals (or yourself) into demographics of gender, race, sexual orientation and religion, it fosters the "us vs them" mentality and nothing changes, it's just a shift in which polarized "victim" is in power.
If a woman were to run with a platform I agreed with I'd vote for her, but I have yet to see it.
2007-12-24 04:30:33
·
answer #3
·
answered by Hellion 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
As long as she is competent - who cares. as for that matter the President can be African American, Homosexual, Mormon or Female are not factors to judge the qualification for the office it is the measure of the person that counts. I would have gladly preferred a woman to Trickie Dick or some of the other doozies that have held the position
2007-12-24 04:19:54
·
answer #4
·
answered by worldstiti 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
It's just a matter of time. I don't think it will be Clinton because of Bill. It's a shame too because she had a good chance at it. The weakness in him exposed the nature of their relationship and thus the fact that somethings not right.
2007-12-24 04:17:41
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think it is great that a Woman, Mormon and an African American all have a good chance to win the election. Maybe the civil rights movement has done some good!
2007-12-24 04:13:31
·
answer #6
·
answered by Time to live 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
I'm all for whatever president supports my views. I won't be voting for Hillary because shes nuts. Not because she doesn't have any.
2007-12-24 04:10:40
·
answer #7
·
answered by reedy112 2
·
3⤊
0⤋
I think it would be absolutly awful! I mean, isn't she supposed to be hitting menopause soon? My mother-in-law is impossible to be around now that's she's going through it. No way would I want to reap the benefits from that one.
2007-12-24 04:17:02
·
answer #8
·
answered by danesilver 3
·
0⤊
2⤋
Great. We'll be on the brink of nuclear war every 28 days....
2007-12-24 04:15:06
·
answer #9
·
answered by slagathor238 5
·
1⤊
2⤋
Other nations have had female leaders with no regret. What are we so afraid of ?
2007-12-24 04:11:00
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋