What Do You Think About A Female President?

you have never read s;uperbadbrutha posts then, huh.


or http://www.newrepublic.com/article/112883/study-racism-cost-obama-millions-votes-unlikely

while it's determined it's unlikely.... people say it.



of course, I know you don't want to hear it, But you're welcome on the free education

 

Yep. It's mind control. You're basically only voting for their candidate to get a pat on the head. A little gesture of approval that says, "I accept you..... for now..... until you resist something else that I want you to do......... then I'll call you names again." Wash, rinse, repeat.

Progressives are just manipulative little (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)es.

Do you even care that you're wrong about everything? I mean, do the facts matter at all to you?

You have now set off the sexist irony alarm at full volume. Congratulations.

 

"Vladimir, why did you invade Ukraine again??????????????????" "
"It's got me totes tizzy mode. You got some real mansplaining to do or you know what's going to happen!!!!!!!!"
"Can't we just go back to having fun like we used to on your "bareskin" rug teeheeteehee?????????"

 

Intelligent people vote for the best qualified person PERIOD. As I said, look at the disaster called Obama. Was that "evened out"?

 

The oddest thing about Obama and him being black is that he isn't really black. He's half black, and half white. Kind of ironic that the left is still following the one drop rule...

 

History has proven that some women are very good leaders. Look at Queen Victoria, Queen Elizabeth the first ,and Margret Thatcher. You may argue Thatchers policies but she was a leader. And the same with that woman in Germany whose name i may misspell.

So yes, I may vote for a woman...but...right now I can't see any that fit the bill for me. And you can call me sexist if you like...sticks and stones.

 

I stated, and meant, the VOTES even out......your opinion of Obama has nothing to do with it...

 

No one should be elected based on anything but ability, especially presidents.

NO EXCEPTIONS!

hil-hor(Hilary for the democrat brain dead) does not have the qualifications to serve in any office of government.

None of the proposed candidates for the next election show any ability to move the nation forward.

 

Do you know the difference between "intelligentsia" and "intelligence agency"?

- - - Updated - - -

And don't forget Maggie Thatcher.

 

Understood.

So how does Condi fit in per the following definition?


in·tel·li·gent·si·a
inˌteləˈjen(t)sēə/
noun
intellectuals or highly educated people as a group, especially when regarded as possessing culture and political influence.

 

Why the do nothing Harry Reid is gone from power.

- - - Updated - - -

Hillary is proof she can't do it. She had almost a year to avert the Benghazi attack and stood there like a deer in the headlights.

 

this I agree with. but just like the race-baiters that meet every issue a person has with Obama's policies with "you're just a bigot is why you don't like Obama".... the same strategy will be used for Hillary. "if you don't vote for Hillary, you are a sexist still thinking it's the 1916, not 2016"

The only way to avoid that argument would be if Hillary defeated a black female republican in 2016

 

Not many qualified candidates. Alaska Governor Sarah Palin would be perfect. Maybe Condoleeze Rice. DUMBEST thing America could do would be to elect one of those left wing harpies, like Hitlary or ELEZabtch Warren.

 

Condi is a highly educated professor with musical talent. She has no experience outside of academia other than her stints as National Security Advisor and Secretary of State. She was the provost of Stanford and a "specialist" on the Soviet Union. As Provost, she was responsible for financial affairs of the university.

In other words, she was an academic and never held a management job outside of government or education.

This is why I said she does not have the managerial skills to be the chief administrator of the USA.

Look what electing an academic has brought us to today.

 

It is really a very backward, ignorant country that is debating the gender of their leader in the 21st century......

 

I'm not debating it. if she's the best candidate.... I will vote for her.


I just don't want to be accussed of sexism (which will happen) if I don't vote for Hillary because I don't think SHE can lead our country effectively.

 

'National Security Advisor and Secretary of State' is not enough? Remember the discussion is about possible women candidates. So what woman is more qualified right now?

 

you know, it's not necessarily sexist to think that there isn't a woman qualified enough to be POTUS currently.


although, I think "qualified" is a subjective term. Was Washington "qualified" Was Lincoln?


If there was a Condi vs Hillary ticket.... I'd vote Condi.....

Palin vs Hillary.... I'd vote Palin


Palin or Condi vs Al Gore or Joe Biden.... I'd vote Palin or Condi over either Gore or Biden.


but on the same token, if it's Jeb vs Hillary, I refuse to vote for Hillary simply because I don't want to be accused of sexism

 

I think there are probably dozens of women who are "qualified" to be POTUS at the moment. The problem is that the national media is not paying attention to them.

Susana Martinez of New Mexico - Hispanic and female
Nancy Fallin of Oklahoma -
Nikki Haley of South Carolina - of Indian {as in Asia} descent
Maggie Hassan of New Hampshire -
Gina Raimondo of Rhode Island

Of the 5, I would happily vote for either Haley or Martinez.

And that does not even consider some females who are CEOs of major corporations.

Oh yeah, in spite of her age, I'd back Liz Dole in a second.

 

The bolded above, mine, is exactly what I addressed: It is really a very backward, ignorant country that is debating the gender of their leader in the 21st century......

If sexism didn't exist then there would be no debate.......and WHO has kept sexism alive and well?

The cavemen who still think women are ruled by hormones and those who blame one woman's mistakes on ALL women.....both those factions ignore the fact that testosterone doesn't exactly make you level headed and/or perfect....and those who don't see men who make mistakes as representative of ALL men.

 

what are you getting at exactly. I'm replying to the OP that gender does not matter, so long as the person is the right candidate for me based on policies....

just so I'm clear.... will I be sexist (in your eyes) if I vote for Jeb Bush over Hillary Clinton in 16?

 

I will not vote for Hillary. But definitely, if Sara Palin or C. Rice were running I would vote for them.

The election of the first African American president was a step forward.

The election of the first non-noble president was also a great step forward. George Washington was not of royal or noble descent and many conservatives thought that such a person should never rule a country.

 

That makes her more qualified than ANY female Democrat politician, in the same way Ronald Reagan was more qualified to be president than ANY Democrat politician. And he was the greatest president in history.

 

I never gave it any thought.

Germany, the UK, France, Isreal, Argentina and Brazil have had female leaders. They don't seem any the worse for wear because of it.

 

Bachman herself ran for the office so she must be of the view that the country will never vote for one. Given the likelihood that Hillary (assuming she remains healthy) will be elected in 2 years, I think she's just plain wrong. I have no issue with the sex of the President. I do have issues with Hillary but that's unrelated to her sex.