Women for President

[dazzleman]

Rice and Dole are the only two that would be acceptable.

Hillary is a horror movie, as is Boxer.  Feinstein is not as bad, but still not good.  I liked some of the themes of Carol Moseley-Braun's campaign, but not the specifics of her policy positions.

Rice is an unknown in the sense that she has never been elected to office, but I like what I have seen of her so far.  I also like Elizabeth Dole, but she already had her run, so I don't think she'll try again.

[dazzleman]

Feinstein.

Walter Mondale, while under mandate from NOW to pick a woman for VP in 1984, considered Feinstein before picking Geraldine Ferraro.

At the time, she was mayor of San Francisco.  Aside from the fact that the jump from mayor to VP was considered too great, he supposedly didn't pick her for three reasons:

-Her links to San Francisco
-She was Jewish
-She was married 3 times.

At this point, she is the more moderate of the California Senators.  However, her links to San Francisco are still a big liability in terms of picking up swing voters, as is the fact that she was married 3 times.  It seems that now, a president can be married up to 2 times (as opposed to once, which was the case before Ronald Reagan), but 3 times may be too much.  I don't think being Jewish is the liability it once was, as long as a candidate is not too liberal.

But taken all together, I think she has too many liabilities to be elected president.

[dazzleman]

You are probably right about the fact that she couldn't win, also she's getting to be fairly old now.

I only chose her in preference to the other choices here.

It's funny how there are so few good choices for president who aren't white males, even at this late date.

There are a very limited number of female governors (I can't remember, but probably under 5), and one of them was born in Canada, so she can't run.  There are only a handful of female Senators, and only a couple of them seem to have presidential prospects.  The most obvious choice, Hillary Clinton, has huge potential liabilities, loved as she is by the more rabid feminists and hard-core Democrats.

The great Republican hope was Elizabeth Dole, and she fizzled.  She had never run for elective office before, and unless you're General Eisenhower, it's hard to start at the top.  Condi Rice is mentioned a lot, but she would probably fizzle for much the same reason, IF she even wanted to run.  It seems that with women (and minorities), we are so desperate to get one that we consider people who would never be considered if they were white men.  This is ultimately a disservice to women and minorities, in my opinion, though it may benefit them in the short run.

Look at Geraldine Ferraro.  She would never have been considered for VP had she been a man.  She was a 3-term congresswoman, which is bush league when it comes to running for national office.  She was not only from NY state, but from a NYC borough, which is absolute political poison.  Even within the rest of NY state, it is political poison to be from a NYC borough, not to mention in southern and western states.  Yet she was picked.

Who knows - maybe a woman will come out of nowhere and get elected president, but other than Hillary Clinton, I can't see anybody on the horizon.  And I think I'd rather die than see that woman in the White House.

[dazzleman]

Rice and Dole are the only two that would be acceptable.

Very true.

I think that a Republican woman has a much better chance of winning than a Democratic woman, simply because of the math.  The fact that she is a woman will attract some members from the opposite party, while turning off a smaller percentage from her own.  As more woman generally support the Democrats, her chances of are inhanced if she is a Republican pulling female votes from the Democrates.

I think the same holds true for blacks--our first African-American president is more likely to be a Republican.

I agree completely.  If a woman or a black person runs as a Democrat, the female gender and/or black race will be a liability, since it could push off some swing voters who have doubts about voting for a woman or a black person, particularly if the woman is the typical shrill feminist that the Democrats favor or the black person is victim-minded and concerned about minority issues primarily.

However, those who would be reluctant to vote for a woman or black person on the Democratic ticket would feel more comfortable voting for them on the Republican ticket because the perception is that a Republican would be less concerned with feminist/civil rights issues to the exclusion of broader-based issues.

[dazzleman]

Nancy Pelosi!!  

and

Barbara Lee!!!

wtf

You don't have to curse man.

I suppose you are so uninformed that you do not recognize the name of the Democratic leader of the House of Representatives, the whip, Nancy Pelosi.  But it's ok, I will clue you in - she is only the MOST powerful woman in Congress.  There is a reason why everyone voted for her.  We got the bucks out here.

The other one is my Congresswoman, a hero - the only person in the House or Senate to vote against this unjust and unnecessary war which was started under false pretenses. (!)

Get informed dude.

Neither one of those two stands a chance of being elected outside their current districts.

As for Barbara Lee, I guess you're suggesting that the Sept. 11 attacks were "false pretenses."  Maybe President Bush or the Israelis engineered the attacks?  You seem to be pushing one of those wacko conspiracy theories.

[dazzleman]

I am only a brit but I quite liked the themes Carol Moseley Braun send during het attempt at the nomination, she might get a place in the dem cabinet if Kerry wins in November.
But from the Republicans from what I have seen Kay Bailey Hutchinson looks impressive- she might make a good running mate for the Republicans in 2008 if Bush gets beaten later this year.

I liked some of the themes that Carol Moseley Braun put forward during her campaign, but I didn't like her specific proposals, which I thought were designed to appeal to simpletons, or to reflect her own lack of understanding of major issues.

Others have mentioned Kay Bailey Hutchinson, and I think she would be worth taking a look at.  She's a Republican from a macho state, which would make a lot of people who might have reservations about voting for a woman seriously consider her in a way they would never consider a woman like Hillary, who's a liberal Democrat representing a liberal state that is unpopular among middle Americans.

I hope that Hillary doesn't stand a chance, but I fear that under the right circumstances she could win.  That would be a catastrophic occurrence in my opinion, given her views on issues as well as the level of personal ruthlessness, and lack of principle, that she has exhibited.

[dazzleman]

Olympia Snowe hasn't shown any real inclination to run for president.  I suspect she'd have some trouble getting nominated.