Is the U.S. ready for the first woman president?

[angus]

Is the U.S. ready for the first woman president?

I think it is ready and has been ready for some time, not unlike France.  Also, not unlike France, the only women to offer themselves have been unfortunate and dreadful choices.  

Neither your country nor mine really have deep, societal qualms with women in leadership roles, despite what the talking heads liked to spew in their analyses after Clinton lost the nomination to Obama in 2008 and after Royal lost the French presidential election of 2007.  Polls suggest that a majority of the US public has been "ready" for a woman president since the mid-50s (monotonic increase from about 33% yes in 1937 to about 92% today, crossing over the 50% in around 1955.)  A similar trend is evident in France, with the "yes" voters in the majority in opinion surveys there since about 1968.  Moreover, Wyoming and Texas were the first two states to elect female governors, and both did so in the year 1924.  Over the past 92 years, 22 other states have elected one or more female governors.  Thus, nearly half of the states have had female governors.

The next president of the United States will likely be a female; hopefully her presidency will not be so marked by corruption and incompetence that it will put the voters off all women candidates, many of whom would become effective managers of the state.  I do think that most voters will not hold Clinton's presidency against all women, should her leadership prove faltering or deceitful, although only time will tell.

[angus]

I personally know a woman who was in the first class admitted to an Ivy League school. 

Harvard didn't admit Catholics or Jews till the very early 20th Century, but you won't find that on their website.  Women were admitted even, in 1920.  That was less than a hundred years ago, but such things change fast.  I do think that people lie to pollsters--The Vorlon constantly reminds us of that anyway--but I also think that the fact of a woman doesn't make a difference to most voters.  It takes time to percolate.  As you point out, it hasn't been so very long since women were admitted to the aristocratic circles which, after a few generations, breed to sort of influence and assure the right circles that get people pushed into positions in which they might be mentioned for candidacy. 

That long acculturalization is part of why no woman has been elected.  I'm not sure that means society wasn't ready for a female commander at least half a century ago.  I use the word commander because I think that's the sticking point, if there is one.  Females have been in executive positions in the private sector as well as in state governments for a very long time, but the Presidency has a special function of commanding a military as well.  The fact that there's a selective service thread fairly alive at the moment, and that no one has yet mentioned that only males are mandated to register, suggest that there's a hesitancy in the military service aspect when it comes to treatment of women.  I don't think Clinton is weak in the area of being willing to march US troops into harms way--if anything, I think she is too power-projectionist. Society will automatically think that any particular woman would make a good president even if it has no qualms with females in command generally, and if a woman running for president is not elected, it will not necessarily mean that society is not ready for a woman.