Potential female presidents in today's politics

[paul718]

I know next to nothing about her.  But is there any potential behind Amy Klobuchar?

I would like to see Pawlenty go after her seat in 2012.

[Four49]

I think you're all missing an obvious one.  Michelle Obama.  If her husband's successful, she's the next Hillary.  I don't know what her ambitions are regarding public office, but who does?

[paul718]

I think you're all missing an obvious one.  Michelle Obama.  If her husband's successful, she's the next Hillary.  I don't know what her ambitions are regarding public office, but who does?

By your reasoning, wouldn't Laura Bush be even more obvious?  The fact that Hillary Clinton parlayed her years as First Lady into a serious presidential candidacy is an aberration.

[Four49]

I think Hillary's success was more of a precedent than an abberation.  Time will tell on that one. 

And like I said, Michelle's chances are tied to her husband's success/failure.  Laura's husband didn't leave her with much to brag about.  And I don't think Laura has any interest in running for anything anyway.

[Matt Damon™]

based on other societies choices of female leaders a trend seems to emerge that the first female leader a nation elects tends to be a conservative

applying that logic to the united states would mean that sarah palin is the most likely one out of the current crop of political figures

sebelius is unfortunately too old for it

[paul718]

I think Hillary's success was more of a precedent than an abberation.  Time will tell on that one. 

You may be right, but it would be a dangerous precedent.  Just like I fear Barack Obama's victory could be a dangerous precedent.  But that's just my opinion.

[paul718]

knocked this guy off

based on other societies choices of female leaders a trend seems to emerge that the first female leader a nation elects tends to be a conservative

applying that logic to the united states would mean that sarah palin is the most likely one out of the current crop of political figures

sebelius is unfortunately too old for it

[Four49]

I think the trend leads to conservative women because a liberal is often considered to be a 'radical', to at least some small degree.  And society has barely evolved enough to accept female leaders, let alone a radical one. 

And I agree, if Hillary's success is a precedent, it's a dangerous one.  On many levels, but primarily, to me anyway, that a woman's success has to be initiated by that of her husband.  Same way Napolitano being single hurts her chances and is the main reason people think she's a lesbian.  Many still believe, even if they lie to themselves about it, that women 'have their place' and only begin to trust them if there's a 'good guy' in the background.

[Spaghetti Cat]

Of those not mentioned, I would say Cathy McMorris Rodgers, Marsha Blackburn, Jo Ann Emerson, and Shelley Moore Capito all have a good chance of being elected to the Senate in within the next 6 years or so.  After that, they're chances at president are extraordinarily higher than those of their fellow male GOP senators (Elizabeth Dole ran in 2000, KBH I think would've been VP if she hadn't turned it down for Texas gov, the Maine twins are widely mentioned, and have been, and well, Lisa is too corrupt). 

[Four49]

Also not mentioned - Maria Cantwell, Democratic Senator from Washington.  I lived in Seattle when she first got elected.  She's very smart and articulate without coming off as condescending.  She made a buttload of dough as a VP for RealNetworks, so she has business experience.  And she was raised in Indiana.  Good background bullet points for a national campaign. 

Though she did lose her seat in Congress in 1994.  But so did a lot of Dems that year.  And it was in a conservative district.  She was the first Dem to win that seat in forty years.  She also got a lot of votes from conservatives in eastern Washington when she was up for re-election in 06. 

Watch for her name mentioned as a potential VP if Obama has a good four years and decides to dump Biden.

[Nixon in '80]

I think you're all missing an obvious one.  Michelle Obama.  If her husband's successful, she's the next Hillary.  I don't know what her ambitions are regarding public office, but who does?

I think her negatives make Hillary look like Betsy Ross.

[Four49]

I think you're all missing an obvious one.  Michelle Obama.  If her husband's successful, she's the next Hillary.  I don't know what her ambitions are regarding public office, but who does?

I think her negatives make Hillary look like Betsy Ross.

Examples? 

[Nixon in '80]

I think you're all missing an obvious one.  Michelle Obama.  If her husband's successful, she's the next Hillary.  I don't know what her ambitions are regarding public office, but who does?

I think her negatives make Hillary look like Betsy Ross.

Examples? 

Many of her comments on the campaign trail, including, but not limited to, the "first time in my adult life" line, have come off as snobbish, condescending, and occasionally outright disdainful to the American public.

Her thesis, while not necessarily a negative in it's own right, hurts the "post-racial" image she attempts to portray.

Okay, so perhaps my statement was a bit heavy-handed, but I maintain she does have definite negatives she would have to overcome before considering a run for office herself.

[Four49]

I actually agree on those two points being negatives.  But I wouldn't consider them insurmountable.  People have short term memories.  If Barack's as successful as his fan base hopes, and future Dem Presidents don't screw up too bad, she has a built in base of 50-60 million voters, maybe more. 

Then again, like her husband, it will depend largely on the climate.  There would probably have to be an outgoing Rep POTUS with Bush like unpopularity. 

And her window would be small.  Like Hillary, she'd probably have to wait a while after her husband is out of office, in order to establish her own credibility.

[Nixon in '80]

She's obviously smart and driven... I don't know, we just have to wait and see if she wants it.

[Josh/Devilman88]

She don't want it at all.

[BeccaM]

Now that they've been elected, I think there's a fairly good chance that Bev Perdue and/or Kay Hagan end up on some sort of national ticket in the future, given that they're relatively young, moderate, and attractive candidates from a new swing state in the south. 

Kay especially already has national recognition for being the one to take down Liddy. It's interesting that NC has had a lot of female politicians reach high office. Most other southern states are the exact opposite.

[Josh/Devilman88]

If Obama loses re-election then Kay Hagan could be on the ticket as soon as 2016.

[Robespierre's Jaw]

If Obama loses re-election then Kay Hagan could be on the ticket as soon as 2016.

I think Secretary of State-designate Hillary Clinton has a greater chance of being on a Democratic ticket in the near future than Senator-elect Kay Hagan and that's saying something.

[Josh/Devilman88]

If Obama loses re-election then Kay Hagan could be on the ticket as soon as 2016.

I think Secretary of State-designate Hillary Clinton has a greater chance of being on a Democratic ticket in the near future than Senator-elect Kay Hagan and that's saying something.

We will see.

[Matt Damon™]

Palin

[bgwah]

From what little I know about her, Kay Hagan seems possible...

Cantwell and McMorris Rodgers have both been mentioned so far. I don't really think either of them will go any higher than they currently are.

Well, Cathy McMorris Rodgers will go higher--in that I think she'll become a very powerful member of the Republican leadership in the House--but I don't think she'll run for Senate or Governor (or President..). Maybe I'm crazy but I could see her being Speaker one day, which would be funny considering that district already produced one recently. I've just always gotten the impression that she'll probably keep her seat and focus on rising in the ranks of the House as opposed to seeking a higher elected office.

[Beet]

I think the trend leads to conservative women because a liberal is often considered to be a 'radical', to at least some small degree.  And society has barely evolved enough to accept female leaders, let alone a radical one. 

And I agree, if Hillary's success is a precedent, it's a dangerous one.  On many levels, but primarily, to me anyway, that a woman's success has to be initiated by that of her husband.  Same way Napolitano being single hurts her chances and is the main reason people think she's a lesbian.  Many still believe, even if they lie to themselves about it, that women 'have their place' and only begin to trust them if there's a 'good guy' in the background.

The first women Governors and Senators served because they succeeded their husbands or were in some way only in power because of their husbands, but no one today thinks that a successful woman candidate for Governor or Senator can only come about because of the woman's husband. Hillary's path was the same as previous women pathbreakers, and in that sense perfectly normal. If she had won, it absolutely would not have set a precedent, IMO, in that regard at the Presidential level.

On the other hand it would have demolished the notion that liberal women are somehow radical or unacceptable. The biggest irony there is that the most passionate Obama partisans usually argue that she lost because of her Iraq war vote.

[BeccaM]

Hillary isn't as liberal as most of her fellow Democratic female senators. She falls somewhere between the Boxer/Murray type and Lincoln/Landrieu type on that spectrum, so she was never deemed a whackjob.  Most female Republican senator are too liberal/moderate for their party at the national level too, which is why I tend to expect more from the female Democrats from southern states who can play the family values angle and whatnot.

Anyway, 10 years ago, there were 8 female senators. The next Congress will have 16-19 depending on final replacements of vacated seats. Women are incredibly more active in state and local politics than ever before, so it's expected that this number will continue to rise.  I wonder if there will ever be a day with 50+ seats being held by women.

[Josh/Devilman88]

Hillary isn't as liberal as most of her fellow Democratic female senators. She falls somewhere between the Boxer/Murray type and Lincoln/Landrieu type on that spectrum, so she was never deemed a whackjob.  Most female Republican senator are too liberal/moderate for their party at the national level too, which is why I tend to expect more from the female Democrats from southern states who can play the family values angle and whatnot.

Anyway, 10 years ago, there were 8 female senators. The next Congress will have 16-19 depending on final replacements of vacated seats. Women are incredibly more active in state and local politics than ever before, so it's expected that this number will continue to rise.  I wonder if there will ever be a day with 50+ seats being held by women.

We can only hope. I strongly believe women make better politicians.