Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
July 02, 2016, 04:37:40 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Atlas Hardware Upgrade complete October 13, 2013.

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
| |-+  Presidential Election Trends (Moderator: Mr. Morden)
| | |-+  Potential female presidents in today's politics
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3 Print
Poll
Question: Is there a rising female president out there right now?
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY)   -9 (15%)
Gov. Sarah Palin (R-AK)   -5 (8.3%)
Gov. Kathleen Sebelius (D-KS)   -4 (6.7%)
Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX)   -3 (5%)
Gov. Janet Napolitano (D-AZ)   -1 (1.7%)
Sec. Condoleezza Rice (R)   -2 (3.3%)
Rep. Stephanie Herseth-Sandlin (D-SD)   -8 (13.3%)
Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-ME)   -2 (3.3%)
Gov. Bev Perdue (D-NC)   -1 (1.7%)
Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-AK)   -2 (3.3%)
Sen. Claire McKaskill (D-MO)   -4 (6.7%)
Atty Gen. Lisa Madigan (D-IL)   -3 (5%)
Carly Fiorina/Meg Whitman (R)   -2 (3.3%)
Chelsea Clinton (D)   -4 (6.7%)
Other (please name others if you have specific alternatives)   -10 (16.7%)
Show Pie Chart
Total Voters: 59

Author Topic: Potential female presidents in today's politics  (Read 11509 times)
paul718
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4013


Political Matrix
E: 4.00, S: -4.35

View Profile
« Reply #25 on: November 19, 2008, 01:41:22 pm »
Ignore

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 Sad
Logged
Four49
Full Member
***
Posts: 197
United States


Political Matrix
E: -3.42, S: -8.09

View Profile
« Reply #26 on: November 19, 2008, 03:57:37 pm »
Ignore

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.
Logged

"Some people walk in the rain, others just get wet." -Roger Miller
Spaghetti Cat
Driedapples
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1038
United States


View Profile
« Reply #27 on: November 19, 2008, 04:13:17 pm »
Ignore

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). 
Logged

Four49
Full Member
***
Posts: 197
United States


Political Matrix
E: -3.42, S: -8.09

View Profile
« Reply #28 on: November 19, 2008, 04:56:44 pm »
Ignore

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.
Logged

"Some people walk in the rain, others just get wet." -Roger Miller
Nixon in '80
nixon1980
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1312
United States


Political Matrix
E: 2.84, S: -5.39

View Profile
« Reply #29 on: November 19, 2008, 09:52:40 pm »
Ignore

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.
Logged

“Sarah Palin is the only part of the campaign that I won’t comment on publicly.” - Meghan McCain
Four49
Full Member
***
Posts: 197
United States


Political Matrix
E: -3.42, S: -8.09

View Profile
« Reply #30 on: November 19, 2008, 11:39:02 pm »
Ignore

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? 

Logged

"Some people walk in the rain, others just get wet." -Roger Miller
Nixon in '80
nixon1980
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1312
United States


Political Matrix
E: 2.84, S: -5.39

View Profile
« Reply #31 on: November 20, 2008, 12:01:35 am »
Ignore

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.
Logged

“Sarah Palin is the only part of the campaign that I won’t comment on publicly.” - Meghan McCain
Four49
Full Member
***
Posts: 197
United States


Political Matrix
E: -3.42, S: -8.09

View Profile
« Reply #32 on: November 20, 2008, 03:53:01 am »
Ignore

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.
Logged

"Some people walk in the rain, others just get wet." -Roger Miller
Nixon in '80
nixon1980
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1312
United States


Political Matrix
E: 2.84, S: -5.39

View Profile
« Reply #33 on: November 20, 2008, 05:09:58 am »
Ignore

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

“Sarah Palin is the only part of the campaign that I won’t comment on publicly.” - Meghan McCain
Josh/Devilman88
josh4bush
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 10126
Political Matrix
E: 3.61, S: -1.74

View Profile
« Reply #34 on: November 20, 2008, 09:25:17 am »
Ignore

She don't want it at all.
Logged
Josh/Devilman88
josh4bush
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 10126
Political Matrix
E: 3.61, S: -1.74

View Profile
« Reply #35 on: January 01, 2009, 06:55:04 pm »
Ignore

If Obama loses re-election then Kay Hagan could be on the ticket as soon as 2016.
Logged
Robespierre's Jaw
Senator Conor Flynn
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8192
Ireland, Republic of


Political Matrix
E: -4.90, S: -8.35

View Profile
« Reply #36 on: January 01, 2009, 07:16:06 pm »
Ignore

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.
Logged



Here's to the State of Richard Nixon

Some things are better left covered up.
Josh/Devilman88
josh4bush
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 10126
Political Matrix
E: 3.61, S: -1.74

View Profile
« Reply #37 on: January 01, 2009, 07:19:27 pm »
Ignore

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.
Logged
Matt Damon™
donut4mccain
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2469
Palestinian Territory, Occupied


View Profile
« Reply #38 on: January 01, 2009, 08:21:02 pm »
Ignore

Palin
Logged

]On the Island of Snipers, I was born
100 Shots, 100 Hits
Lu lu la la lu~
On a mouse's eyeball LOCK ON
On your heart LOCK ON!
The man who came from the Island of Snipers
Lu lu, lu lu la la
You better run away
Sniper sniper sniper...
SOOOOGEKIIIINGUUUUU
bgwah
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13877
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.03, S: -6.96


View Profile
« Reply #39 on: January 01, 2009, 10:07:38 pm »
Ignore

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.
« Last Edit: January 01, 2009, 10:11:42 pm by bgwah »Logged

Beet
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 17996


View Profile
« Reply #40 on: January 01, 2009, 10:13:23 pm »
Ignore

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.
Logged

Hillary's awesome work for America's future
"I feel like Paulette Revere — the recession is coming, the recession is coming!” - Hillary Clinton, April 3, 2008
Josh/Devilman88
josh4bush
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 10126
Political Matrix
E: 3.61, S: -1.74

View Profile
« Reply #41 on: January 01, 2009, 10:46:26 pm »
Ignore

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.
Logged
ChrisFromNJ
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2743


Political Matrix
E: -5.35, S: -8.61

View Profile
« Reply #42 on: January 01, 2009, 10:46:43 pm »
Ignore

Future Senator Caroline Kennedy (D-NY)
Logged
Beet
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 17996


View Profile
« Reply #43 on: January 01, 2009, 10:53:24 pm »
Ignore

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.

Why? Women are just as vulnerable to moral failing, greed, corruption, or heartlessness as male politicians. Yes, statistically, they tend to be more liberal than the average within both parties, but it all depends on the woman. Gender essentialism would be a mistake, IMO.
Logged

Hillary's awesome work for America's future
"I feel like Paulette Revere — the recession is coming, the recession is coming!” - Hillary Clinton, April 3, 2008
Josh/Devilman88
josh4bush
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 10126
Political Matrix
E: 3.61, S: -1.74

View Profile
« Reply #44 on: January 01, 2009, 11:04:20 pm »
Ignore

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.

Why? Women are just as vulnerable to moral failing, greed, corruption, or heartlessness as male politicians. Yes, statistically, they tend to be more liberal than the average within both parties, but it all depends on the woman. Gender essentialism would be a mistake, IMO.

No, I say that because women because most women's like the think out-side of the box to fix problems, men like plain black and white ideas. Also women more then men think about how things/actions will effect others. Also women know how to get people to do what they want. But that is just my view and how I see things.
Logged
Beet
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 17996


View Profile
« Reply #45 on: January 01, 2009, 11:07:34 pm »
Ignore

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.

Why? Women are just as vulnerable to moral failing, greed, corruption, or heartlessness as male politicians. Yes, statistically, they tend to be more liberal than the average within both parties, but it all depends on the woman. Gender essentialism would be a mistake, IMO.

No, I say that because women because most women's like the think out-side of the box to fix problems, men like plain black and white ideas. Also women more then men think about how things/actions will effect others. Also women know how to get people to do what they want. But that is just my view and how I see things.

Do you have any proof of this or is it just your conjecture?
Logged

Hillary's awesome work for America's future
"I feel like Paulette Revere — the recession is coming, the recession is coming!” - Hillary Clinton, April 3, 2008
Beet
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 17996


View Profile
« Reply #46 on: January 01, 2009, 11:14:45 pm »
Ignore

I tend to like female politicians more, but that's usually just because I think they have more interesting personalities. And they're so fashionable.

But really, I do find a lot of them to be more pragmatic and reasonable than the boisterous male idealogues  within their respective parties, especially within the Republican party. A lot of my favorite politicians are female Republicans, and I hardly align myself with the party's typical ideology.

Perhaps they have interesting personalities because it is *more likely* to take an interesting personality to make a serious run for office as a woman. And fashions for women politicians are hardly well-defined by tradition, as both Clinton and Palin and others have proven.

As far as the Republican party, perhaps because within strongly conservative circles, it is not viewed on as a woman's "proper role" to be heavily involved with career, particularly if she has a family (as is requirement for most pols), and therefore there are a dearth of boisterous ideologues.

The point is, these can all be explained by probabilities and environmental factors, not some essential genetic trait that says that if X is a woman, X will be pragmatic and reasonable. Each politician should be examined individually.
Logged

Hillary's awesome work for America's future
"I feel like Paulette Revere — the recession is coming, the recession is coming!” - Hillary Clinton, April 3, 2008
Josh/Devilman88
josh4bush
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 10126
Political Matrix
E: 3.61, S: -1.74

View Profile
« Reply #47 on: January 01, 2009, 11:28:29 pm »
Ignore

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.

Why? Women are just as vulnerable to moral failing, greed, corruption, or heartlessness as male politicians. Yes, statistically, they tend to be more liberal than the average within both parties, but it all depends on the woman. Gender essentialism would be a mistake, IMO.

No, I say that because women because most women's like the think out-side of the box to fix problems, men like plain black and white ideas. Also women more then men think about how things/actions will effect others. Also women know how to get people to do what they want. But that is just my view and how I see things.

Do you have any proof of this or is it just your conjecture?

Just my view.
Logged
Jeff from NC
Full Member
***
Posts: 174


View Profile
« Reply #48 on: January 01, 2009, 11:44:08 pm »
Ignore

I don't think Bev Perdue will make it far.  She is part of a corrupt Raleigh establishment, and frankly ought to have won her election by more than she did since her opponent was the mayor of Charlotte.  (Charlotte mayors are not kindly regarded elsewhere in the state.)  She is a mediocrity.
Logged
Jeff from NC
Full Member
***
Posts: 174


View Profile
« Reply #49 on: January 01, 2009, 11:48:19 pm »
Ignore

As for Hagan, one plus is that her husband is a multimillionaire, so that would be good seed money for a national campaign.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines