New Post
Search
Help[Opinions] Re: Hilary (or Hillary)
in reply to a message by Ozma
Yes---it's hard to know whether it was done because of her gender or to avoid confusion with her husband.
I had a friend who used the fact that Hillary Clinton failed to win the presidential nomination as proof that the American people are not ready to elect a woman President. I made the argument that her failure to secure the nomination didn't necessarily mean that, because she came with a lot of baggage from her tenure as First Lady, and people had already formed strong opinions about her. So it's hard to judge whether or not the people are ready for an woman President, or how future women Presidential candidates will be treated, based upon her example.
Well, quite OT.
I had a friend who used the fact that Hillary Clinton failed to win the presidential nomination as proof that the American people are not ready to elect a woman President. I made the argument that her failure to secure the nomination didn't necessarily mean that, because she came with a lot of baggage from her tenure as First Lady, and people had already formed strong opinions about her. So it's hard to judge whether or not the people are ready for an woman President, or how future women Presidential candidates will be treated, based upon her example.
Well, quite OT.
Archived Thread - replies disabled
1
Replies
I don't think it was the fact she was a woman. I think it was the fact she's thoroughly corrupt and a liar... Even a lesbian woman I met from NY was less than favourably impressed w/ her and glad she didn't get in.
I don't think Ms. Clinton is a good example to judge that from either. After all... some who accpeted the fact her daughter chose to go through w/ her pregnancy instead of aborting were willing to accept Sarah Palin as VP... and these weren't even the liberal voters, so I think it would depend on the woman how the American public would respond to her.
After all, whether Mr. Obama or Ms. Clinton got in, there'd be at least one factor making history... and while Mr. Obama may not be perfect, neither were any of the other candidates on either side. I'd say he's definitely a better choice than Ms. Clinton though... and not based on gender either.
I don't think Ms. Clinton is a good example to judge that from either. After all... some who accpeted the fact her daughter chose to go through w/ her pregnancy instead of aborting were willing to accept Sarah Palin as VP... and these weren't even the liberal voters, so I think it would depend on the woman how the American public would respond to her.
After all, whether Mr. Obama or Ms. Clinton got in, there'd be at least one factor making history... and while Mr. Obama may not be perfect, neither were any of the other candidates on either side. I'd say he's definitely a better choice than Ms. Clinton though... and not based on gender either.
This message was edited 8/25/2010, 7:03 PM
1
I agree with you. I think she went far enough to show that the country IS ready for a female president; I just think it will most likely be a woman who rose to the position without the extra push of being a former First Lady. The country had already formed an opinion of her, so an "unknown" would have more of a chance.
1