Should we have a woman president in the US White House?
358270
We already had a woman president, Hillary. lol\nMickey Mouse could win the presidency next term on the Democratic ticket after these last few years with W.\nIf a woman becomes president, what do they call her husband? The first gentleman?\nIt's not a matter of "should a woman be president." It's not important that we elect a woman, so that we can finally say we did it. What needs to happen is to elect the most effective leader, whether it is a man or a woman. That's not so easy to do. Usually, instead of a leader, we get a politician. A politician is someone who cuts deals, trades influence, and always if it will benefit him or her. That makes politicians self-serving. A leader is someone who does the right thing for the country, whether it is good for him or her personally or not. We haven't had one of those in a long time. Harry Truman 60 years ago. Or maybe John Kennedy 45 years ago. \n\n\nThere are several women out there right now with the nads to be president. Many other nations have female heads of state so why no the U.S.? One way to look at it is being a good mother. To do this you have to be a good leader requiring strength, making tough decisions even if those you lead (your kids) hate you for a while, being flexible with what new information comes your way, and so forth. \nNot saying a president has to be a mom, just saying women have the ability and strength of character to do the job.\n\nThanks for a great question.
444301
I think "isn't it time...?" may be the wrong approach.  I do not believe we should specifically seek to elect a 'the first woman President' or 'the first African-American President' or an other such 'first' just to do so.  These sorts of things will likely happen in time, but not just to do them!\n\nCompare how Margaret Thatcher became the first female Prime Minister in Britain.  It was not BECAUSE of her gender!  She simply was very good at what she did and rose to prominence in her party the same way anyone else would. (The same is the case for the first elected female leaders of other states, e.g., Israel and India.)\n\nI am hopeful that is how it will happen in the U.S. as well. \nI happen to agree with you about Hillary Clinton -- I am opposed to her, but it has nothing to do with her being a woman. (And I think it would be just as unfortunate for people to vote FOR a Presidential candidate of ANY party just because she's a woman, as it is to vote AGAINST the person for that reason.)
478102
Yes i would, it's about time, we had some really smart lady in charge. \nFor one on the most advanced nations on earth, we are one of the few democracies that have never had a woman leader.\nMaybe the time has come at last.
1067755
This country is in no way ready for a woman president, and even if we were, the countries we deal with will probably never be. Look, if we have a woman president how will we ever get those sandy, archaic, third world countries to take us seriously, they don't even let their women show any skin, let alone make any decisions about anything important. If we had that loud mouth Hillary Clinton for president of our country, or any other woman for that matter, we would be the laughing stock of the entire world.
1179235
LOL Good catchy one! \nYes I believe it is time for a woman to be in the WHITE House.. although Hillary kind of was w/ Bill hahaha.. So..I'd vote for any woman because I know it is time in history to move forward with the times!
587378
Next election we have 2 female candidates, and I believe both are the favored candidates. \nSecondly a womans nature isn't to lead in a head position, but in a behind the scenes position. I'm not saying it's impossible, however, most wouldn't exactly shine. Third, the number of female candidates has been far to low for one to have been elected. Fourth, foreign negotiations would probably have trouble with a female leader. Many countries still have women in lesser positions and believe women aren't fit for head positions in anything. A probably distant fifth reason is that some guys wouldn't except a female president so they would lose votes there, but noone's ever gonna be excepted by everyone. Don't take this as unfair treatment, it's fairly equal, and it's also natural. Most people I know would be open minded enough to accept a woman, that was qualified, to be president.\n\nI believe that's 5 good reasons, and also I gave you some info on the fact that we might soon get a female president, so whatever sexism you were trying to 'bring to light' or w/e  you should probably drop. Sexism is similar to racism, most is fueled by the person who is 'hurt' by it, for the simple reason that they can't understand, someone's always going to find some reason not to like you, it doesn't matter what you say. If you're perfect in every other way, they'll use your race, your sex, or your ethnicity against you. Grow past it and stronger than it and you'll probably notice less of it.\n\nAnd trust me, just because we get women leaders, we would not be without war. Men are more logical than women, and women act on emotions. Emotions are feelings and feelings are temporal. If a girl's on her period and then also ends up with some problem with her kid if she's married, and then has to negotiate with Russia, I'd personally be scared. That's one of the reasons women operate better behind the scenes. But my point was, impulse and emotion cause a whole lot more fighting than logic does. Women are human just like men, and there's going to be fighting regardless.
1044345
I would DEFINATELY vote for her - Bill Clinton did a great job and she helped an awful lot behind the scenes - would be good to see a woman in power , the US could do with some feminine touches after what the current moron is doing.
1184609
No, I think the right woman would make a good President, black or white, as long as it wasn't Hilary.
1095166
qualifications maybe??\n\nIt's not that anyone should want a man or a woman as a president, we want the best candidate to be president, ... period.
304431
I may not trust Clinton to run this country (in war time or peace time, makes no difference to me really.) Women can run wars though. Margaret Thatcher was brilliant in the Falklands War, leading her country through a tough time to an impressive victory over a formidable enemy. Condoleeza Rice would probabally be a great war time leader. Women can be tough too. Make no mistake about that.
326409
Either one of them would make a good first woman president.  The first woman president would have to be able to withstand a lot of criticism.  They would have to flip-flop with the best and act like it was the way they truly feel.  The men presidents have done this for centuries.  Both of these women have demonstrated this ability.  The first woman president must not back down in a fight, even if they are dead wrong.  This would be a sign of weakness.  Again both qualify.  Both women have already run the White House.  Both have been involved in underhanded dealings and have gotten away with it.  Just like various male presidents.  How could you go wrong with either.  Since I tend to lean more to the conservative side as I've gotten older, I would probably cast my vote to Condi.
1838
Generally ladies are peace loving, accurate, hardworking, determination and concentration on their work...... and godgifted motherly behavioiur.  Therefore, I do support the idea of a woman president.
897184
We have our first Female speaker in the house. I feel that this is an important step to having a female president in the running. We need more women to balance out the good ole boy network that has been running for to long. A women as president would make other countries take another look at us. They would have to reconfigure their stand in dealing with the US. As long as she is sure and confident in her purpose she would be an asset to the Presidency.
418837
I am a liberal, and I believe that Condoleeza Rice is doing a much better job at the State Department than her predecessor, and would make a fine Republican candidate--much better, much more qualified than our current President.  I also think that Hillary Clinton would make a much better President than our current one, and I would support her for President, no matter who sha ran against, unless the Republican party nominated someone like Mayor Bloomberg or the very respectable Senator Arlen Specter, which will never happen.  But neither Clinton nor Rice holds a candle to other women luminaries out there who have not a chance to be President.\n\nAs for the canard that women do not make good leaders, I think it is one of those moronic, essentialist things that people keep parroting simply because it is the socially acceptable way of expressing sexist prejudice.  In fact, we have very little empirical evidence to evaluate such a claim, and the little evidence we have actually refutes that hypothesis.
673825
Yes, the right woman who can be a leader and take the abuse of being president...no, I do not believe HC can become president, she has too much baggage
260859
We had a woman for president.\nHillary.\nHer husband was just a figurehead.
211331
AS TO WHETHER ONE SHOULD VOTE FOR A FEMALE PRESIDENT OR NOT, MY ANSWER IS YES, IF THE CANDIDATE IS ONE THAT IS GOOD FOR THE COUNTRY.  GENDER IS NOT A QUALIFIER FOR THE PRESIDENCY.  ONE WILL BE A GOOD PRESIDENT BASED ON HIS/HER INTELLIGENCE, CHARACTER AND SKILL AT SURROUNDING HIMSELF/HERSELF WITH SKILLED AND KNOWLEDGABLE ADVISORS WHO ARE ALSO OF GOOD CHARACTER.  NARCISSISTIC POWER WORSHIPERS AND PEOPLE WHO WILFULLY VIOLATE THE LAW FOR PROFIT OR THE AQUISITION OF MONEY AND POWER HAVE NO PLACE IN HIGHER GOVERNMENT OR ANY LEVEL OF GOVERNMENT IN MY OPINION.  \n\nSUMMARY:  IF THE PERSON IS A GOOD, DECENT AND INTELLIGENT PERSON, AND YOU FEEL GOOD IN YOUR HEART ABOUT THEM, VOTE FOR THEM.