I would bemoan it.
The US is not going to unite behind a female president.
I don't wanna say it, but it's true. Sorry if it sounds sexist or whatever, but I really can't see the US accepting a woman president. Not only would the republicans remain united against her, but she'd lose a lot of democrats' support.
True, although it's not the US I wonder about, it's the other countries where women's rights have not progressed enough... will they really respect a female president?
That, and I'd rather see someone moderate in office for a change. :x
I agree with you both entirely. o_O I don't mean to offend anyone, but I think that the only reason the media is even focusing on Hillary as a candidate in 2008 is because she has a vagina and is a former first lady that doesn't closely resemble the crypt keeper. IMO, Hillary doesn't stand a chance in being endorsed by the democratic party because she's such a populist liberal on most issues to the point where it would even scare most democrats away...
I don't care whether anyone thinks people only focus on her because she's woman, or whether people think she wouldn't seriously make it because "America isn't ready for it". Well, you know what? Sometimes people don't know what's good for them.
I like Clinton as a potential presidential candidate because my views (obviously) match hers, and because like her husband, is only IMO able to reach both "sides". Not solely because she has a "vagina between her legs".
And the day people stop using "liberal" like it's a dirty word, I will rejoice. I personally don't automatically look upon the word "conservative" with disdain, I look at a person's character and such. There could be self-proclaimed liberals I may not like, and the same is with conservatives. As with McCain, he is "conservative" and Republican, however, I don't spit venom at him, because I rather like the man. Bush, however, I dislike heavily on so many levels, it's not funny.
"Liberal" and "Conservative" are both two labels I just try to avoid entirely. ^^; People who are too far over on either side seem to think there can never, ever be a middle ground, when there really can be. Yes, we can have gay marriages and welfare reform. Yes, we can have a strong military AND a strong environment. It doesn't have to be black or white.
Nobody can ever really avoid those labels, though. They're inescapable. I am of the thought that some things are just meant to be "black and white", but I also agree that everything doesn't have to be that way.
Same with the "extreme left" and "extreme right", although, I suppose extreme could be left to interpretation, maybe.
And the day people stop using "liberal" like it's a dirty word, I will rejoice. I personally don't automatically look upon the word "conservative" with disdain, I look at a person's character and such.
I can count on maybe 10 hands how many times Bush called Kerry a liberal, as if it's some dark secret horrible thing. In the Bush ads I saw, they never referred to Kerry and co. as Democrats, but as "liberals," never referred to other policies as anything but "liberal," liberal, liberal, liberal, as if it's the worst attribute a person can possess. In my opinion Kerry was hardly very liberal for a democrat. I think it goes like this:
Left Centrist Right
And finally, good old dictionary.com (you know the end all of everything haha) defines "Liberal":
1) Not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas; free from bigotry.
2) Favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas for progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; broad-minded.
It's fucking awesome to be a liberal.
My little chart didn't exactly work. Here's another:
*dances with her liberal queen*
If I'm understanding correctly, you are speaking generally about any woman who would attempt becoming the president of America, not just Clinton, no?
Well, I don't doubt you that Republicans would probably be like that... however, I fail to understand why a woman would lose the support of many fellow (or not fellow) Democrats.
Well ... I agree with you, haha. Completely. No more of this pathetic ultra-centrist John Kerry bullshit. Hilary Clinton is someone who's views I actually hold to a very high regard. She's not a coward. She's a fucking G and a half.
I would like to see a race between Dean and McCain. Now that would be something to see, and I would not mind if the candidate I voted for lost.
DEAN. Oh baby. He is one hot man.
I'd mind if McCain won, but compared to Bush he's a saint.
I don't think Dean would try for the nomination again, though. I would've voted for him in the primaries if I weren't registered as "No Party Affiliation", but eh, I digress.
I don't know if he'd succeed trying to run again, either, because of his love for shouting towards the end of the Democratic primaries.
Other than that, he's awesome in my book.
A race between him and McCain would be interesting, if McCain also tries to run again.
I would definately vote for her. However, I don't really know much about her. Why do so many people not like her? ;_;
Let's see... well, the silliest of all: she bought a house in New York so she could run for office there. ;) She is not even FROM New York, so how can she accurately represent the people?
Schwarzenegger, I believe, isn't from California... but yet, he's governor there.
I don't believe that you have to be a native of a state to run for office there, and to "accurately represent its people". ^^;