Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Well, that and the fact that we've never had one worthy of running. Still don't and probably won't have one worthy of running for several years.
So let me get this straight. You can say with absolute certainty that of the millions of women currently in the United States and all the millions who've lived in the history of the United States none of them are or were worthy of even running for President. You surely can't really believe that?
this is just a guess, but maybe because one has never run???
BTW, look at what the "president" is in India. It's basically just a cermonial thing and not a position of actual authority. Kinda like the Queen of England
This is Victoria Woodhull and she was the first woman to run for president, doing so in 1872 for the Equal Rights party, long before women gained suffrage in 1920. In what may be an omen of things to come, her running mate for vice president was:
Frederick Douglass!
Needless to say, they lost. Perhaps it was Woodhull's advocation of free love or maybe it was just because she was a woman? Either way, her votes were not counted.
Plenty of other women have run before, here's a list.
India, Pakistan, Bangladesh have all had women heads of government since quite a while now. While it can be argued that they were elected because of their relations/connections to former powerful/beloved male leaders, it is still quite an "achievement" that such male-dominated societies actually voted for women to lead their countries.
As some have pointed out, we haven't had any (strong/realistic?) women candidates for the US presidency. This begs the question why not?
It'll be interesting to see how Hillary does. She is such a polarizing figure though, if she fails, it'll be hard to determine whether she didn't win because she's a woman or because she's Hillary.
So let me get this straight. You can say with absolute certainty that of the millions of women currently in the United States and all the millions who've lived in the history of the United States none of them are or were worthy of even running for President. You surely can't really believe that?
This question opens a fun thread but is totally beyond being answered in any rational way...Why does India contain so many more Hindus than the US does? ....why are there so few surfers in North Dakota?....why don't the women of the middle east simply rise up and demand their rights? ...and, if America is losing jobs due to off-shoring, why do we shop at Wal Mart?...these any many other questions could be answered with the same simplicity as the OP's......
This question opens a fun thread but is totally beyond being answered in any rational way...Why does India contain so many more Hindus than the US does? ....why are there so few surfers in North Dakota?....why don't the women of the middle east simply rise up and demand their rights? ...and, if America is losing jobs due to off-shoring, why do we shop at Wal Mart?...these any many other questions could be answered with the same simplicity as the OP's......
The OP is probably a supporter of Hillary Clinton trying to get people to get used to the idea of Hillary Clinton being President.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,330 posts, read 54,400,252 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by NewOldLompac
So let me get this straight. You can say with absolute certainty that of the millions of women currently in the United States and all the millions who've lived in the history of the United States none of them are or were worthy of even running for President. You surely can't really believe that?
I believe there are and have been many capable women who haven't run. Then again there have been and are many capable men who haven't run either.
When you're effectively limited to a two party system and there's only two chances every four years, the odds aren't good for any individual and connections seem more important than competence,
I've read comments on this forum such as, "I hope women don't vote for Hillary just because she's a woman." When I read comments such as, "there's no woman competent enough to handle the presidency" I realize I have to support Hillary because she is a woman - and a competent one to boot.
The OP is probably a supporter of Hillary Clinton trying to get people to get used to the idea of Hillary Clinton being President.
Not necessarily stating that Hillary would be in any way capable of screwing things up any worse than they are; I was simply making the point that, how on earth is the political situation in India relevant to the political situation here? I am still nursing the severe bruises I've recieved from many contributors of this forum, who have taken me to task for making comparisons far more cogent than THAT one!...
No doubt there's a "good ol' boy" somewhere in the woods of Arkansas who is rude, mean, and nasty toward his hard-working wife; and somewhere in the wastes of Saudi Arabia is a nomad who can't do enough for his beloved spouse. But these comparisons can hardly be used as the basis for judging Women's Rights in the West vs the Middle East..."Why" India elected a "woman president" cannot be answered here--- you'd have to ask the voters over there...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
or maybe it was just because she was a woman? Either way, her votes were not counted.
