Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Raise your hand if you thought we'd go 24+ years w/o another female VP nom

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
Bucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 04:22 PM
Original message
Raise your hand if you thought we'd go 24+ years w/o another female VP nom
In 1984, Walter Mondale was in an uphill fight and went for a "Hail Mary" pass (well, technically a Hail Geraldine) by nominating the first female vice presidential candidate from a major party. How many of us thought we'd go a whole quarter of century with neither party trying it again? Republicans, who've suffered from a gender gap problem, probably have the most to gain from nominating a woman, so I'm kinda surprised they haven't. But it's not like we have any dearth of XX talent (as opposed to XY talent, so get your mind out of the gutter, Matcom). Look at the line up of women contenders we could be choosing among...


. . Kathleen Sebelius . . . . . . Maria Cantwell . . . . . . . . Patty Murray


. . . Janet Napolitano . . . . . . Shirley Franklin . . . . . . and probably some people I haven't even thought of.

I think it's a shame that we're wasting so much of our political talent in this country. We'll scrape the bottom of the barrel to hire any old assclown to be president, but the only woman our party is seriously considering right now is there in large part because she happened to be married to a former president. (I mean no disrespect to Senator Clinton, but a first termer with only a moderate amount of leadership success isn't going to get "mentioned" unless some candidates just get free passes (or the opposition desperately wants to run against her).

I don't go in much for tokenism when it comes to candidates; leaders should stand and fall on their own talents. But certainly there's enough silence, enough "dogs that didn't bark," among these non-candidates to wonder why none of them are getting any serious buzz. What are we doing wrong?



PS, the best kept political secret of this decade: Sebelius has green hair.

http://6news.ljworld.com/art/apps/pennynews/1080978356_Sebelius,-Kathleen-602.jpg
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Conker Donating Member (284 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 04:29 PM
Response to Original message
1. I never really understood why so many oppose a female president.
I am a male, and I do not see anything wrong with it.I also think it is wrong that women get paid less than men.I read somewhere that in polls even most women oppose having a female president.Is America really that sexist?Are you sure that women have a hard time voting GOP when several prominent conservatives are women (Hatcher, etc.)?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 04:58 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. yes it is that sexist
look at all the sermons on submission...it doesnt bother the majority of Americans that women are paid less or dont move up the corporate ranks.

The vast majority of men never talk to their HR departments or their bosses about why this is so wrong. Women may get support outside of work from sympathetic males. But no male will go to HR or to Senior management and state that this state of affairs is morally wrong and that it should be corrected immediately.

It might give you an idea why we have not had a woman president
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maine-ah Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 05:01 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. personally, I don't think it's the many that oppose a female pres
the problem is, is that old rich white men (a handful) are the ones running this country. And until the (few) old rich white men are no longer running the country, don't expect it to happen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ComerPerro Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 05:05 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. women are so emotional and can't make important decisions
so, therefore, its better to have a reckless, drug-abusing, moronic cowboy-wannabe asshole in the White House.

I mean, sure, Bush screwed everything up.

But imagine if a woman was president on 9/11!

Not only would she not have found Osama, but she probably would have been so emotional and irrational that she might have done something really insane, like maybe attacked another country that had nothing to do with 9/11...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cruzan Donating Member (806 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 05:19 PM
Response to Original message
5. It's something I've never given much thought to
To me, it'll happen when it happens, maybe more likely as president than VP. In Britain, nobody in any collective sense decided they needed a woman PM. Thatcher rose to the top wholly organically. It would seem that'll be the way here also. It's just a matter of things coming together and the right woman at the right time. And I don't think that'll be Hillary; she's just too polarizing to make practical political sense.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AnnInLa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 05:22 PM
Response to Original message
6. One of my most prized possessions is
a large red campaign button with a pic of Walter Mondale and Geraldine Ferraro on it and the number '84. Wonder if it is worth anything?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rageneau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 07:06 PM
Response to Original message
7. I thought pot would be legal for over 20 years by now, too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 07:42 PM
Response to Original message
8. Women have had a tough time breaking out
Despite having much better numbers than African Americans in terms of being elected to statewide offices, they haven't been able to break through. For what it is worth, a close friend of Al Gore's who I know says that he really wanted Feinstein in 2000 but she turned him down for family reasons.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DELUSIONAL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-31-06 11:12 PM
Response to Original message
9. NEVER NEVER Maria Cantwell -- she is NOT a democrat
she is a DINO.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 12:39 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC