• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Isn't it about time that a Lady should be President of the US?

Isn't it about time that a Lady should be President of the US?

  • yes

    Votes: 24 70.6%

  • no

    Votes: 9 26.5%

  • better: a non-binary person .....

    Votes: 1 2.9%
  • Total voters
    34
Phys251 said:
To each their own.



I have no idea who will be our nominee in 2024. I don't see Biden running again, and I think that we may see several candidates besides Harris.
Click to expand...
Who is Sanders' protege? I know AOC, but I -think- she will be to young to run then? IF not, then she's going to take the Sanders mantle and run in my opinion. She can also get the Warren wing (read: the Warren supporters who didn't vote for Sanders) of the party to coalesce behind her if she plays her cards right.
 
Most democracies use a parliamentary system, with a Prime Minister instead of President. Confusing matters a bit, there is sometimes a President with very little power: a head of State but not of Government. Anyway, my point is that being chosen by the majority in Parliament before the popular vote probably gives women a better chance. Standing on their own against a competing male, they're at a disadvantage because it's less acceptable for them to use personal insults and threats, meaning they can't defend themselves from those.

However, I can say for sure the US will elect a woman. When Republicans and Democrats each put forward a woman.
 
PoliSciPulse said:
So who would be the most likely Sanders Protege for 2024 (whether he/she runs or not)?
Click to expand...

I don't know that there is one. Sanders is one-of-a-kind ... people tend to over-value what they know they can't have.

Do you remember that his full package included a 50% increase in total taxes? That's a big target. "Democrats always want to raise your taxes, and finally we have one who boasts about it" writes itself.
 
Rumpel said:
Isn't it about time that a Lady should be President of the US?
Click to expand...
Shouldn't the most qualified candidate be brought into this position regardless of sex? Or should we just nominate an unqualified, female candidate (like Kamala Harris) because ... "it's about time?"

Screwed up logic ..
 
jotathought said:
Shouldn't the most qualified candidate be brought into this position regardless of sex? Or should we just nominate an unqualified, female candidate (like Kamala Harris) because ... "it's about time?"

Screwed up logic ..
Click to expand...
Your logic is screwed.

According to your logic, there has NEVER EVER been a woman in the US that was qualified to become President.

When I speak of "about time" - I do not mean any special election. I am speaking in general.

Or do you think it natural, that ONLY men should be POTUS?
 
Rumpel said:
Your logic is screwed.

According to your logic, there has NEVER EVER been a woman in the US that was qualified to become President.

When I speak of "about time" - I do not mean any special election. I am speaking in general.

Or do you think it natural, that ONLY men should be POTUS?
Click to expand...
Do you understand English? What part of "the most qualified candidate should be elected president, regardless of sex" didn't you understand?
 
TheParser said:
No.

The best qualified person should be President.

Obviously, this did not happen in the 2020 election.

Chances are that a woman WILL be the next President, even though she is no more qualified than the male that currently claims the title.
Click to expand...
What qualifications are needed to be a party puppet. A good set of strings and somebody to tell you what to say. Biden is the perfect party puppet. In 4 more years Hillary will be senile enough for the job.
 
MamboDervish said:
Absolutely. I was viscerally repulsed by Hillary Clinton, but not only was she better qualified than Trump for the job, she might have been the single most qualified non-incumbent candidate in my lifetime. So naturally I voted for her.
Click to expand...
Is that some sorta sick joke????

There was no way in hell that lying, corrupt, incompetent horrible evil old woman could possibly be better than Trump.

Frankly, America and Americans had 4 very good years with Trump as president.
 
jotathought said:
Shouldn't the most qualified candidate be brought into this position regardless of sex? Or should we just nominate an unqualified, female candidate (like Kamala Harris) because ... "it's about time?"

Screwed up logic ..
Click to expand...
So you think it "normal" that in the whole history of the US there has never been a female President?
 
Lucky 1 said:
Is that some sorta sick joke????

There was no way in hell that lying, corrupt, incompetent horrible evil old woman could possibly be better than Trump.

Frankly, America and Americans had 4 very good years with Trump as president.
Click to expand...
Uh .... no. There was nothing corrupt or incompetent about Hillary. As an 8 year White House veteran, a US Senator, AND a Secretary of State, she was easily the most qualified non-incumbent applicant for the Oval Office in my long lifetime. If anybody knew how Washington worked, it was Hillary. And although he wasn't needed, if there were any missing pieces about running the country, her husband could fill in the blanks.

Conversely, Trump was a sick candidate put into office by sicker sycophants, and the country was lucky to survive four years of his total lack of qualifications, his unwillingness to even learn, his incompetence, and his efforts to destroy our government. I'm sure nothing amuses the charlatan more in his solitary moments than remembering how easy it was to get his mindless minions to chant, "LOCK HER UP! LOCK HER UP!". I bet he laughs and laughs about it. and knowing full well that, even after he controlled the DoJ, there wasn't any crime he could charge the most investigated woman in the history of the planet with - because she was squeaky clean.
I laugh about it too. There are few things more amusing to me than Trump's foolish followers.

"LOCK HER UP! LOCK HER UP!"

:ROFLMAO::LOL::ROFLMAO::LOL::ROFLMAO:
 
mrjurrs said:
Lay them out, let's see what you've got. Here's an early resume entry she might have used.

Law degree from Yale, served as a congressional legal counsel.
Click to expand...
My problem with Hillary was not her law degree or any of the wonderful things she did; it's that she demonstrated an inability to learn from what she did, especially in 2016, when she repeated the same mistakes of 2008 during campaigning. This displayed rigid and inflexible thinking.

This is not to diminish her accomplishments; just to say that she ran a very poor campaign. Many observers, including various authors in Foreign Affair, say that Trump would have been beaten my a "competent politician." I think that is slightly harsh and should be closer to a "competent campaigner."
-----
Trump was the opposite when he campaigned. At times he seemed too flexible, a carnival barker, willing to say whatever it took to win. The pandering was so obvious that I wasn't entirely sure if he actually planned to govern the way he campaigned.

For these two reasons, I felt both were equally disqualified and I voted third party. I was in NY, so my vote did no harm -- I could have voted Trump and there was still no way he would have won NY. Had I been in a state that mattered, I would have grudgingly voted Hillary.
 
Rumpel said:
Isn't it about time that a Lady should be President of the US?
Click to expand...
Only if she doesn't get voted in strictly because she's a she.
 
Rumpel said:
So you think it "normal" that in the whole history of the US there has never been a female President?
Click to expand...
Has a female candidate ever been selected out of the primaries (the answer is yes)? and she got her ass kicked. Why would it not be considered "normal" for the most qualified candidate to be selected? Do you find it normal that Kamala Harris was the first primary candidate to be dropped from the Democrat primaries because nobody liked her, and she only received a sliver of support (like 1 - 2 %)? Yet .. she's the VP now and most likely the 2024 contender when old Joe can't continue.
 
PoliSciPulse said:
My problem with Hillary was not her law degree or any of the wonderful things she did; it's that she demonstrated an inability to learn from what she did, especially in 2016, when she repeated the same mistakes of 2008 during campaigning. This displayed rigid and inflexible thinking.

This is not to diminish her accomplishments; just to say that she ran a very poor campaign. Many observers, including various authors in Foreign Affair, say that Trump would have been beaten my a "competent politician." I think that is slightly harsh and should be closer to a "competent campaigner."
-----
Trump was the opposite when he campaigned. At times he seemed too flexible, a carnival barker, willing to say whatever it took to win. The pandering was so obvious that I wasn't entirely sure if he actually planned to govern the way he campaigned.

For these two reasons, I felt both were equally disqualified and I voted third party. I was in NY, so my vote did no harm -- I could have voted Trump and there was still no way he would have won NY. Had I been in a state that mattered, I would have grudgingly voted Hillary.
Click to expand...
Not to mention FBI director Comey's call out days before the election, plus the constant Republican/Pooten fueled harping on e-mail/Benghazi. Of course a lack of retail politicking didn't help.
 
Rumpel said:
So you think it "normal" that in the whole history of the US there has never been a female President?
Click to expand...
There's a whole lot of never beens, as it's been 45 white males, one (mixed race) Black.
 
PoliSciPulse said:
My problem with Hillary was not her law degree or any of the wonderful things she did; it's that she demonstrated an inability to learn from what she did, especially in 2016, when she repeated the same mistakes of 2008 during campaigning. This displayed rigid and inflexible thinking.

This is not to diminish her accomplishments; just to say that she ran a very poor campaign. Many observers, including various authors in Foreign Affair, say that Trump would have been beaten my a "competent politician." I think that is slightly harsh and should be closer to a "competent campaigner."
-----
Trump was the opposite when he campaigned. At times he seemed too flexible, a carnival barker, willing to say whatever it took to win. The pandering was so obvious that I wasn't entirely sure if he actually planned to govern the way he campaigned.

For these two reasons, I felt both were equally disqualified and I voted third party. I was in NY, so my vote did no harm -- I could have voted Trump and there was still no way he would have won NY. Had I been in a state that mattered, I would have grudgingly voted Hillary.
Click to expand...
Did you hold your independent candidate to the same vetting as you did the main two party's? If Beau Biden had not passed away Joe Biden would have been president in 2017. As far as equivalency, you have got to be kidding. djt is a life long grifter that has benefited from lawless actions his entire life.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom