| REVIEWER | RATING & REVIEW |
 | LadyJesusFan777 (33)
08/11/2007 | Nothing wrong with a woman president if she can do the job.
(2 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | irishgit (138)
07/23/2007 | Sure.
Its not that they're going to be any worse than what we've seen so far.
At least not on the basis of gender.
(5 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | ILikePie (49)
06/12/2007 | The words 'Hilary' and 'Clinton' come to mind. Otherwise... sure
(2 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | Gloomyeeyore (6)
05/07/2007 | I would not have a problem with a female president. I would vote for a female it just depends on where she stands on issues. But I would not vote for somebody just because they were a female.
(2 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | Vudija (92)
02/23/2007 | Being female has no bearing on a person's ability to lead a nation. If a woman happens to be a good choice and shows that she is capable and willing to take the job; more power to her. I'm not going to go and vote for someone simply because they are a certain gender; it has to do with my belief that this person could do great things with our country.
(6 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | LastMessenger3 (40)
08/07/2006 | Women are much more stronger and smarter than man give them credit for. Saying that I think women much more emotional and caring because of their nurturing nature. If woman's sensebility won't interfere with her duty, then why not?
(3 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | doobiesNhof (21)
03/13/2006 | Yes. I don't care if it is a man or woman who is president as long as that person is honest and takes care of the things that really matter (i.e. health care, national security, human rights issues, diplomacy, etc). Might be a great change for this country if we have a woman president that is not weak but logical and more sensitive to the needs of the world.
(3 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | butyubchubstub (0)
01/15/2006 | Sure, the thing with this issue is not a matter of if, its a matter of when.
(3 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | HistoryFan (98)
01/06/2006 | No problem here.....I've had employers who were women before.
(4 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | oscargamblesfro (76)
12/21/2005 | Doesn't bother me, as long as the woman is capable who cares.
(5 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | Drummond (54)
12/21/2005 | Most of my bosses have been women. No problem at all.
(5 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | daedalus (33)
12/16/2005 | This absolutely needs to happen at some point. As we've seen with various administrations, its at least equally important, if not more so, who you are surrounded by rather than your own skill as a leader. Examples can be found from both parties.
I think the breaking of the cycle alone is enough reason to vote for a candidate that is reasonably qualified. Hell, all we get right now are reasonably qualified men.
Ask yourself -- does the president of the United States really need a package? (ligten up if that offends you)
The problem with Hillary Clinton being president is the likelihood of even greater partisan division in the country. Even so, I find the prospect of a white female Democrat vs. a black female Republican fascinating. That mix of race, gender and party affiliation would force many people to take a good hard look at themselves.
(That is if they even would come to the polls.)
(5 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | abichara (60)
09/19/2005 | I wouldn't have a problem with a female president. The fact is that many women have done exceptional jobs as leaders of their individual countries. Witness Margaret Thatcher, Golda Meir, or Eugenia Charles of Dominica. All of these women were major political leaders in their time that made a significant impact on the direction of their nations. Women in leadership positions cannot be defined by certain gender roles which society places on them. It is a mans world, but that doesnt have to stop a woman from seeking leadership positions. The truth of the matter is that women can perform on par with their male counterparts, and many have offered their own unique perspectives. History has proven this.
(7 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | johnnyjosephemil (0)
09/19/2005 | Speaking from a Canadian perspective a female president would be fantastic!!! Go Hillary! Go Condolezza! Go Oprah!
p.s. If Hillary wins (and I feel she would), I cannot wait for the S.N.L. skit that would follow.
(2 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | CanadaSucks (45)
09/05/2005 | We already have a female president. Dubya is quite the scared little bitch who (1) ducked real action in Vietnam, (2) does whatever his handlers or the voices in his head tell him to do and (of course, #3) sends other people to die or take the fall for his obvious mistakes while he does the pathetic tough-guy act. Real high on the puss-o-meter for me. . .
(9 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | JonTheMan (27)
09/05/2005 | I don't think it's the case that a female president would be thought of as weak abroad. The Soviet Union feared Margaret Thatcher more than any British Prime Minister before her, and with good reason.
(10 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | PzKpfw VI E (27)
09/04/2005 | Not completely sold on this, by I have nothing against women in power.
Simply put, the countries we face today as 'enemies' have leaders that do not have the advantage of seeing women in the same way I do. When a steady hand is needed to keep order and peace in these fragile, shale we call them invisible, 'ceasefires' many nations, rouge and otherwise, have with the US, they may see any women candidate as weak, which puts them at an acute disadvantage from the beginning.
What I am saying, is that the complete lack of respect they have for women in general may led them to become intially more hostile and aggressive.
And with American might spread so damn thin, retaliation may be limited.
I know women like Indira Ghandi led a country with little tolerance for women in a place of power, but I just don't think the US' foregin policy would be as strong.
Am I making any sence whatsoever?
I doubt it...
(4 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | James76255 (17)
09/04/2005 | I wouldn't have a problem with a woman president, but that doesn't mean I'm going to go out and vote for someone JUST because they are a woman. I look at the qualifications, the record, and the stance on issues before I check the gender.
(3 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | lucasboy (1)
09/04/2005 | I'm all for it if they can keep America's priorities first and not let the rich and corporations own them.
(2 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | scarletfeather (47)
09/04/2005 | As long as she was qualified, I would have no problem.
(5 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | Mr.Political (18)
09/04/2005 | My only concern would be that other countries (particularly those that traditionally tend to value woman differently than the western world does) would not treat her with the respect and diginity that the position of president warrants. Otherwise, as long as we elect a candidate based on more than the gender card alone, I don't see what problem there is with it.
(4 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | zuchinibut (36)
09/04/2005 | Do I see this happening anytime soon...Not at all. However, I wouldn't personally have a problem with a female president. Other countries have female leaders, and I think there isn't much reason to assume that a man would necessarily be better than a woman for the job.
(1 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | egista44 (0)
09/04/2005 | No. Everyone knows that a woman's place is barefoot, pregnant and in the kitchen.
(1 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | sixty7a (3)
08/17/2005 | Depends on the female, Hillary NO WAY!
(6 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
| Paul2505 (0)
08/07/2005 | Well this is an outside opinion, but I wouldn't care. We had a Woman for Prime Minister in Canada (be it for all of 4 months)
I think it would be a bad idea for thr Republicans to have Condoleeza Rice run, as IMO most (male) Republicans would rather vote for a White Male hippy than elect a black woman as president. Having a woman run would certainly be interesting though, I'll bet that the turnout would be very high.
(0 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | traderboy (25)
08/06/2005 | An idea whose time has arrived, with only one thing currently standing in the way: there aren't any compelling candidates on the horizon. Hillary Clinton pretty much has the position if she wants it in '08, but I won't be doing too many cartwheels when she gets in (she's too much of an opportunist who'll bend like a reed to suit her own needs). Christine Todd Whitman looked like a solid player for awhile (fiscal soundness and pro-choice), but after Bush and company ran a train on her as the EPA honcho (don't think THAT wasn't planned far in advance), she's morphed into a sidelines writer. Rice is a sterile dominatrix with too much prior baggage. And there you have it.....three known names: one who shouldn't get in (but will), one who should get in (but won't), and one who wants in (but can't and shouldn't). I'd like to see a female President in my lifetime, but I'll probably see a male African-American President first (which would also be fine).
(2 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | edt4 (99)
08/02/2005 | I'm more than ok with the thought; I'd LOVE to have a female President. If I can indulge in generalities here, I think they'd be less belligerent, more diplomatic, more progressive, probably more intelligent, and far less prone to displays of bull-headed, mulish machismo. In fact, I'd love to see anybody that wasn't a rich, male WASP elected to the office. Of course, it probably won't happen in my lifetime, if ever...
(6 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | 93century (36)
08/01/2005 | At least we would not have to worry about DNA on the interns clothing!
(1 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
| Sundiszno (30)
07/30/2005 |  I have no problem with the possibility of having a female President. It's not like being male is a Constitutional mandate, or any kind of mandate for that matter. Interestingly, this country, which prides itself on being so progressive and such a world leader, woul have to stand towards the back of the line when it comes to having females as leaders of the country - take a look at England (Margaret Thatcher, not to mention the titular head, the Queen); India (Indira Gandhi); The Philippines (Corazon Aquino); Israel (Golda Meier), to name just a few off the top of my head. Tell me that Thatcher and Meier didn't have a set of cojones when push came to shove! It's probably about time that we had a female Prersident, although I agree with others who have stated that they have to have the proper qualifications, and shouldn't be elected just because they are female and the country feels it's time to give some woman a shot at the Presidency. We stand a pretty good chance of getting at least one female presidential candidate in 2008.
(4 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | Molfan (57)
07/30/2005 | I would be willing to vote for a female president. I would look at her stands on all subjects I am concerned about and if she has most of the same as what i want in a president then yes i would vote for a woman as president.
(3 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | Solenoid DH (19)
07/30/2005 | What does gender have to do with anything? If she has wisdom and intelligence and good moral character - and takes seriously her oath to defend the Constitution, that is all that matters.
(5 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | magellan (153)
07/30/2005 | I want my President to share my worldview, be smart, be charismatic, be inspirational, be honest, be effective.... ack, i'm starting to sound like a broken record. Time to leave this list, as I don't think I'm getting it.
(7 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | Djahuti (54)
07/30/2005 | Sure- it's about time! Just not Condoleeza,Hillary or Christie Whitman!!! Remember,every LOUSY President in the last 200+ years has had testicles...
(3 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | Jar-Jar Binks (16)
07/30/2005 | Why not? Does it have to be men running the country? Why not have a change? Hillary Clinton, Barbara Boxer and Babs would be fine.
(4 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | louiethe20th (74)
07/29/2005 | Depends.If it is Hillary,I am not.If it is Rice, I would be ok.
(8 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | texasyankee (21)
07/29/2005 | No way. Thinking of all of the powerful women we've had, and they are all scary! As much as I always thought I'd like it, now as I have gotten older, I realize women in politics are Witches with a b!
(3 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
| bluetarbaby (8)
07/29/2005 | I'm completely okay with this. I grew up with all women, and happen to think (I hate to generalize, but must) they are smarter than men. I think we're ready for this. As for Clinton, I happen to think she's a genius that would be better suited to handle som e of the problems we face today. She can sit down with just brains and wit, no machismo crap that sometimes makes negotiations impossible. I mean, look at Margaret Thatcher. Furthermore, forget would I accept a female president - I'd take Gary Coleman at this point!
(6 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | kamylienne (77)
07/29/2005 | I'M okay with the thought of having a female president. It doesn't phase me much. The REST of the nation, though, I'm not sure.
(5 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | SZinHonshu (44)
07/29/2005 | Qualified female politician to lead the country = OK. Hillary Clinton = Not OK.
(5 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
| souljunkie (20)
07/29/2005 | In my lifetime I will not be ready for this. Echew hit on some of the ideas that I share probably not in quite the same way. Goneaway gets even closer to my way of thinking I have to admit. It was mentioned that Women have been leaders in other countries, I concede to that but those countries are not America. They are not the same in so many ways. Great Britian specifically has been weened under a Monarchy, they are used to the concept of a Queen or more so a Monarch that at one time had absolute power, the kind of power that our leaders dont have at all in this day and age. It is different. I dont believe women have the mindset to handle leadership at this level in our society. Like Mr. Eschew was lending to, I would be so afraid of projecting something else other than strength if this were to happen. It would be like leaving your front door open in the middle of Detroit, the most violent city in the country.
(2 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | LanceRoxas (40)
07/29/2005 | I would have no problem voting for a female conservative who is strong on national defense, pro-life and will nominate originalists to the Supreme Court. Someone like Ann Coulter ;-)
(6 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | EschewObfuscation (61)
07/29/2005 | I'm really not and it's not just Hillary. It's that Commander-in-Chief thing. Not that no women are qualified, far from it. There are several women, some of whom I know personally, whom I would consider eminently qualified to serve as President, and would probably do as good, if not a better, job than some of the empty suits who have presided over the Oval Office. None, not a single one of those women, have any chance of being elected, not just to the presidency, but to any elected political office. There are very few things of which I am certain. But one of them is that when the US shows weakness, the US gets attacked (I don't have to enumerate the deadly attacks visited on us during the 1990's, do I?) and electing a woman, particularly Hillary, particularly with the current backdrop of islamofascist aggression, would invite attack, like nothing we have done in the past.
(6 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
 | numbah16tdhaha (147)
07/29/2005 | Not if its Hillary.
(6 voted this helpful, 0 funny and 0 agree) |
| 1-43 OF 43 | View All |
