• 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!

Would You Vote a Woman into Presidential Office?

Would you vote for a woman running for president if she held your political views?

  • I'd be happy and excited to vote for a woman

    Votes: 87 82.9%

  • I would have some hesitations, but vote for her if she was best qualified

    Votes: 12 11.4%

  • I would vote for her only if there wasn't a qualified man

    Votes: 2 1.9%

  • I would not vote for a woman even if she held my views

    Votes: 4 3.8%
  • Total voters
    105
Tigger said:
I haven't suggested they can't. I have suggested they shouldn't. I believe that pretty much all of life is about what one SHOULD or SHOULDN'T do much moreso than what one can and can't do.
Click to expand...

thats horse****...who are you to decide what anyone should do....
 
lpast said:
thats horse****...who are you to decide what anyone should do....
Click to expand...

Me, personally?..... I'm nobody. However, I am a believer in a Universal set of Morals and Values that I believe should be the core of every society and culture in the world. THAT is what I base my beliefs on.
 
Laughing-
damn good thing a few patriots didn't just say the British Empire is just too powerful to stand infront of, we should just wait until it runs out of steam. I have heard many sorry excuses for doing nothing, not so much isolationist as parasitic, feeds off the system while doing nothing to help what feeds it. A scabies or toe fungus, not any danger to the host, just an irritant.

I too firmly believe every citizen should be content with their place in society, should live happy and content lives within society. The ability to move in society pretty much defeats the caste system. However I do want my daughter to know her place and be content in it-

managing the family household budget or a fortune 500 company

Fixing her daughter's ouchie boo-boo or another's teen clinging to life after a bus accident

Killing spiders in the house or bad men in far away lands

The problem with 'know their place' is those who want it seldom agree with the place others choose.

Time heals all wounds as best as I can recall, never heard it claimed it rights any wrongs.

Men AND women who are willing to risk more than ridicule usually are credited with wrong righting.

Bottom line for most 'know their place' types is a very narrow focus on who show know their place. A woman doesn't upset society by wanting to chase her dreams... anymore than a black man for sitting at a lunch counter, or one man saying 'I DO' to another.

What it does is rock the narrow world view of a few fungi on society's feet... like toe jam on the walk of life... :peace
 
notquiteright said:
I too firmly believe every citizen should be content with their place in society, should live happy and content lives within society. The ability to move in society pretty much defeats the caste system. However I do want my daughter to know her place and be content in it-
Click to expand...

How can she know her place if society has never shown her what it is, because society refuses to define it either?

notquiteright said:
The problem with 'know their place' is those who want it seldom agree with the place others choose.
Click to expand...

That's because some of us don't believe that choice is the proper avenue for defining such things.

notquiteright said:
Time heals all wounds as best as I can recall, never heard it claimed it rights any wrongs.
Click to expand...

No, time does not heal all wounds. At least not in the span of a single human lifetime. It definitely doesn't right any wrongs.

notquiteright said:
Men AND women who are willing to risk more than ridicule usually are credited with wrong righting.
Click to expand...

Yes, and all too often replacing one set of wrongs with another.

notquiteright said:
Bottom line for most 'know their place' types is a very narrow focus on who show know their place. A woman doesn't upset society by wanting to chase her dreams... anymore than a black man for sitting at a lunch counter, or one man saying 'I DO' to another.

What it does is rock the narrow world view of a few fungi on society's feet... like toe jam on the walk of life... :peace
Click to expand...

I'm going to have to disagree that people don't upset society by chasing their dreams. In fact many do exactly that. My worldview is what it is. Nothing will shake or change it.
 
In the last election ofr president in Mexico there was a woman running and her campaign slogan was "I'm different"

That was scary after seeing Obama get in saying just the same thing, and she meant just that she was a woman and not anything about her ideas.
 
I would never attempt to change the world view of anyone so determined to be nothing more than a self serving irritant for society, perhaps like a grain of sand, society will encase and seal away such irritants creating a pearl for others.

Society has shown women their role/place in society for a very long time..

Joan d'Arc, Elizabeth I, Molly Pitcher, Sacajawea, Earhart, Madam Curie, Rosa Parks, Sally Ride, I think you get the idea.

It just isn't the teachings you would have girls learn, too bad so sad.

I never said time was limited to one lifetime, you know better, the British Empire wasn't going to run out of steam in one lifetime, nor will 'this wrong', as you see the current path of society, run out of gas in a lifetime. You quibble, petty folks hold hard to perceived slights and grudges. You tried to claim time will right the wrong, no sir, people stepping forward do that, from Joan to Rosa, women step forward and right wrongs, Time just marches on...

Interesting thought, society is just replacing one set of wrongs with another, perhaps an more enlightened view is as society advances it replaces one badly flawed society- slavery, women as second class citizens, discrimination, colonial 'empires' that devastated whole swathes of people, with one not as flawed, working toward a better society.

One clear fact is no one agrees 100% with all of society, but it is an interesting mix that claims society is going in a totally wrong direction. They all think they stand alone but there are many, just too socially dysfunctional to be able to gather.

People upset an old not longer functional society by chasing their dreams, be it equality for women, blacks, nations under colonial rule. I'm sure many white folks would like 'the good ol' days' where not only women but blacks knew their place. I imagine some Brits long for the days when the sun never set on the British Empire, and change is never easy, like childbirth painful and messy, however without it the human race ends.
 
notquiteright said:
I would never attempt to change the world view of anyone so determined to be nothing more than a self serving irritant for society, perhaps like a grain of sand, society will encase and seal away such irritants creating a pearl for others.
Click to expand...

Good. It would be a massive waste of time.

notquiteright said:
Society has shown women their role/place in society for a very long time..

Joan d'Arc, Elizabeth I, Molly Pitcher, Sacajawea, Earhart, Madam Curie, Rosa Parks, Sally Ride, I think you get the idea.

It just isn't the teachings you would have girls learn, too bad so sad.
Click to expand...

I get the idea, and most of them do have a place in history, as an example of what not to be.

notquiteright said:
I never said time was limited to one lifetime, you know better, the British Empire wasn't going to run out of steam in one lifetime, nor will 'this wrong', as you see the current path of society, run out of gas in a lifetime. You quibble, petty folks hold hard to perceived slights and grudges. You tried to claim time will right the wrong, no sir, people stepping forward do that, from Joan to Rosa, women step forward and right wrongs, Time just marches on....
Click to expand...

I was referring to personal wounds more than societal ones, but whatever. Time has a way of grinding away at society just like water lapping up on the rocks. It may not be a short process, but it works none the less.

notquiteright said:
Interesting thought, society is just replacing one set of wrongs with another, perhaps an more enlightened view is as society advances it replaces one badly flawed society- slavery, women as second class citizens, discrimination, colonial 'empires' that devastated whole swathes of people, with one not as flawed, working toward a better society.
Click to expand...

Or maybe it replaces it with one that is equally, if not more wrong. That would seem to be a matter of viewpoint and opinion, now wouldn't it?

notquiteright said:
One clear fact is no one agrees 100% with all of society, but it is an interesting mix that claims society is going in a totally wrong direction. They all think they stand alone but there are many, just too socially dysfunctional to be able to gather.
Click to expand...

Actually, we don't gather together because even inside our own "society" there is significant division about what the true Right way of looking at and doing things is.

notquiteright said:
People upset an old not longer functional society by chasing their dreams, be it equality for women, blacks, nations under colonial rule. I'm sure many white folks would like 'the good ol' days' where not only women but blacks knew their place. I imagine some Brits long for the days when the sun never set on the British Empire, and change is never easy, like childbirth painful and messy, however without it the human race ends.
Click to expand...

Maybe we'd be better off if the human race ended.
 
Why is it a massive waste of time? Time makes diamonds, oil, pearls. Odd you call turning an irritant into a prize a massive waste of time when you hold grudges for centuries... :confused:

Odd you call national heroes examples of what not to be when several of them come from the time you idealize and lead their nations in times of great strife. Rather than good examples of what is wrong they are excellent examples of why you are wrong. ;)

Strong women who lead men in battle, rallied a nation when an armada bore down on HER country, lead our first explorers, worked on the frontiers of knowledge on isotopes, set world records, and traveled into space, showing future female leaders the sky is literally no longer the limit.

I agree time works away at everything, but sure as age takes the bloom off a rose, you can't turn back the hands of time. Time marches ON, not back. We will not go back to the 50's, to separate but equal, to women seeing no further than the grocery store and dry cleaners on Mondays....

It is a matter of opinion or viewpoint what progress in society is? I disagree, the opinion needs to be fully vetted in facts, not fantasy to be of much value. How worthy of consideration is the viewpoint the earth is only 10,000 years old? How about believing the earth is flat or the opinion blacks can never be trustworthy?

Opinions that ignore facts that don't jib with the preconceived notion, the fantasy world being weaved are fatally flawed. Viewpoints that encourage people to show no courage, not matter the 'stand alone rhetoric' are not worthy of a freeman, even a misanthropic,misogynist, flight not fight one. It almost sounds like one of those liberal touchy feely communes to base your life on the 'Universal Good/Truth/credit card'. Like many things that are oversimplified and underdefined that theory of conduct died out as men progressed past pledging loyalty to the Lord of the Manor, and nobles being exempt from common law.

A madman have commitment to his delusions, a sociopath a steady heartbeat as he filets his victims, but it doesn't make him just, or worthy of consideration.
 
notquiteright said:
Why is it a massive waste of time? Time makes diamonds, oil, pearls. Odd you call turning an irritant into a prize a massive waste of time when you hold grudges for centuries... :confused:
Click to expand...

I was suggesting that debating with me or trying to change my mind on anything were massive wastes of time.

notquiteright said:
Odd you call national heroes examples of what not to be when several of them come from the time you idealize and lead their nations in times of great strife. Rather than good examples of what is wrong they are excellent examples of why you are wrong. ;)
Click to expand...

Just because they came from the time in history that I prefer does not mean they are the epitome of what I believe a woman should be.

notquiteright said:
Strong women who lead men in battle, rallied a nation when an armada bore down on HER country, lead our first explorers, worked on the frontiers of knowledge on isotopes, set world records, and traveled into space, showing future female leaders the sky is literally no longer the limit.
Click to expand...

You're correct that the sky is no longer the limit. It SHOULD be set much lower than that, but unfortunately it no longer is. The biggest problem with the shattering of the glass ceiling..... the shards of glass have cut decent society to pieces as they've fallen.

notquiteright said:
I agree time works away at everything, but sure as age takes the bloom off a rose, you can't turn back the hands of time. Time marches ON, not back. We will not go back to the 50's, to separate but equal, to women seeing no further than the grocery store and dry cleaners on Mondays.....
Click to expand...

Then humanity has no value at all and the best thing we could do is to have someone "accidentally" touch off a MAD situation.

notquiteright said:
It is a matter of opinion or viewpoint what progress in society is? I disagree, the opinion needs to be fully vetted in facts, not fantasy to be of much value. How worthy of consideration is the viewpoint the earth is only 10,000 years old? How about believing the earth is flat or the opinion blacks can never be trustworthy?
Click to expand...

Yes, it IS a matter of opinion what progress and deevolution are in society. The fact that you don't like that doesn't make it any less true.
 
I have nothing against a Women in the White House. Now the trick is to find one that is worthy of the job. If there is a women that appears on the spectrum that has good plans for the country, then I will consider voting for them. But the idea of voting for a president based on gender is quite childish.
 
kerussll said:
The United States seems much more resistant to electing women into high positions when compared to Europe and other western countries. So I'm interested to see people's views and how they would vote. Would you vote for a woman who you held all of your views politically and promised to make changes you agreed with? Would you be more like or less likely to vote for your candidate because she's a woman?

My views: I would be very excited to see a woman who held my views run for president or even vice president. I would be excited to see someone whose views match my own running for office, but her being a woman would be the cherry on top. I would not go so far as to vote for any average woman just because she's a woman, because I feel the first female president is going to be held to higher standards and have her every move scrutinized by her critics. A sub par female president would only set us back.
Click to expand...

I could care less about the gender of our President. All I care about is whether they are honest and hold at least most, if not all of my views. Or at the very least is willing to honestly consider other view points.

Edit PS: I would have voted in this poll but the options don't take into account of not careing what the gender is of our President.
 
Last edited:
Tigger-
again you have the cart before the horse, because you don't like the way history has unfolded doesn't make your opinion true. Facts are just that, opinion is what you choose to believe. You keep getting them confused and when questioned about it you use the Luddite 'reasoning' of it is what I believe so there, a sort of blind thoughtless faith not unlike a religion of disconnect. You see, just like an ostrich with it's head in the sand, you refuse to look around and are rather proud you are incapable of self examination. You lock in on one 'philosophy' never truly develop it, mainly because it can't be developed past a bumper sticker phrase, and think you are somehow enlightened.

This usually happened in the late teens but you seem older, stunted development with little chance of that changing.

Now I said all that without any anger, or hate in my heart, I hold no hope it will change you a lick. I don't think many folks here take your trollish pronouncements seriously and your firm opinion, ready to flee the best nation on earth for one that is as brutal as any 1984 scenario. (be honest, you are going no where)

I don't see this as a massive waste of time, talking to you, you tend to flatter yourself, not much massive about you intellectually. I don't see talking about basic philosophy as a massive waste of time, holding a grudge for centuries sure seems like one. Kind of the opposite of your value system on time wastage,

Women have shown gender roles are as obsolete as the alpha male and his companions having primary breeding rights within the tribe. Like medieval medicine, philosophy, and construction methods, roles in society do change and for the better, but it is a process, not a microwave pizza. Even in your beloved medieval times alpha male breeding dominance was obsolete. The concept that in a very inbred linage has been Ordained by Gawd to rule without question was quite the rage back then, a development of alpha male breeding, now it is money and power as a sign Gawd is gracious to a select few, but now society has developed so that more are capable of reaching the elite ranks. (one regressive measure some are trying to codify into our society is a return to heredity rather than merit as a wealth enhancer)

That came about as society specialized and began the walk down Industrialization Way with the rise of a merchant class, which started us down the road to a more broad based and enlarging credit system. Few Americans would have the cash to buy a home, our middle class rose as credit was passed to them from an almost exclusive ownership of the elite.

Society progresses as the power or benefits of membership pass to more, not less hands of the society. It is like making sausage, not pretty to watch at times but a tasty produce when done. Women going from servants to CEOs may upset a few, but more than one petty noble was distressed when merchants could enforce their IOUs on nobles and get the somewhat run down Starter Castle...
 
Mason66 said:
In the last election ofr president in Mexico there was a woman running and her campaign slogan was "I'm different"

That was scary after seeing Obama get in saying just the same thing, and she meant just that she was a woman and not anything about her ideas.
Click to expand...

Obama was using his race as a selling point? Care to cite that?
 
waas said:
Obama was using his race as a selling point? Care to cite that?
Click to expand...

What a racist thing to ask.

Where did I say in my post that he referred to his race? I said different and you jumped to race.
 
Mason66 said:
What a racist thing to ask.

Where did I say in my post that he referred to his race? I said different and you jumped to race.
Click to expand...

You want to call me racist, go right ahead. Just do me this: What were you referring to?
 
kerussll said:
The United States seems much more resistant to electing women into high positions when compared to Europe and other western countries. So I'm interested to see people's views and how they would vote. Would you vote for a woman who you held all of your views politically and promised to make changes you agreed with? Would you be more like or less likely to vote for your candidate because she's a woman?

My views: I would be very excited to see a woman who held my views run for president or even vice president. I would be excited to see someone whose views match my own running for office, but her being a woman would be the cherry on top. I would not go so far as to vote for any average woman just because she's a woman, because I feel the first female president is going to be held to higher standards and have her every move scrutinized by her critics. A sub par female president would only set us back.
Click to expand...

If her political platform was inline with mine and had demonstrated the desire and ability to push towards that end, then yes.

Besides, women are not the most unelectable category out there; that would be atheists.
 
Its rare that I feel I want to vote for anyone man or woman. Sadily however I have never voted for a woman. They just never match up with me enough to feel comfortable in doing it, sorry. I would if they did, but it just hasn't happened yet.
 
Sure I'd vote for a woman, but your choice goes from estactic about it (yeah, like I would ever feel that way about any polotician) to some reservations.

Heck, right now if we elected a bunch of hard working single mothers who know how to budget, we would be a lot better off than with that bunch of clowns up there now.

A hardcore feminist commie witch like Clinton, not in a billion years, but one with common sense and thinks the writings of Marx should be used for toilet paper, sure.
 
I would absolutely vote for a woman. Too many people are hesitant about electing women because they are afraid they'll get too emotional during their period, and they'll bomb North Korea or something. Women carry the load for the entire family, most of the time, and I think it's entirely possible that a woman could carry the load for her country, with no problem.
 
I would vote for any woman that I believed was more qualified or a better choice than who she was running against....
 
kerussll said:
The United States seems much more resistant to electing women into high positions when compared to Europe and other western countries. So I'm interested to see people's views and how they would vote. Would you vote for a woman who you held all of your views politically and promised to make changes you agreed with? Would you be more like or less likely to vote for your candidate because she's a woman?

My views: I would be very excited to see a woman who held my views run for president or even vice president. I would be excited to see someone whose views match my own running for office, but her being a woman would be the cherry on top. I would not go so far as to vote for any average woman just because she's a woman, because I feel the first female president is going to be held to higher standards and have her every move scrutinized by her critics. A sub par female president would only set us back.
Click to expand...

Of course.

What I want from any president:

Integrity
Solid ethical history
Ability to negotiate
International comprehension and a measure of comfortability
Faith and love for Country
Solid perspective of US History
Economic and military knowledge
Humility - for when a mistake or error is made a true apology and admittance of wrong will genuinely come
The ability to compromise
The ability to communicate with and meet congress on differing issues

Gender doesn't mean one does/doesn't have any of these qualities.
 
Superfly said:
I would absolutely vote for a woman. Too many people are hesitant about electing women because they are afraid they'll get too emotional during their period, and they'll bomb North Korea or something. Women carry the load for the entire family, most of the time, and I think it's entirely possible that a woman could carry the load for her country, with no problem.
Click to expand...

If she said she would bomb NK, that would go some distance towards getting my vote. The only good Red is a dead Red.

Oh ****!!! I probably shouldn't of said that, now they will be after me for threatening Obama.

Ok, statement ammended, the only good Red is a Dead Red who is not currently holding political office in the US. No threat to Comrade Premier Obama intended and non should be implied.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom