Krauthammer’s Take: Dems’ Midterm Strategy Is ‘Total Humiliation for Obama. . . and He Can’t Take It’

[musiclady]

I may take heat for this, but I don't want a woman president!  That would be a turn-off for me because I don't know of a woman right now that is qualified to be the president of the US - especially in these dire times.  Any woman candidate is skating on her gender - just like Obama did with his skin color - I want someone who has a proven track record in governing.  I would be insulted if they pick a woman right now.

Here's a question for you, alice.....

How do you know if any person, male or female, leadership experience or not, is going to be a good President?

You can say that governing a state is a good indicator, but all you have to do is look at Jimmy Carter to see that doesn't always work out well.   

My point is that we don't really know who is going to have what it takes to lead us in troubled times until it happens.  There's always a risk.  That's why looking to gender only, whether pro or con, doesn't seem to me to be a valid plan.

There may well be a courageous woman out there who could be a good President.  I don't know who she might be, but I'm not going to dismiss the possibility out of hand this far ahead of the process.

[Bigun]

I heard this a long time ago, and I like it. A description of gender characteristics that is close to my view of things.

In the case of a fire in the home, the man thinks "Must get out, must get out, must get out" and is great at finding the way to safety. The woman thinks "Get the kids, get the pets, get the important papers". And is great at assembling the important things to save. Both are critical, but they aren't the same.

Now, as to my characterization of women as emotional, I stand by it, but I don't see it as a negative. It is simply reality. Yes, there are emotional men, and yes, there are stoic women. And because women are emotional, doesn't mean that women aren't capable. One of the best directors of my department was a woman. However, I work with women as coworkers, and I'll tell you, they are challenging in the work environment.

A woman can be president. Currently, we have woman voters who will cross party lines to vote for a woman. So, nominate a woman, fite Democrat fire with fire.

Male and female brains are NOT wired the same and that has been scientifically proven I do believe!

Not saying that females are any less capable than males but they definitely react differently in most situations.

[xfreeper]

equal is not same

[Fishrrman]

Relic wrote above:
[[ Obama was everything they dreamed of, and somehow, he still failed...]]

He failed because the Republicans blocked his every move.

He failed because of Bush and his policies which were destroying hope in America.

He failed because conservatives hated him for no reason.

He failed because the loathsome old white guys LIKE YOU wouldn't give him a chance.

Right?

/s

[Fishrrman]

Relic wrote above:
[[ The only way for the Republicans to have a chance in 2016 is to nominate a female candidate. It would be just enough to confuse a lot of women voters, something the "war on women" proved is easily accomplished. ]]

I can think of one who speaks her mind to traditionalism quite well...  ;)

(Unfortunately, there aren't any more...)

[alicewonders]

Here's a question for you, alice.....

How do you know if any person, male or female, leadership experience or not, is going to be a good President?

You can say that governing a state is a good indicator, but all you have to do is look at Jimmy Carter to see that doesn't always work out well.   

My point is that we don't really know who is going to have what it takes to lead us in troubled times until it happens.  There's always a risk.  That's why looking to gender only, whether pro or con, doesn't seem to me to be a valid plan.

There may well be a courageous woman out there who could be a good President.  I don't know who she might be, but I'm not going to dismiss the possibility out of hand this far ahead of the process.

I would love to see a woman president some day - AND - right now, you could pull a person off the street randomly, and they wouldn't be a worse president than what we've got. 

But, it's like throwing a half white/half black community organizer out there and expected the whole black community to vote for him simply because he is "black".  Voting for a person based on the color of his skin is RACIST.  Voting for a person based on their gender is no different.

The fact that you would have to think for a minute to come up with a woman that is barely qualified means that just coming up with a woman to head off Hillary/Granny Warren shows that we don't have any women on the A Team.  We're catching up, but we're not there yet. 

Our country is in too big of a mess to vote for another person that has to have on-the-job-training.  We need someone who can hit the ground running on day one.  Of course, I'm thinking of someone like Rick Perry or Scott Walker. 

And PLEASE!  It isn't because women are different than men in a way that makes us worse leaders - - NO! 

[evadR]

America will learn nothing. Democrats, including the media, will chalk this up to an explicable failure by Obama. Obama was everything they dreamed of, and somehow, he still failed. Obama should have succeeded, so, the only explanation is that Republicans obstructed and sabotaged Obama. Those Democrats are recalibrating, and are now, "Ready for Hillary." Sadly, they will be joined by a good number of otherwise conservative women who will vote for Hillary because it's time for a woman.

In the end, the women always take us down....well, almost always.
Sad to say.
Here's an opportunity to redeem themselves.

[evadR]

Give me the right woman to vote for and I'll vote for her.

[Relic]

There are plenty of women that will give you the screw driver you are asking for. And, I bet the whole episode might make YOU very emotional when SHE gets the job done !!!!!!

"Relic" it is !!

Thank you for proving my point. 

[musiclady]

I would love to see a woman president some day - AND - right now, you could pull a person off the street randomly, and they wouldn't be a worse president than what we've got. 

But, it's like throwing a half white/half black community organizer out there and expected the whole black community to vote for him simply because he is "black".  Voting for a person based on the color of his skin is RACIST.  Voting for a person based on their gender is no different.

The fact that you would have to think for a minute to come up with a woman that is barely qualified means that just coming up with a woman to head off Hillary/Granny Warren shows that we don't have any women on the A Team.  We're catching up, but we're not there yet. 

Our country is in too big of a mess to vote for another person that has to have on-the-job-training.  We need someone who can hit the ground running on day one.  Of course, I'm thinking of someone like Rick Perry or Scott Walker. 

And PLEASE!  It isn't because women are different than men in a way that makes us worse leaders - - NO!

Just for the record, I'm not one here who thinks we need to nominate a woman (hope that was clear before).

And I'm in total agreement that running a woman just because Hillary will most likely be the Dem nominee is not a good plan.

I'm just saying that sometimes people appear without perhaps being "on the A list," so dismissing the possibility of nominating a woman out of hand just because we don't see one right now, is not a good plan either.

OBVIOUSLY that women and men are 'wired differently' doesn't make a lick of difference in whether or not they have principles, the wisdom to choose good people around them, integrity, strength of will, patriotism, determination, intellect, an understanding of the Constitution, and a whole host of other qualifications required in a leader.

And OBVIOUSLY we have a male person in the Oval Office right now with the emotional age of about 6, so anyone arguing that being male is a necessity won't get very far these days.  ^-^

[aligncare]

I despise identity politics, style over substance and political correctness. But, if Hillary runs and is the nominee, we better have a woman opposing her or we will be steamrolled again.

Look, the fact is, first the culture has to change. Only then will the sniveling, feckless politicians "get it" and begin behaving like representatives of a mature republic instead of like Saturday Night Live caricatures.

[alicewonders]

Just for the record, I'm not one here who thinks we need to nominate a woman (hope that was clear before).

And I'm in total agreement that running a woman just because Hillary will most likely be the Dem nominee is not a good plan.

I'm just saying that sometimes people appear without perhaps being "on the A list," so dismissing the possibility of nominating a woman out of hand just because we don't see one right now, is not a good plan either.

OBVIOUSLY that women and men are 'wired differently' doesn't make a lick of difference in whether or not they have principles, the wisdom to choose good people around them, integrity, strength of will, patriotism, determination, intellect, an understanding of the Constitution, and a whole host of other qualifications required in a leader.

And OBVIOUSLY we have a male person in the Oval Office right now with the emotional age of about 6, so anyone arguing that being male is a necessity won't get very far these days.  ^-^

I agree musiclady.  And I should have been clearer at what I meant - which was, that at this time!   

As soon as this mid-term election is over - it's going to be 2016 campaign time.  That's just less than 2 weeks away.  Anyone that is thinking about running as the GOP candidate better be getting ready.  We can't afford to waste any time with these Herman Cain, Ben Carson, Michelle Bachman, Huckabee, Santorum, Gingrich, ......TIME WASTERS!

WE'VE got to get the process going in our favor as much as possible.  It is TIME to roll up our sleeves and work together to support the most conservative candidate that can also WIN!  It is vital!

So, to make myself clear - I don't see a woman that fits my qualifications this time around that can be groomed and prepped this late in the game.  Having said that, yes - sometimes candidates come out of nowhere and end up being the president!  I know they are going to be looking for a woman to counter the Democrats.  But I have been maintaining that the Democrats are going to stab Hillary in the back again - I don't think Granny Warren will catch fire.  The Democrat nominee is probably going to be a young and dynamic hispanic man. 

[alicewonders]

I despise identity politics, style over substance and political correctness. But, if Hillary runs and is the nominee, we better have a woman opposing her or we will be steamrolled again.

Look, the fact is, first the culture has to change. Only then will the sniveling, feckless politicians "get it" and begin behaving like representatives of a mature republic instead of like Saturday Night Live caricatures.

The problem AC is that the media never treats our women candidates with the same stature and respect they accord Democrat women.  There is a clear bias, and LIV tend to go with the same view as popular culture - which is, unfortunately, the mainstream media.

So, even if we had the best female candidate - a serious contender - the media would smear her with innuendo, out-of-context sound bites and outright lies - until she becomes a caricature with the LIV.  They do it to the men too, but I think they are especially vicious to conservative women that they fear.  Ironic, in light of their "War on Women" mantra!

But nobody ever said they weren't angry and repressed lying hypocrites!

 

[evadR]

"...we better have a woman opposing her or we will be steamrolled again."

WHO?

[aligncare]

"...we better have a woman opposing her or we will be steamrolled again."

WHO?

Preferably a tri-racial, black/Hispanic/Asian, physically challenged, lesbian; from a poor, immigrant background. Surely we can find someone who fits that description.

[musiclady]

The problem AC is that the media never treats our women candidates with the same stature and respect they accord Democrat women.  There is a clear bias, and LIV tend to go with the same view as popular culture - which is, unfortunately, the mainstream media.

So, even if we had the best female candidate - a serious contender - the media would smear her with innuendo, out-of-context sound bites and outright lies - until she becomes a caricature with the LIV.  They do it to the men too, but I think they are especially vicious to conservative women that they fear.  Ironic, in light of their "War on Women" mantra!

But nobody ever said they weren't angry and repressed lying hypocrites!

I really like this post!      

[Bigun]

The problem AC is that the media never treats our women candidates with the same stature and respect they accord Democrat women.  There is a clear bias, and LIV tend to go with the same view as popular culture - which is, unfortunately, the mainstream media.

So, even if we had the best female candidate - a serious contender - the media would smear her with innuendo, out-of-context sound bites and outright lies - until she becomes a caricature with the LIV.  They do it to the men too, but I think they are especially vicious to conservative women that they fear.  Ironic, in light of their "War on Women" mantra!

But nobody ever said they weren't angry and repressed lying hypocrites!

BRAVO!!!
Nail meets hammer!

[xfreeper]

Preferably a tri-racial, black/Hispanic/Asian, physically challenged, lesbian; from a poor, immigrant background. Surely we can find someone who fits that description.

You got the LG but forgt the BT

[Lando Lincoln]

The problem AC is that the media never treats our women candidates with the same stature and respect they accord Democrat women.  There is a clear bias, and LIV tend to go with the same view as popular culture - which is, unfortunately, the mainstream media.

So, even if we had the best female candidate - a serious contender - the media would smear her with innuendo, out-of-context sound bites and outright lies - until she becomes a caricature with the LIV.  They do it to the men too, but I think they are especially vicious to conservative women that they fear.  Ironic, in light of their "War on Women" mantra!

But nobody ever said they weren't angry and repressed lying hypocrites!

To your point (well, mostly):

UPDATE: CNN’s Costello: Violent Assault of a Woman is 'Disturbing' – Unless It’s Bristol Palin

[alicewonders]

To your point (well, mostly):

UPDATE: CNN’s Costello: Violent Assault of a Woman is 'Disturbing' – Unless It’s Bristol Palin

That is my point, thank you Lando.   

[Lando Lincoln]

That is my point, thank you Lando.   

Astounding isn't it?  Costello took glee in in Bristol Palin's assault or, at least her recounting the assault.  Genuine glee.

[evadR]

"...we better have a woman opposing her or we will be steamrolled again."

WHO?

Preferably a tri-racial, black/Hispanic/Asian, physically challenged, lesbian; from a poor, immigrant background. Surely we can find someone who fits that description.

hmmm, well, yes, that would be a good start.