General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWho do you hope is the first female President? Since Hillary is not available I say Debbie Wasserman
Shultz. The more I hear from her the more I think she really has what it takes.
snappyturtle
(14,656 posts)President but now that you've pointed it out, I think she'd be a fine choice.
elfin
(6,262 posts)Debbie 'is fantastic, but appeals to a too narrow a base (ie those really paying attention, such as you).
If Warren wins, she is on the fast track for us.
Cleita
(75,480 posts)Also, wouldn't all the Orly Taitz types come crawling out of the woodwork, not only demanding birth certificates, but probably vaginal probes to prove she's a woman?
Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)roguevalley
(40,656 posts)I can't forget or forgive that.
Mojorabbit
(16,020 posts)aint_no_life_nowhere
(21,925 posts)I think she would be terrific: a lawyer like Hillary, extremely well-educated like Hillary, extremely likable and personable, attractive, and charismatic. You will probably say that we don't need dynasties in this country and you're probably right. But that's who I'd most like to see. I like her even more than her husband.
louslobbs
(3,238 posts)Lou
surfdog
(624 posts)5 more years and I think it's going to happen. I really do.
Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)Running for President is only for the creme de la creme of the political world......tried and true NATIONAL politicians.
Hillary did as well as she did because she'd had top level national experience because of her First Lady status in the White House and Governorship of Arkansas.
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)dsc
(52,166 posts)he just was an idiot. Warren would be fine in comparison.
MoonRiver
(36,926 posts)Zalatix
(8,994 posts)blm
(113,101 posts).
PotatoChip
(3,186 posts)is huge on my wishlist.
Up and coming Sandra Fluke, hopefully appointed, or elected to key positions in future years (if of course she is willing) would also be a very great asset, and a potentially wonderful big-time political contender, if she so chooses. Iow, she has 'the right stuff' for high office if she wants to expand upon it.
Love Rachel, and of course would support her, but hat-in-the-ring politics does not appear to be her career bent. Can't read her mind of course, but my guess is that she is currently where she wants to be. Her contributions are already extremely valuable as is.
Cleita
(75,480 posts)she's a lesbian and if you think the screams from the right are bad now...I hesitate to think. Look what the wing nuts are trying to do to JCP spokesperson, Ellen DeGeneres. It's not that I mind poking the conservatives with a stick, but Rachel has shown herself to be sensitive about unfounded hatred of her, like the 'she shouldn't have been born' remark by a nasty politician, and I wouldn't want to put her through that wringer.
I believe media persons like herself and Thom Hartmann are best where they are, keeping the public informed of the lies and misinformation from the right. Now Elizabeth Warren has the right background to enter politics and if she gets elected will have the opportunity to learn the ropes.
benddem
(3,172 posts)but she is also Jewish. The first woman and first Jew...I don't think so. Elizabeth Warren a much better choice.
JSnuffy
(374 posts)She is not the best spokesman with lots of "uhs" and comes off as very average. Every time I see her it seems like the things she said came straight from a card and not form her own knowledge.
YMMV
NRaleighLiberal
(60,022 posts)mrmpa
(4,033 posts)I was on a conference call with her earlier this week. She was able to inspire me even more. She clicked off what her husband has achieved. She is the strength behind him.
Number23
(24,544 posts)CTyankee
(63,912 posts)I have high hopes for her...
Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)Number23
(24,544 posts)And since the question was "who do *I* hope to see as the first female president" I'm sticking with my answer. If you have another suggestion, I'm sure the OP would love to hear it.
Edit: Just noticed that all of your responses in this thread are shooting down/disagreeing with everyone's suggestions. No idea why you feel in any way compelled to do that.
Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)kind of person it would take to run for President. Someone without extensive national political exposure and extensive political experience could never run for President. So to name someone without it doesn't make sense.
I'd like to "see" Joy Behar as President, but that's not a sensible answer, now is it, since she's not a politician. The question implies someone who you would REALISTICALLY like to be the first female President. As in, someone who could actually be a contender.
I agreed with the Schultz suggestion more than once, BTW. She is my selection. I forgot she was Jewish, which is a problem. And although she is a state rep, she has had extensive national political exposure. Maybe not enough. But she could realistically be a contender. Most likely would be a V.P. contender, since she's never been a governor or senator, though.
Number23
(24,544 posts)She has tons of "extensive national political exposure and extensive political experience."
I am aware of the reality of the kind of person that should run for president just fine, thank you. Which is exactly why I suggested and will continue to suggest Susan Rice.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)A Catholic was elected president. Our Constitution expressly provides that there is to be no religious test for a public office.
It's about time we had a Jewish president. Why not a female one?
I would prefer Elizabeth Warren, and I think she may be well enough known and ready to run in 2016.
Elizabeth Warren has had a lot of national press coverage, and while she did not run for office or serve in public office, she has done a lot of high profile public service and been trusted with great responsibility by Congress and the President.
Elizabeth Warren has the experience, the personality and the political clout to run for any office including that of president. Her handling of Jon Stewart proves it.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)DCBob
(24,689 posts)I would totally support her for President. She definitely has the cojones!
ZM90
(706 posts)HockeyMom
(14,337 posts)You go, girl! From a woman old enough to be your Grandma.
BlueToTheBone
(3,747 posts)Wasserman-Shultz would have to overcome her Jewish heritage and ties to Israel.
applegrove
(118,808 posts)Weren't people behind Eliot Spitzer? Are Americans not over that? Hell Lieberman ran for vp and nobody talked about his heritage.
BlueToTheBone
(3,747 posts)and it needs to be that good old time religion....evangelical christian.
Behind the Aegis
(53,991 posts)And when Lieberman ran, yes they did talk about his being Jewish, and they still do to this day.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)among some DUers. It is extremely unfortunate and makes DU look like a bunch of bigots. DU is not just a bunch of bigots, but is pretty representative of the population as a whole.
But then it isn't just the Jewish religion that gets unfair treatment here from time to time. Name a religion and someone will ridicule or criticize it. Good heavens, the atheists get dragged through the mud here too by a lot of DUers.
We all try to be tolerant and fair, but then we all have limitations.
I don't think that a Jewish candidate would have a tough time. Not at all. But then I'm from Los Angeles.
Besides, I thought that Debbie Wasserman-Schulz was somehow hispanic. Stupid me. I always assumed that. Shows you how little I care about people's religions.
phleshdef
(11,936 posts)golddigger
(3,804 posts)Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)soleft
(18,537 posts)aaaaaa5a
(4,667 posts)stlsaxman
(9,236 posts)Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)is there a Dem governor out there who looks promising?
Warren will not be able to run for President for many years, while she builds up years of experience on a national level. If she's able to do that while serving on a state level.
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)Odin2005
(53,521 posts)Rosco T.
(6,496 posts)unless it's Schweitzer/Wasserman or Schweitzer/Warren
Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)chknltl
(10,558 posts)Not that she has any desire for such service.
Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)on the national level in the political arena. And lots of it. As we've seen with Rick Perry.
Unless it's a Bill Clinton or someone like that.
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)With her incompetence and lack of interview skills she was the Democratic Sarah Palin.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)Jennifer Granholm (First (and only) woman to serve as Governor of Michigan)
Janet Napolitano (First woman to be elected to two terms as Governor of Arizona. Resigned to become Secretary of Homeland Security in the Obama Administration. First woman to immediately succeed another woman as Governor.)
Kathleen Sebelius (Resigned to become Secretary of Health and Human Services in the Obama Administration)
Kathleen Blanco (First (and only) woman to serve as Governor of Louisiana.)
I'm thinking the first female Prez would come from governors. I fear it might be a woman, since it seems like there have been more female Republican governors, and they seem to be stronger (more male-like, which is perceived as being a better leader). Like Jan Brewer of AZ.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)is another one to watch.
http://www.governor.wa.gov/
whistler162
(11,155 posts)President since she was born in Canada - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jennifer_Granholm
Brigid
(17,621 posts)Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)Get on board or get out of the way.
I don't think going from DNC chairperson to presidential candidate is a viable path to victory.
banned from Kos
(4,017 posts)people love KG. Plus she is not a gun nut like Michael Moore.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)We can dream, can't we? A female president would be great. It's about time!
lovemydog
(11,833 posts)She's bright, patient, compassionate and witty. All great qualities for a President.
applegrove
(118,808 posts)RZM
(8,556 posts)Last edited Sat Mar 3, 2012, 12:06 PM - Edit history (1)
DonCoquixote
(13,616 posts)Democrat, Governor, and firmly liberal, plus she is already used to the cameras.
Behind the Aegis
(53,991 posts)Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)whistler162
(11,155 posts)so maybe we can change the Constitution to make that exeption. ;}
knixphan
(4,442 posts)DiverDave
(4,887 posts)I'd vote for her
hauweg
(98 posts)Courtesy Flush
(4,558 posts)I'm in awe of her intelligence, wit, and insight.
She would take no prisoners and has no ties to the PTB.
B Calm
(28,762 posts)ecstatic
(32,733 posts)she can't win the general election. She was my choice but the polls aren't looking too good.
I like Debbie, but I can't picture her running for president. Our best hope is still Clinton,IMO.
AsahinaKimi
(20,776 posts)will always get my vote.
Retrograde
(10,159 posts)She keeps her seat because the GOP can't seem to find someone to run against her who appeals to the middle-of-the-road voters (yeah, I'm looking at you, Carly Fiorina and Matt Fong). She's also over 70, and even worse, she's from the ultraliberal (at least that's how we're perceived) Bay Area. And she's Jewish. I like her as my senator, but I think she'd have a hard time in a lot of the country.
A Californian to keep an eye on is [link://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jackie_Speier#2008_presidential_campaign|Jackie Speier], who, unfortunately, is not my representative.
mmonk
(52,589 posts)Shankapotomus
(4,840 posts)Shankapotomus
(4,840 posts)Boudica the Lyoness
(2,899 posts)TeamsterDem
(1,173 posts)bvar22
(39,909 posts)...in several Florida House races in 2009?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/howie-klein/debbie-wasserman-schultz_b_123322.html
"The problem I have with "Centrists"
is that they agree with Republicans too often."
You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their excuses.
[font size=5 color=green]Solidarity99![/font][font size=2 color=green]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------[/center]
uponit7771
(90,364 posts)Boudica the Lyoness
(2,899 posts)for what kind of genitals they were born with or their appearance in general.. ie; colour of skin.
Intelligence, integrity and ideas are what matters.