A Woman President in 2012?
July 19, 2010
by The New Agenda
|Secretary Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin are grabbing the headlines and spotlight with 2012 just around the corner. Speculation is building that both women could be their party’s candidate in the upcoming presidential election.
In The Wall Street Journal last Friday, Peter du Pont wrote an op-ed Hillary Clinton for President:
It isn’t just the president whose poll numbers are falling fast. According to recent Harris polling, Vice President Biden viewed favorably by 26% of the public and unfavorably by 45%. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi does even worse, 20% positive to 49% negative. A June Nevada poll gave Sen. Harry Reid, the majority leader, 33% approval and 52% disapproval.
But the greatest contrast and most interesting statistic is Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s ratings: 45% favorable and only 35% unfavorable.
That is not surprising, and there are some obvious factors that suggest she might have a chance of defeating President Obama if she were to challenge him for the 2012 Democratic nomination.
That night, on The O’Reilly Factor, Monica Crowley’s had this to say in the shows lead-off “Talking Points Memo”:
And on the front page of none-other-than The New York Times, Sarah Palin was featured in a story Palin Wades Into Republican Midterm Primaries. For The NYT, the piece is surprisingly pro-Palin, only because it doesn’t feature the typical biased vitriol.
Here’s some highlights on Palin’s efforts for women in her party:
And the biggest furor so far has erupted here, with a leader of an anti-abortion group, Georgia Right to Life, accusing Ms. Palin of “endorsing any female Republican candidate that she could find.” Rival candidates complained that Ms. Palin was backing the most liberal Republican in the race.
And this (emphasis added):
When Ms. Palin announced her backing of Mary Fallin in the Oklahoma governor’s contest, the other Republican in the race testily denounced the endorsement. That candidate, Randy Brogdon, declared, “Stop acting like you are owed the governor’s mansion, and stop hiding behind the skirt of Sarah Palin.”
Ms. Fallin, a two-term member of Congress who would be the first woman to be governor of Oklahoma, dismissed the criticism from her opponent as sexist.
“Sarah is at the top of my list to receive an endorsement from,” Ms. Fallin said in an interview. “Even a lot of Democrats and independents admire her spunk and her willingness to stand up for what she believes and say what’s on her mind.”
Palin’s support of Ms. Fallin empowered her to speak out against sexism in her race!
Sarah Palin and Hillary Clinton – you go girls!!!
Many points in Monica’s ‘Talking Points Memo” I disagree with. But not this one: “it will take the First Woman President to depose the First Black President.”
I hope BOTH parties take note.
I’m inclined to doubt it (that Hillary will be president) only because it would be the best thing that ever happened, which means it never will. But it would be schweeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeet …
Hillary did so well in her run, that the sexism in the media, which was most violent and demeaning toward her, did not stop her from winning. She won the election. She had the most votes. But she had to step down so Hope and Change could happen.
Palin fared almost equally as well, dragging the race out of the ditch and taking the lead for quite some time before the media waged war on her, and only managed a slim margin, when we account for the creepy vote tactics (bus fulls of vagrants) led by the Hope and Change Unicorn.
And these same people that support the Unicorn have things against drunken vagrants, the ones that won them the election along with media warfare.
So how do we go forward from here. We need more stringent election rules. We can’t have bus fulls of vagrants crossing country lines to vote twice in different countries. We can’t have thugs standing outside with bats, and most importantly, we need to take control away from the media. They need to be accountable for their reporting. If they report something stupid or false, it needs to be a federal crime, not just a civil matter.
I’d love to see Hillary run again, but it just doesn’t seem politically feasible. You can’t challenge a sitting president from your own party, especially when your party’s brand has already been tarnished. She couldn’t win Republicans and independents at this point and Obama supporters would view her as betraying him, so she’d be left with several million Hillary loyalists who are willing to overlook what the Dem party did to them the first time around. That’s an impressive amount of people, but not enough to win a primary or a general election.
Uh…claiming that Fallin’s opponents remarks are sexist is akin to saying if I say I don’t like fried chicken it is a racist remark. Being from Oklahoma and familiar with this race I can tell you his remark about Fallin hiding behind Palin’s skirt had nothing whatsoever to do with gender (though it was an imprudent choice of words). It was a criticism for Fallin’s unwillingness to openly discuss her stance on issues and refusal to debate her opponents. The fact that Fallin is a woman has nothing to do with it. She is a self-important coward and doesn’t represent the same views that Sarah Palin does. Unfortunately – because I admire Sarah Palin – Palin has lost a lot of support in Oklahoma because of her endorsement of Fallin. People here can’t really figure out why she did it, because her opponent, Randy Brogdon, is the Tea Party favorite and lines up with Palin’s views more than anyone else in Oklahoma.
Maybe Hillary could run in 2012 as an Independent. No way would the Democrat party tolerate her running in 2012, they told her to sit down and shut up in 2008 and encourage a sexist and crooked primary to keep her out. The Dems don’t have the common sense to want her back, ever. The most they would consider is dumping Biden and putting Hillary in as Obamas VP. There is no circumstance under which I would vote for Obama and that probably goes for most of Hillary’s followers but when the ticket lost they would at least have a woman to blame for Obamas failure and woman blaming is a concept that sells to the Dems.
Hillary would be a long shot as an Independent but she could kill Obamas bid for reelection by running. Just like Ross Perot killed George Bush (one) chance for a second term and let Bill Clinton win President with something like 30% of the vote.
She would never in a million years run as anything but a Dem.
But it would be funny to see the two women candidates who the corporate media attacked with sexism join up to get one of them elected. If Palin took the Republican nomination and Hillary went out as an Independent she could split the Dem vote and let Palin gain the Presidency in the same way Bill Clinton got it when Ross Perot ran and split the Republican vote.
It will be an interesting election anyway with the Independent voters so fed up with Obama.
Actually Hillary was a Republican when she was young so being an Independent and saying it was because, try as she might, she couldn’t find a welcoming home for a woman who wants to serve her country in either party, you know, it would be believable.
Not in a million years — with her husband being such a staunch Dem and a well-regarded one? And her having been such a vocal proponent for Dem ideals? It’s possible like a meteor strike on the Moon while I’m looking at it is possible, but it’s just not going to happen.
Hillary would never leave the Dem party, but it is fun to think about! I’d love to see her and Palin join forces. Probably never happen but just imagining all the exploding heads makes me smile. If those two ever aligned themselves in public together, the two parties would probably die of fright.
yttik: There is just something so enjoyable about watching strong competent women scare the hell out of petty little men. If Palin and Hillary both ran the talking heads would explode and the election would be talked about for generations. Actually the corporate media could probably make a bunch of money off of the coverage even though it so totally violates their world view of the limited and appropriate place of women.
Uh, Janis,
Meteors strike the moon all of the time. That’s where all those craters come from! But I agree it would take a lot for Hillary Clinton to run as an independent. Maybe if Obama did something to really anger both her and Bill. I mean the campaign rhetoric about Bill Clinton’s being a racist and Hillary’s “plot” to have Obama assassinated like Bobby Kennedy wasn’t enough. What do you think it would take?
Um, Samanthasmom,
No one has ever in recorded history witnessed a meteoroid or asteroid hit the moon. In fact, it is commonly believed that the craters on the moon came from bodies of ice hitting it, but it is unknown since all of the craters were created long ago.
For your FYI.
Why do people buy the Fox News spin or that on the con du Pont? HRC has said a number of times that she will not run. Her latest FEC filing shows she is still in debt from 2008. Face realities people.
Try telling that to NASA, Ethan. They regularly observe meteors hitting the moon. A as matter of fact, they’d like your help watching for them.
Try telling that to NASA, Ethan. There have been many sightings of meteors hitting the moon. Lunar meteorite flashes are visible from backyard telescopes. Seen a couple myself.
Okay, first of all, Ethan, you’re mistaken. A group of Canterbury monks is thought to have witnessed this when they saw what they perceived as a “lunar explosion” in 1178. This was actually covered in Sagan’s classic series “Cosmos”.
Secondly, I think that Obama hates being President. So while I doubt that his ego would allow him to retire a one-termer without trying for a second, I think he’d much prefer to retire to the lecture circuit and overcompensation on boards of corporations and be congratulated for his historic victory and token acts of philanthropy. If he did go this route, though, he’d probably leave for “family” or “health” reasons.
That said, I’d LOVE to see Hillary primary him, and I think she could possibly pull it off. Obama’s huge turnout wouldn’t happen again. And now that the Journolist has been revealed, I think it’s possible that the pundits might be slightly more likely to receive some kind of scrutiny next time around. In addition, she’s got FAR more experience now than she did, and most of his foreign policy experience now is HER foreign policy experience. Plus, her record on the economy is way better than his. Just like he was “against the war” way back when, she called the housing crisis far in advance.
I also think she could win a general, despite having the Dem party hanging like a millstone around her neck. She’s divisive, sure, but the moderates have been coming around. I think it could work. Unless an independent runs. Then all the pea-brained Dems who gave us Obama in the first place will get pied pipered away and it’s a Republican win. Which I’d mostly only mind because I think this one is Hillary’s last chance. I think Sarah will live to run another day.
What does NASA have to do with the moon or meteors? Obama made NASA’s mission to be the cheerleader of the Muslim science world.
Anyway, I was being satirical to continue your chastisement of Janis. Don’t get your panties in a bunch. Oh, wait. I’m sorry. I didn’t mean to be sexist. It’s just people use that expression all the time for women and men alike, just like “hiding behind the skirts”. I’ll be sure to say nothing gender-specific in the future.
“…she called the housing crisis far in advance.” And Ron Paul called the housing crisis far in advance of her. Does that mean we should elect him? I don’t think so.
I don’t mean to cross anyone here, but I honestly think Clinton is a very scary prospect for president. I’m not the most ardent supporter of Palin either, but I would much prefer her. She’s less experienced, but much more in tune with what is needed the way I see it.
Of course, correct me if I’m wrong, their policies don’t really matter to you all, as long as a woman becomes president. The tone of misandry around here is worrying and much more dangerous than its friend, misogyny. Because if we eschew traditional sexism, and its negative slant on women, for another sexism with a negative slant on men, what has been gained? Only that feminist women become the very same thing as the misogynistic men they despise.
Government is too sacred and crucial to be abused as a vehicle for feminism. Elect a president based on merit, worth, and value – not on gender.
Why is it that some guy will always show up here and say something that clearly reveals he doesn’t know what the hell he’s talking about? Abused as a vehicle for mere females? Why, the horror!
Ethan,
You said:
“Elect a president based on merit, worth, and value – not on gender.”
I agree. Where were you during the primary when the MSM, pundits, and the obama supporters (with narry a word of protest from the obama campaign) attacked Hillary every day about her looks, her voice, her laugh and her being soooo polarizing? Gender had everything to do with how Hillary was treated by the predominantly male run press, government and business.
If the boyz were willing to take your advice, a woman would have been president a long, long, long time ago. It has always been the men who have a problem with women in power, not the other way around.
I make it a mission to vote for the most qualified candidate in every election, that is exactly WHY I vote only for women.
The End.
I love the way he shows up here and has the gall to say, “But it’s abusive to attempt to elect people like YOU!” and expects us to just nod and listen attentively to his superior mansplaining.
Lol Janis they are so predictable. I could make an AI program to post on here; so males won’t have to.
As much as the above individual is a tool, I do have to state that not all men who visit here are (eg. Bruce N.). We also have had women who have voiced their similar blather to the above troll.
So we treat trolls as individuals and not blame their gender for their shortcomings. And as individuals they can be banned.
Good point, although aside from Bruce, I can’t think of one male who has posted here and not been a tool.
I almost always vote for women candidates because I figure they are at least twice as qualified as any male to make it as far as they have. I have rarely been disappointed in women I have voted for but I have been disappointed in a significant number of men I have voted for.
“But it’s abusive to attempt to elect people like YOU!”
I can’t seem to find where I said that. I didn’t.
You all are the reason feminism has a bad name. You are perpetuating sexism by your atitude toward it and toward men. I’ll admit, I haven’t bothered to go read every article on this site, but based only on the comments to this article, this is a very unhealthy approach to curbing gender discrimination and misogyny. I’m on your side, but you really need to find a balance. You can’t say women shouldn’t be treated unfairly, then go off and have an unfair atitude toward men. That doesn’t solve the problem.
Ethan, men like you, are why that glass ceiling at times seems so insurmountable. Always a justification as to why the candidate should not be a woman…pick the best candidate you say…unless that person is female and then a different excuse comes into play and sexist BS raises it ugly head. Both HRC and the governor have experienced this and Ethan let me ask you this where were you during all those horrible statement about the Governor( and her family) or the Secretary in the past two years- I assume supporting Barak, who Time ( or was it Newsweek) told us is what a real feminist looks like.
Janis, Optixmom…thanks so much for the cudos
Bruce, it’s a damn shame we felt we had to give them. That’s one of the reasons I give them so grudgingly and through gritted teeth, to be honest. I resent having to do it.
Ethan — name me one hand’s worth of women you have voted for for ANYTHING. Five women. Or else STFU.
Can’t even come up with one, can you?
ethan seems to think that we’ll take his word for it when he says he’s “on our side” – like we can’t tell the difference. Hahaha. He wasn’t even able to maintain this charade for the duration of this thread! Each successive posting contradicts the one before. He’s just another tedious troll. I vote for banning. Let him take his fragile little ego elsewhere.
Pacific, this is why older women are worse trouble for Democrats and men in general. Once you’ve been lied to a couple times by the guy who tells you he SWEARS he had a vasectomy, and those open sores aren’t anything baby, you get good at detecting bullshit. Although even when I was twenty, I knew the deep faux-sincere gaze into the eyes followed by, “But I’m on your side, baby!” was crap. I always had a far better BS-detector than most around me — the biggest gift Lady Luck ever gave me.
Ethan, it’s quite obvious that you haven’t the slightest idea what you are dealing with. You are in over your head here.
Leave your Response Want an avatar? Get a gravatar!
Community Room
February 6, 2012 at 4:25 pm
January 30, 2012 at 2:36 pm
January 26, 2012 at 4:38 pm
January 23, 2012 at 1:04 pm
January 15, 2012 at 11:37 am
January 9, 2012 at 6:36 pm
January 7, 2012 at 10:10 pm
January 5, 2012 at 9:31 am
BUILD your NETWORK
Our Network of College Women
Protecting our Teenage Girls
We’re in the Media »
Click to see our latest stories in the media
More Stories »Recent Comments
The Latest from our Blog
Archives
Pioneer Mentors
Blogroll
Find us Online
Subscribe Entries (RSS) | Comments (RSS)
The New Agenda is a 501(c)(4) organization dedicated to improving the lives of women and girls by bringing about systemic change in the media, at the workplace, at school and at home. More...