ADVERTISEMENT

POLL: Which Woman President Would You Prefer? Which Would You Vote For?

If these 3 are the choices, who do you like best and for whom would you vote?

  • I like Carly best and would vote for her.

    Votes: 17 51.5%
  • I like Hillary best and would vote for her.

    Votes: 5 15.2%
  • I like Jill best and would vote for her.

    Votes: 2 6.1%
  • I don't particularly like Carly but would vote for her to keep Hillary (or the Dems) from winning.

    Votes: 5 15.2%
  • I don't particularly like Hillary but would vote for her to keep Carly (or the GOP) from winning.

    Votes: 2 6.1%
  • I like Jill but she can't win so I'll probably vote for Hillary.

    Votes: 2 6.1%
  • I like Jill but she can't win so I'll probably vote for Carly.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    33
Nov 28, 2010
87,377
42,088
113
Maryland
It is almost certainly going to be Hillary for the Dems and Jill Stein for the Greens, and Carly Fiorina has a legitimate shot at the GOP nomination.

If it turns out all three are on the ballot, which would you prefer, and which would you vote for?

I'm not ignoring that there could be women candidates from other parties, but I don't know who the other parties may be thinking about. Is there a prominent female libertarian who might run, for example?
 
Hillary is not the type of person I want 'leading' the country. Carla is not at all convincing and I'm not familiar with Jill. So Jill of course, due to lack of knowledge.
 
So, out of all the major/minor parties, there are only three women?
 
Last edited:
Jill by a mile.
"Referring to President Franklin D. Roosevelt's New Deal approach to the Great Depression, Jill Stein advocated a "Green New Deal", in which renewable energy jobs would be created to address climate change and environmental issues; the objective would be to employ "every American willing and able to work". Stein noted the successful economic effects of the 1930s' New Deal projects, and said she would fund the start-up costs of the plan with a 30% reduction in the U.S. military budget, returning US troops home, and increasing taxes on areas such as speculation in stock markets, offshore tax havens, and multimillion dollar real estate. She says, based on the research of Phillip Harvey, Professor of Law & Economics at Rutgers University, that the multiplier economic effects of this Green New Deal would later recoup most of the start-up costs.

Stein supports the creation of sustainable infrastructure based in clean renewable energy generation and sustainable communities principles, in order to improve or avoid what she sees as a growing convergence of environmental crises in water, soil, fisheries, and forests. Her vision includes increasing intra-city
mass transit and inter-city railroads, creating 'complete streets' that safely encourage bike and pedestrian traffic, and regional food systems based on sustainable organic agriculture."


After reading her positions on issues, I'd have to say her also. She had me at 'returning the US troops home. Green technology development and job creation also sounds fine and dandy. Plus, she's not bad looking for a 65 year old. She must be into healthy living.
Jill_Stein_JillStein-thumb-400x600.jpg


I'll keep my eye on this one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: moral_victory
put jill in the debates standing between Hillary and sanders, see what happens
 
Last edited:
I picked Carly, begrudgingly, bc I think Hillary is just an awful awful human being and incompetent leader. She is wrong on most things the first time before she gets it right...as POTUS you can't have that or you end up with another Iraq like war. Don't get me started on her time as SOS...just awful.

I am sure I would like the green candidate better than both of these two but I have not heard one thing about her so I couldn't pull the lever for her at this point.
 
I picked Carly, begrudgingly, bc I think Hillary is just an awful awful human being and incompetent leader. She is wrong on most things the first time before she gets it right...as POTUS you can't have that or you end up with another Iraq like war. Don't get me started on her time as SOS...just awful.

I am sure I would like the green candidate better than both of these two but I have not heard one thing about her so I couldn't pull the lever for her at this point.
She wasn't wrong on the Iraq War, she was what she wanted to be on that. It wasn't until afterwards that she decided to put on her hippy face and talk down on it. Someone like her doesn't make a mistake like that. If she does, then she doesn't need to be anywhere near the Oval Office.
 
  • Like
Reactions: moral_victory
She wasn't wrong on the Iraq War, she was what she wanted to be on that. It wasn't until afterwards that she decided to put on her hippy face and talk down on it. Someone like her doesn't make a mistake like that. If she does, then she doesn't need to be anywhere near the Oval Office.

She may have been where she wanted to be but that still doesn't make the decision not wrong. We never should have been in Iraq...Sanders and Trump are the only two serious candidates that held that position.
 
Hillary is ... wrong on most things the first time before she gets it right...as POTUS you can't have that or you end up with another Iraq like war.
I think this is a fair criticism. Alleviated in part by 2 factors: 1) she often does get it right eventually; and 2) there's usually time to get it right.

Let's face it, I'd rather have someone who leads with the right instincts and objectives. So Hillary is not my preference.

I don't understand how you can think Carly is any better. Whereas Hillary may start off with the wrong aim, at least she has shown that she can come around. Carly has been wrong or MIA on most policy statements in the debates and shows zero flexibility or willingness to adjust to the facts. If anything, she is worse than Hillary on your measure.
 
I think this is a fair criticism. Alleviated in part by 2 factors: 1) she often does get it right eventually; and 2) there's usually time to get it right.

Let's face it, I'd rather have someone who leads with the right instincts and objectives. So Hillary is not my preference.

I don't understand how you can think Carly is any better. Whereas Hillary may start off with the wrong aim, at least she has shown that she can come around. Carly has been wrong or MIA on most policy statements in the debates and shows zero flexibility or willingness to adjust to the facts. If anything, she is worse than Hillary on your measure.

My belief is that she ONLY comes around when it finally and without a doubt makes sense for her to do politically. She is a huge sellout in this way (and to Wall Street/other special interest groups but that is another story) and just has this whole "the rules don't apply to me"/entitlement sense about her that I just can't ever pull the lever for her. As I said, she is an awful human being.

Sorry I just can't get down with a two-face. It is one of the most unattractive traits a person can have, at least with Carly you know what you are getting bc she will tell you. Heck it may be even different if Hillary had some sort of unique skill (besides having to pee sitting down which I know is a big draw to many liberal...small mindedness I guess) but she doesn't. Mitt was a two face but you know he great skill in operational management and efficiency so at least he brought that to the table...Hillary brings nothing to the table except for Bill and, honestly, I don't think he really likes her that much either.
 
[1] ...at least with Carly you know what you are getting bc she will tell you.

[2] Mitt was a two face but you know he great skill in operational management and efficiency so at least he brought that to the table...Hillary brings nothing to the table except for Bill and, honestly, I don't think he really likes her that much either.
[1] The problem with Carly is that she has told us. And what she has told us is wrong (or missing in action) on too many issues. Being up front that you are wrong on so many issues is helpful to the voter - but not a reason to vote for her.

[2] Similarly with Mitt. I really don't doubt his competence (whereas I do have doubts about Carly at this level). If I had wanted a president who would privatize national resources and government functions and sell them off at fire sale prices to vulture capitalists, he would absolutely have been my first choice. And, no, I don't really think he would have gone that far. Unless maybe he had a GOP Congress. But it's like the scorpion and frog tale, it is his nature. Then again, by all accounts he was a competent if unoriginal governor. So I wasn't terribly afraid of the damage he might cause. Still, why vote for someone whose instincts are in the wrong direction? Competency is good. But competency at what?

I give Carly credit for intelligence, doggedness, and the competence to work her way up to CEO of HP. And I'm really not all that concerned that she was fired. But I think it's perfectly clear that she had risen to or a bit beyond her level of competence in that job. I certainly don't want to promote her. We don't often have that choice be so clear. Most of the time we are choosing among people who have succeeded and we are guessing whether or not they have sufficient competence to go one level higher. But in Carly's case, it's pretty clear that she does not have any higher-octane competency in her tank.
 
Well, when I read Jill Stein's resume, it appears she was elected to the Lexington town council, but lost every other race she ran in. She's a private-practice doctor. Has never really led anything. Except protests.

180px-Jill_Stein.jpg


What do we want?

A WING NUT!

When do we want it?

NOW!
 
[1] The problem with Carly is that she has told us. And what she has told us is wrong (or missing in action) on too many issues. Being up front that you are wrong on so many issues is helpful to the voter - but not a reason to vote for her.

[2] Similarly with Mitt. I really don't doubt his competence (whereas I do have doubts about Carly at this level). If I had wanted a president who would privatize national resources and government functions and sell them off at fire sale prices to vulture capitalists, he would absolutely have been my first choice. And, no, I don't really think he would have gone that far. Unless maybe he had a GOP Congress. But it's like the scorpion and frog tale, it is his nature. Then again, by all accounts he was a competent if unoriginal governor. So I wasn't terribly afraid of the damage he might cause. Still, why vote for someone whose instincts are in the wrong direction? Competency is good. But competency at what?

I give Carly credit for intelligence, doggedness, and the competence to work her way up to CEO of HP. And I'm really not all that concerned that she was fired. But I think it's perfectly clear that she had risen to or a bit beyond her level of competence in that job. I certainly don't want to promote her. We don't often have that choice be so clear. Most of the time we are choosing among people who have succeeded and we are guessing whether or not they have sufficient competence to go one level higher. But in Carly's case, it's pretty clear that she does not have any higher-octane competency in her tank.

No of those things help me pull the lever for Hillary. I would vote Trump before Hillary bc you get better initial judgment (Iraq) and more entertainment value. A history of govt level accomplishments just doesn't mean a whole lot to me as I don't believe anyone should be a career politician but instead should have a REAL career first...just how I am wired.
 
No of those things help me pull the lever for Hillary. I would vote Trump before Hillary bc you get better initial judgment (Iraq) and more entertainment value. A history of govt level accomplishments just doesn't mean a whole lot to me as I don't believe anyone should be a career politician but instead should have a REAL career first...just how I am wired.

I am by no means a Trump supporter, but I like him a lot more on trade than Hilary.
 
Seems like a good bullet. I thought you guys were all about non-establishment this time around, and she was a doctor which you guys also seem to be into this go around.

Carson was the Director of Pediatric Neurosurgery at Johns Hopkins Hospital for 30 years. That's leading something.
 
George HW Bush was possibly the most experienced person to run for president. He was, at best, mediocre. George W Bush ran an oil company, ran a baseball franchise, and was governor of Texas. He was the worst president in modern history. Richard Nixon was a Rep and Vice President before becoming president. Carter was a farmer and governor.

Experience is overrated.
 
Sarah Palin was the reason I could not even think about voting for McCain. It would be funny to have an ideological airhead in the WH but in a dark comedy sort of way.
Actually, we ended up with exactly that ... an ideological airhead! It has not been all that humorous.
 
Amusing poll, but legitimate shot is silly.

Carly Fiorina, Donald Trump, Ben Carson.

Three names that will be nowhere near the "Republican" entry on the Presidential ballot come next November.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cigaretteman
George HW Bush was possibly the most experienced person to run for president. He was, at best, mediocre. George W Bush ran an oil company, ran a baseball franchise, and was governor of Texas. He was the worst president in modern history. Richard Nixon was a Rep and Vice President before becoming president. Carter was a farmer and governor.

Experience is overrated.

Carter was also a Navy submarine officer. Give the man some credit.
 
  • Like
Reactions: unIowa
George HW Bush was possibly the most experienced person to run for president. He was, at best, mediocre. George W Bush ran an oil company, ran a baseball franchise, and was governor of Texas. He was the worst president in modern history. Richard Nixon was a Rep and Vice President before becoming president. Carter was a farmer and governor.

Experience is overrated.

Maybe but being a govt elected official all of your life garners no respect from me. In fact it tells me something about that persons character.
 
Maybe but being a govt elected official all of your life garners no respect from me. In fact it tells me something about that persons character.
What it should say is that they have a strong commitment to the greater good and serving the people. Admittedly it doesn't always (or even often) say that. But sometimes it does.

But what does is say when a person has made his living exploiting people? Is that better?

There are several people running who I believe are doing it for the right reasons, and with admirable sincerity. Some, like Santorum, I strongly disagree with on important issues, but I respect them for wanting to work for what they believe is the public good. Some of them are also skilled politicians. Some, like Carson, may be sincere but clearly lack the knowledge or skills to be a good choice. Unless your idea of a good choice is a figurehead who lets unelected people behind the scenes call all the shots.
 
I think we should elect them all simultaneously, and whichever one isn't on her period should run the country for that week.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gusto79
1. What it should say is that they have a strong commitment to the greater good and serving the people. Admittedly it doesn't always (or even often) say that. But sometimes it does.

2. But what does is say when a person has made his living exploiting people? Is that better?

There are several people running who I believe are doing it for the right reasons, and with admirable sincerity. Some, like Santorum, I strongly disagree with on important issues, but I respect them for wanting to work for what they believe is the public good. Some of them are also skilled politicians. Some, like Carson, may be sincere but clearly lack the knowledge or skills to be a good choice. Unless your idea of a good choice is a figurehead who lets unelected people behind the scenes call all the shots.

1. If they were in it for the greater good they would not want or need to spend their entire careers in DC. Most of these folks are just big egos on a power trip. If you at least come up through the private sector or academia and lead something then I will give you the benefit of the doubt that you are in it for the greater good...at least until you prove otherwise (and many do).

2. That argument goes no where bc not all people in the private sector are out to exploit people. Profit isn't a bad word and what my old boss always said holds very true today: "Not for Profit...Not for long".

Lots of good people that would be great in DC but most won't run as they don't want their names to be dragged through the mud by the career politicians they will have to run up against.


Edit: I will give you people like Warren, Sanders, even the Paul's but they are ones who are often fighting against the grain of not only the opposing parties but in many cases their own party. Thing is Hillary isn't these folks, she isn't even Trump at least that guy is honest about what he is saying...hell he can't stop himself from saying things.
 
This is my write-in candidate.

you guys can all argue about those other trolls

 
It is almost certainly going to be Hillary for the Dems and Jill Stein for the Greens, and Carly Fiorina has a legitimate shot at the GOP nomination.

If it turns out all three are on the ballot, which would you prefer, and which would you vote for?

I'm not ignoring that there could be women candidates from other parties, but I don't know who the other parties may be thinking about. Is there a prominent female libertarian who might run, for example?
Caitlyn
 
Have they updated it since 2000 or is the one you posted still from then?
Good question. I don't know. I just googled and found that.

Of course when you are right, no need to change. Can I get a hallelujah?

So, I googled again and found this Cliff Notes version. BUT, I recommend the earlier link because it has specifics, whereas this is sort of moonbeamy.

1. Grassroots Democracy
Every human being deserves a say in the decisions that affect his or her life and should not be subject to the will of another. Therefore, we will work to increase public participation at every level of government and to ensure that our public representatives are fully accountable to the people who elect them. We will also work to create new types of political organizations which expand the process of participatory democracy by directly including citizens in the decision-making process.

2. Social Justice and Equal Opportunity
All persons should have the rights and opportunity to benefit equally from the resources afforded us by society and the environment. We must consciously confront in ourselves, our organizations, and society at large, barriers such as racism and class oppression, sexism and homophobia, ageism and disability, which act to deny fair treatment and equal justice under the law.

3. Ecological Wisdom
Human societies must operate with the understanding that we are part of nature, not separate from nature. We must maintain an ecological balance and live within the ecological and resource limits of our communities and our planet. We support a sustainable society which utilizes resources in such a way that future generations will benefit and not suffer from the practices of our generation. To this end we must practice agriculture which replenishes the soil; move to an energy efficient economy; and live in ways that respect the integrity of natural systems.

4. Non-Violence
It is essential that we develop effective alternatives to society's current patterns of violence. We will work to demilitarize, and eliminate weapons of mass destruction, without being naive about the intentions of other governments. We recognize the need for self-defense and the defense of others who are in helpless situations. We promote non-violent methods to oppose practices and policies with which we disagree, and will guide our actions toward lasting personal, community and global peace.

5. Decentralization
Centralization of wealth and power contributes to social and economic injustice, environmental destruction, and militarization. Therefore, we support a restructuring of social, political and economic institutions away from a system which is controlled by and mostly benefits the powerful few, to a democratic, less bureaucratic system. Decision-making should, as much as possible, remain at the individual and local level, while assuring that civil rights are protected for all citizens.

6. Community Based Economics
Redesign our work structures to encourage employee ownership and workplace democracy. Develop new economic activities and institutions that will allow us to use our new technologies in ways that are humane, freeing, ecological and accountable, and responsive to communities. Establish some form of basic economic security, open to all. Move beyond the narrow "job ethic" to new definitions of "work," jobs" and "income" that reflect the changing economy. Restructure our patterns of income distribution to reflect the wealth created by those outside the formal monetary economy: those who take responsibility for parenting, housekeeping, home gardens, community volunteer work, etc. Restrict the size and concentrated power of corporations without discouraging superior efficiency or technological innovation.

7. Feminism and Gender Equity
We have inherited a social system based on male domination of politics and economics. We call for the replacement of the cultural ethics of domination and control with more cooperative ways of interacting that respect differences of opinion and gender. Human values such as equity between the sexes, interpersonal responsibility, and honesty must be developed with moral conscience. We should remember that the process that determines our decisions and actions is just as important as achieving the outcome we want.

8. Respect for Diversity
We believe it is important to value cultural, ethnic, racial, sexual, religious and spiritual diversity, and to promote the development of respectful relationships across these lines. We believe that the many diverse elements of society should be reflected in our organizations and decision-making bodies, and we support the leadership of people who have been traditionally closed out of leadership roles. We acknowledge and encourage respect for other life forms than our own and the preservation of biodiversity.

9. Personal and Global Responsibility
We encourage individuals to act to improve their personal well- being and, at the same time, to enhance ecological balance and social harmony. We seek to join with people and organizations around the world to foster peace, economic justice, and the health of the planet.

10. Future Focus And Sustainability
Our actions and policies should be motivated by long-term goals. We seek to protect valuable natural resources, safely disposing of or "unmaking" all waste we create, while developing a sustainable economics that does not depend on continual expansion for survival. We must counterbalance the drive for short-term profits by assuring that economic development, new technologies, and fiscal policies are responsible to future generations who will inherit the results of our actions. Make the quality of life, rather than open-ended economic growth, the focus of future thinking.
 
Good question. I don't know. I just googled and found that.

Of course when you are right, no need to change. Can I get a hallelujah?

So, I googled again and found this Cliff Notes version. BUT, I recommend the earlier link because it has specifics, whereas this is sort of moonbeamy.

1. Grassroots Democracy
Every human being deserves a say in the decisions that affect his or her life and should not be subject to the will of another. Therefore, we will work to increase public participation at every level of government and to ensure that our public representatives are fully accountable to the people who elect them. We will also work to create new types of political organizations which expand the process of participatory democracy by directly including citizens in the decision-making process.

2. Social Justice and Equal Opportunity
All persons should have the rights and opportunity to benefit equally from the resources afforded us by society and the environment. We must consciously confront in ourselves, our organizations, and society at large, barriers such as racism and class oppression, sexism and homophobia, ageism and disability, which act to deny fair treatment and equal justice under the law.

3. Ecological Wisdom
Human societies must operate with the understanding that we are part of nature, not separate from nature. We must maintain an ecological balance and live within the ecological and resource limits of our communities and our planet. We support a sustainable society which utilizes resources in such a way that future generations will benefit and not suffer from the practices of our generation. To this end we must practice agriculture which replenishes the soil; move to an energy efficient economy; and live in ways that respect the integrity of natural systems.

4. Non-Violence
It is essential that we develop effective alternatives to society's current patterns of violence. We will work to demilitarize, and eliminate weapons of mass destruction, without being naive about the intentions of other governments. We recognize the need for self-defense and the defense of others who are in helpless situations. We promote non-violent methods to oppose practices and policies with which we disagree, and will guide our actions toward lasting personal, community and global peace.

5. Decentralization
Centralization of wealth and power contributes to social and economic injustice, environmental destruction, and militarization. Therefore, we support a restructuring of social, political and economic institutions away from a system which is controlled by and mostly benefits the powerful few, to a democratic, less bureaucratic system. Decision-making should, as much as possible, remain at the individual and local level, while assuring that civil rights are protected for all citizens.

6. Community Based Economics
Redesign our work structures to encourage employee ownership and workplace democracy. Develop new economic activities and institutions that will allow us to use our new technologies in ways that are humane, freeing, ecological and accountable, and responsive to communities. Establish some form of basic economic security, open to all. Move beyond the narrow "job ethic" to new definitions of "work," jobs" and "income" that reflect the changing economy. Restructure our patterns of income distribution to reflect the wealth created by those outside the formal monetary economy: those who take responsibility for parenting, housekeeping, home gardens, community volunteer work, etc. Restrict the size and concentrated power of corporations without discouraging superior efficiency or technological innovation.

7. Feminism and Gender Equity
We have inherited a social system based on male domination of politics and economics. We call for the replacement of the cultural ethics of domination and control with more cooperative ways of interacting that respect differences of opinion and gender. Human values such as equity between the sexes, interpersonal responsibility, and honesty must be developed with moral conscience. We should remember that the process that determines our decisions and actions is just as important as achieving the outcome we want.

8. Respect for Diversity
We believe it is important to value cultural, ethnic, racial, sexual, religious and spiritual diversity, and to promote the development of respectful relationships across these lines. We believe that the many diverse elements of society should be reflected in our organizations and decision-making bodies, and we support the leadership of people who have been traditionally closed out of leadership roles. We acknowledge and encourage respect for other life forms than our own and the preservation of biodiversity.

9. Personal and Global Responsibility
We encourage individuals to act to improve their personal well- being and, at the same time, to enhance ecological balance and social harmony. We seek to join with people and organizations around the world to foster peace, economic justice, and the health of the planet.

10. Future Focus And Sustainability
Our actions and policies should be motivated by long-term goals. We seek to protect valuable natural resources, safely disposing of or "unmaking" all waste we create, while developing a sustainable economics that does not depend on continual expansion for survival. We must counterbalance the drive for short-term profits by assuring that economic development, new technologies, and fiscal policies are responsible to future generations who will inherit the results of our actions. Make the quality of life, rather than open-ended economic growth, the focus of future thinking.
Some things to like and some not so much. Just like the other two parties.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT