Why are all the Presidents, Men?

[msanthrope]

It's a question worth asking.

Don't care who you support, currently.

Tell me why no women?

[TCJ70]

1. Because none have gotten the required electoral college counts...

...in a general election.

[msanthrope]

2. To whom are you referring? Nt

[TCJ70]

4. I was answering the "Why no women?" question. n/t

[msanthrope]

8. Indeed. Was asking for specifics that the Electoral College considered. Nt

[GoldenThunder]

63. Because Elizabeth Warren hasn't been nominated yet. n/t

[Sparkly]

3. Coincidence?

Surely there's no Man Card.

[msanthrope]

6. Of course there is no advantage to being Male. White. Rich.

To suggest such would be playing a card. I generally lose at cards.

[jberryhill]

5. Because they had Y chromosomes

[msanthrope]

11. You. Hopefully, privilege attached to this....

[jberryhill]

16. The best way to terminate an attorney-client relationship...

...is to send them a bill.

[msanthrope]

18. No truer words ever written. nt

[SheenaR]

7. How many have run

And who should have won out of that group.

Thanks in advance.

A woman.

[msanthrope]

9. How many have run? Maybe the q question is....

How many had the opportunity to run?

Abigail Adams would have been a great President, would not she?

[SheenaR]

21. Apples and oranges

Why was it only whites who won the World Series before 1947.

Thought we were obviously discussing eligible women.

Your choice was a good one. Still would like to see a woman who rose up not because of who she was married to in order to dispel all doubt about her merits.

[msanthrope]

23. Why do you think the "World Series" before 1947 is relevant?

Without a diverse player pool, why do you think any World Series before 1947 laudatory enough to be mentioned as a point of comparison?

Your ideas of who was "eligible"..and when.... are, well, interesting.

[SheenaR]

27. Youre right.

Lincoln, Jefferson, Washington... All shit. Not laudatory at all. They don't count because women couldn't vote and because of slavery.

Sound logic when using my words against me.

Night.

[msanthrope]

29. Well...I was asking about baseball. Since you brought it up. Nt

[Sparkly]

10. How many make it to the point of even getting close?

Do you think that is coincidence, too? Or are we genetically inferior?

[SheenaR]

20. In 2016

The lack of female presidential candidates is coincidence. Nobody is stopping great women from being in power.

In fact it hurts the cause when a woman is married to a President and then runs. Looks to people like its the only reason she got there. Not saying it's true. Perception.

[Sparkly]

22. "Nobody is stopping great women from being in power."

You're kidding me. Great women just don't WANT to be in power, I guess? Or what?

Perception Shmerception. She's more qualified than any candidate, male or female, I can remember.

[SheenaR]

25. Well now we are just going to disagree on this

Don't twist my words around please. There are no barriers. Hence why we have many women in important governmental roles. That's what I mean by nobody is stopping them.

And your definition of most qualified is very subjective. 1.5 term senator. Horrible SOS. Married to the President and Governor. Being "around politics" doesn't make you the most qualified. Is she popular? Is she intelligent? Yes to both. Doesn't make someone qualified. Feel free to continue to get angry but this will be my final reply on the matter. Have a good night.

[kcr]

59. The OP wasn't just about important governmental roles. It was about Presidents.

It cannot be coincidence. So, if there are no barriers, there must be another reason.

[Rhiannon12866]

12. As Bill Maher pointed out, women didn't even get the vote till 1920

My grandmother couldn't vote at 18 like young women can today.

[msanthrope]

14. An, perhaps...less than 100 years later....

We, women, put a woman in the White House.

[Rhiannon12866]

19. It's also true that we haven't had women seeking the presidency till recently

It's been tough enough to obtain a noticeable female presence in the House and Senate. We did have one female VP candidate, and I voted for that ticket, but they unfortunately lost.

[msanthrope]

24. Um, no. Nt

[Rhiannon12866]

31. I meant from a major party in the GE

Gracie Allen did run for president in 1940 on the Surprise Party ticket.

[msanthrope]

33. wiki more. nt

[yeoman6987]

45. Sarah?

[Rhiannon12866]

46. Geraldine Ferraro ran for VP first, in 1984

And that was a ticket that I voted for.

[yeoman6987]

49. How great. I was too young which explaines my ignorance.

[Rhiannon12866]

50. My first vote was for Jimmy Carter

And all the choices were men, except twice for VP and I only voted for one of those tickets.

[yeoman6987]

51. So lucky. I was in kindergarten

Such hope back then even for a kid. Little did we know hell on earth would happen in a later election. I am envious that you were able to vote for carter. Thank you for that too.

[Rhiannon12866]

52. He's still my favorite president, has led a pretty remarkable life

I'm currently listening to his autobiography, "A Full Life," on audio (read by the author himself! ) and there is so much I never knew. From his childhood on the farm near Plains, to his Navy career, to his early runs for office - I'm on disc #5 and he's just been elected president, LOL. It's a fascinating story...

[Recursion]

55. Chisholm (nt)

[Rhiannon12866]

56. I certainly remember her, one of my all time favorites

My Dad was fortunate enough to meet her years ago and became a lifetime fan even though he was a Republican.

There were women who sought the nomination, Carol Moseley Braun in 2004 was a serious candidate, too, but I meant that none got the nomination, though two were on the ticket in the VP slot. Odd that I immediately remembered Geraldine Ferraro but had to be reminded of the other...

[lovemydog]

60. I highly recommend the documentary on Shirley Chisholm

called Unbought and Unbossed, if you haven't yet seen it. It's available on amazon streaming or purchase. Also on youtube. It's also an excellent book.

http://www.pbs.org/pov/chisholm/

[Rhiannon12866]

62. No, I haven't seen that! Thank you so much!

She's always inspiring... Looking forward to it!

[lovemydog]

64. You're in for a real treat!

I love documentaries. This one's amazing.

[Rhiannon12866]

65. I love documentaries, too, tend to watch the same ones over again

And this one is exactly what I love best since I'm already an admirer, so I'm going to enjoy learning more... Thank you!

[passiveporcupine]

80. I hope you are right, but not this time. Not this woman.

And I'd prefer to put a woman in the white house that attracts more than just the women vote. So it's not just "we" women who put her there.


I actually think the country is ready for a woman president. They just want one who doesn't have so much baggage and is so unpopular with so many.

[cherokeeprogressive]

13. I dream of a female President. One whose name is NOT Hillary Clinton.

[msanthrope]

15. Indeed. So which downballot woman are you supporting?

Tell me which woman's campaign you are supporting?

[cherokeeprogressive]

35. There's another woman running for president?

[msanthrope]

38. did you miss or not ken "downballot?" nt

[cherokeeprogressive]

42. I'll be voting for Loretta Sanchez.

[Chan790]

67. Currently...

my wonderful and responsive-to-constituents Congresswoman Elizabeth Esty.

Beth and I don't agree on everything...but she at-least does listen to her constituents, which is more than I can say for the Republican that held the seat for the majority of my lifetime.

I'm pretty sure that's the only woman running for office in a downticket race on my ballot this year.

[ieoeja]

75. A few

Heather Steans, State Senator.

Kim Foxx, Cook County State's Attorney. I actually like her predecessor, Anita Alvarez, and think she is getting a raw deal over her handling of the murder of Laquan McDonald. But Kim won the primary, so she's the one I will be voting for in November.

Barbara McGowan, Mariyana Spyropoulos, and Josina Morita for Metropolitan Water Reclamation District Commissioners.

I was hoping the most recent redistricting would put me in Jan Schakowsky's district because I really like her. But didn't happen.

And probably a few other down ballot tickets I'm not aware of at the moment.


I've known you long enough on DU to know that you really do honestly believe we don't like Hillary simply because she is a powerful woman. Most Hillary supporters making that claim are full of it. I'll grant you props for honesty. And will readily cite your DU history as a frequent target of MRAs to any Bernie supporter who thinks you're just pretending.

[840high]

39. I would vote for Warren in a heart beat.

[cherokeeprogressive]

43. So would I.

[StevieM]

47. I am hoping that we get a female president named Hillary Clinton followed by another one named

Elizabeth Warren.

[Tarc]

17. Because males have held onto the reins of power in America since its inception

and are loathe to let go as they consider it an incursion.

[JPnoodleman]

26. Thus far none have ran and garnered widespread support? n/t

[msanthrope]

28. Why? nt

[JPnoodleman]

36. Well its a big question, putting on my History degree cap....

The biggest reason for the first century was a lack of legality. I am uncertain if women could actually HOLD OFFICE nation wide. Though it was certainly legal the further west the country expanded including the vote in various states.

Nationally I think it was always not illegal for a woman to be president but were limited in being elected to other offices making building experience kind of a challenge.

Today I think its just a lack of nationally exciting candidates. Some female presidential candidates run as "I'm a Feminist candidate for women!" but I believe to this day most women do not identify as Feminist so they had appeal that was narrow. Some conservative women have also failed to gather much steam, like Carly Fiorina(SP?) or Palin, though she was for a time the darling of the Right in the US.

Off the top of my head I cannot think of any immediate female contenders to the US presidency whom had a platform of any note or mass appeal. Until obviously very very recently in say Clinton, Fiorina, Palin. Clinton having the most chance in that she has a lot of credentials, experience and a wide network and clique of friends within the government structure and DNC and among key lobbying groups. Clinton's platform obviously isn't universally appealing as the Sanders challenge reveals.

Idk, why haven't we had any kind of president? Its a big question. I would caution against the easier answer of "America is super sexist." Which may be true to an extent but it does sort of act as a self-exculpatory sedative. Some women candidates haven't been stellar candidates.

[kcr]

61. Which candidates ran specifically as feminist and called themselves that?

They usually don't because the reason women don't specifically identify as feminist is the right wing media has done such a number on that word that they don't know what it means. But when you ask American women, and Americans in general if they support gender equality, over 80% say yes.

[JPnoodleman]

71. Mostly fringe third party candidates

Cheryl Lindsey Seelhoff is one that comes to mind, purely because she also stirred the hornets nest of 4chan and became the target of the demon beast of the interwebs.

I think why women don't use the F-word is a bit more complicated than that. But as it stands running as a women's issues candidate only I think hasn't built mass appeal, even if in theory it could work. Since for example Cheryl Lindsey Seelhoff ran as a explicitly Radfem candidate but she is really ONLY notable for running a forum and becoming the target of 4chan's /b/.

[morningfog]

30. This country is rooted in sexism and racism.

[msanthrope]

34. Well,yes. So it's really not surprising to me the support for a white male Senator from

a racially homogenous state.

[morningfog]

37. Are you surprised that we currently have an African American president

And that there is even greater support for a white woman?

[msanthrope]

40. Pleasantly so. On DU...the great Republic that was going to elect President

Kucinich? No.

[whatchamacallit]

32. Historical patriarchy

It's a crime really, and hopefully soon to be a thing of the past. That said, Hillary, for reasons other than her gender, isn't the one.

[yeoman6987]

41. Very few women have run for president

That is the one and only reason.

[Bonobo]

48. Why did you put a comma after "presidents"?

Is this question addressed only to men?

[Warren DeMontague]

53. Why have only a couple of them had a cell phone?

Same reason. Because we as a species are really only barely out of the dirt and caves, and we carry a lot of fucked up, outdated baggage with us. A good chunk of it can be laid at the foot of religion and superstition, but not all of it.

The good news is, there are those among us who constantly wish to push us forward, despite the people who are afraid of the future and cling to the past.

[silvershadow]

54. Not really sure. But if Elizabeth Warren had run, I would be supporting her

at this moment.

[BreakfastClub]

57. Because men wouldn't let women run for president and wouldn't vote for them if they did.

Even now, most white men won't vote for Hillary because she's a woman. Sexism.

[JTFrog]

58. This thread is a trip.

Pay no attention to the patriarchy behind the curtain....

[msanthrope]

79. It's high comedy. nt

[Chan790]

66. Because Shirley Chisholm wasn't taken seriously.

She'd have made a great President...Hillary, not so much.

[NCTraveler]

68. Because almost all groups outside of white men...

Are highly underrepresented in every area of government. Like can be seen with the treatment of minorities in this country the door was opened for us to participate yet little was done to compensate for the egregious policies of inequality and oppression.

In all honesty, some of the answers you have gotten are fucking horrific and go straight to the root of the problem. They display the reality for women and minorities. Here is partial equality after over a century of extreme oppression, now pull yourselves up by your bootstraps. I say we've done pretty well considering. the trend over the last decade shows we are teetering on the white male losing extreme dominance in national elections. I believe that is a part of Trump. White male desperation.

[whistler162]

69. Because most woman are smart enough to

leave the really dirt jobs to the men folk. You know like cleaning septic tanks or being President!

[ancianita]

70. Women aren't stupid. Those with families weigh the costs. Many are assassinated in office.

http://www.ibtimes.com/13-famous-murdered-women-you-may-or-may-not-have-heard-936610

When whole countries fail to protect half their population, women everywhere can see the threats to their existence.

It is, indeed, about someone stopping them. We know who those someones are.

[lumberjack_jeff]

72. They are the people that voters, 54% of whom are women, elected.

In 2012, 71 million women and 61 million men voted

[TheSarcastinator]

73. Why Are All the Presidents Gentiles?

It's a question worth asking.

Don't care who you support, currently.

Tell me why no Jews?

[Armstead]

74. Historical sexism

[EndElectoral]

76. Because Elizabeth Warren isn't running.

Women got the vote less than a hundred years ago, and really began to move out of traditional roles in the 60's - 50 years ago.

One could ask why it's taken 150 years for a black President to be elected or why a Native American has never been elected President or why a guy like FDR had to hide his handicap to be elected.

Society moves slowly to accept people who are slowly accessing power to be considered for the most powerful office in the land.

That said, we have had some women VP candidates in Ferraro, Palin, and Fiorina lately.

I also beleive that a good portion of this second half of the century was affected by the Greatest Generation who valued service. The role of the veteran being elected was critical until Bill Clinton took office and it was an issue in his running as well. When Clinton beat Dole it marked a significant event where serving in the armed forces was no longer as critical, but even so it became an issue with GW Bush, and Kerry in 2004. Many women of political power never served in the armed forces in combat and that has begun to change. Both the need for it in previous political campaigns may have hindered women running for President.

Also women needed to work their way up to governors and senators before they were considered for the highest office in the land and it took awhile. It is improving but it will be awhile until it's a 50-50 representation.

I'm never been a quota person, but I hope more good qualified women with progressive ideas keep running and get elected. However, gender is not going to affect whom I vote for. Issues will.

[Todays_Illusion]

77. That is a pitiful reason to vote for Hillary.

[SheilaT]

78. Are you truly that ignorant of history?

Men have been running things from the beginning. They've seriously held that women are not only the physically weaker sex, but mentally, morally, and emotionally weaker also. The three major monotheistic religions have been part and parcel of the claims that women are inferior, unfit to rule, and must be kept "in their place" which means in the home, raising children, doing for the men even to their own detriment. The Protestant Reformation and the Enlightenment didn't improve things much.

So when this country was founded, the vote was limited to a small category of males. Eventually the vote was extended to all white men, and after the Civil War to all black men also. Well, in theory anyway.

Women have had the right to vote in this country for less than one hundred years, although a number of states did grant female suffrage before the 19th Amendment. But the idea that women should exercise that right fully, freely and completely on their own, was much slower in coming.

Likewise, the notion that women could be just as incompetent as men in public office was slow to catch on. And yes, I said "incompetent" deliberately.

Until relatively recently, the party elders in each party had tight control over who was going to be able to run for President, and even as that loosened up in the second half of the 20th century, few woman had the political clout to run a credible campaign for the nomination. This has changed a lot recently.

Unfortunately, an awful lot of those who support Hillary Clinton are totally focussed on "O! M! G! How fabulous would it be to have a woman President!" without really paying close attention to what she actually stands for, or her record in many areas. It was the same 8 years ago. It was my observation that in 2008 many of her supporters only cared to elect a woman to the White House without thinking through who that woman should be.

Yes, I hope I live to see a woman in the WH, but as far as I'm concerned Hillary Clinton would be a terrible President.

Meanwhile, your question isn't very meaningful and isn't going to evoke any genuinely thoughtful answers. Unless a history lesson can be considered thoughtful.

[jillan]

81. Why were all the Presidents white until Barack Obama?

[JTFrog]

83. Because of racism.

Thank you for making the OP's point.

[panader0]

82. Vote for HRC then. She's a woman.

[CTyankee]

84. You know, I love Bernie but I have a strong desire to see the first woman president in

my lifetime. I was heartbroken when Elizabeth Warren decided not to run. I read her book and was so enthusiastic for her. Oh well...

[panader0]

86. As do I.

Part of the reason, besides the true need for a woman president, is because I always thought a woman
president would be less likely to get us into a war. But HRC is quite hawkish and that scares me.
As a Bernie guy, I will nevertheless vote for HRC if she is the nominee.

[CTyankee]

88. nice that we are of one mind on this. I already voted for Bernie in our primary. My husband

voted for Hillary. We have no fights over this. It's all good on the political front (both of us are fiercely political!).

[H2O Man]

85. Patriarchal society's

sexism, in my opinion.

[Waiting For Everyman]

87. To quote Hillary Clinton,

"What difference does it make?"

A corporatist neoliberal warhawk is the same, man or woman.

[Time for change]

89. That's a very complicated question that I think has many answers

But if I had to give one answer, I would say it has been our culture. For a very long time we have had a culture that thought women were not fit for high positions of power. Recall that until about a century ago, women were not even thought to be fit to vote.

But that has been changing gradually over the past several decades, and today I would say that, although there are many individual differences on the subject, our country as a whole has no qualms about electing a woman president. The number of women US Senators has been growing by leaps and bounds as have the number of women in many other positions of power.


I myself have never had any qualms about having a woman president, and would have liked to see one. Both my parents respected women, and I shared that respect since I was a child. And even though neither of the two major parties of my lifetime has ever nominated a woman for president, I have voted for women twice in general elections for president -- not because they were women but because I believed that they would be much better presidents than either of the men running from each of the major parties, both who I felt on both occasions would be beholding to the powerful individuals and corporations that funded their campaigns rather than the vast majority of the American people.

And I would like to add that I think it is a huge mistake for American women today to vote in the Democratic primaries for the woman candidate, because the other candidate, though he is a man, has an agenda that would be far better for both women and men.