Although I not a woman, I must say that even if I were a woman I would still be voting for Obama.

Sent by George de Man, Rome GA | 9:26 AM ET | 02-14-2008

Just because Hillary is a woman doesn't mean she's the right woman. There are plenty of men who aren't the right man. Let's not be sexist and elect her only BECAUSE she's a woman.

I'd love to see a woman in the White House (I'm an educated, middle-aged, Democratic female) but I'm holding out for a woman who can unite instead of divide and one who is willing to truly put the country's best interests ahead of her own. I'm confident that Hillary believes she's putting the country's interests first - but I sense that what she's really putting first is her own agenda. She seems convinced that she knows and gets to decide what's best for us without allowing for input, dialogue and multiple opinions.

Sent by Stacy | 9:33 AM ET | 02-14-2008

I think it's because Hillary is seen as "tough" and women don't want to acknowledge that it's the tough women who succeeds in a "man's world." There are too many sterotypes about women. We all need to let go. Don't think of Hillary as a woman. Think of her as a PERSON -- someone who might just have the qualifications to be a president that gets things done.

Sent by Maria | 9:41 AM ET | 02-14-2008

I'm not sure why I don't like Clinton. But I don't. I am a 39 year old woman, college educated and working in a male dominated field. I've been an active democrat in a red state for many years.

I don't like her equating 8 years as first lady to foreign policy experience.

I didn't like her running for senate in NY when she had lived more of her life in other states. (Why not Arkansas? Illinois?)

I didn't like feeling like she was the "anointed" candidate two years before the election.

I understand that some people feel that she is held to a higher standard because she is a woman - she seems too tough, but has to be tougher than the man - she seems ambitious, why can't a woman seem ambitious when men do the same thing. It's unfair.

I guess I want a woman to run who can pull it all off - and I don't think Clinton does.

By the way, I wouldn't love to see a Republican woman in the white house. I guess the truth is I am looking for more in a president than female gender.

Sent by Joyce | 9:44 AM ET | 02-14-2008

Women are known for intuition and my gut check on this potential nominee screams no. It isn't good enough to be first - especially now when the stakes are so high - you better be the best. I don't want to vote for a Republican president - but I will if Hillary gets my parties nomination.
Tracey Lamm
Iowa

Sent by Tracey Lamm | 9:47 AM ET | 02-14-2008

Face it, if Hillary were not married to Bill, none of us would ever have heard of her. Even her claim of "experience" seems to be based mostly on her husband's -- she has held elected office for less time than Senator Obama has, and hardly faced a tough challenge for her Senate seat.

I would LOVE to see a woman president. But shouldn't it be a woman who doesn't get there riding her husband's coattails?

A woman can, and I think soon will, be elected president. But for HERSELF, not her husband.

Sent by TJ | 9:54 AM ET | 02-14-2008

I would love to see a woman President but Hillary is not the woman for this job. To me she is so focused on winning the race but not to make this country better. She only wants it for the title the prestige of being "THE FIRST WOMAN PRESIDENT" and "THE FIRST PRESIDENTAL COUPLE" and the list goes on. I do believe she believes she is the right person for the job, I just don't agree. She would only deepen the divide between the two parties and little would be accomplished with her in the Oval Office.

Sent by Hillary | 9:54 AM ET | 02-14-2008

Women do not trust each other period. They do not approve of a woman who can be tough, or independent. So Hillary is paying for sexist ideals, and those are perpetuated by women themselves. Men dont hold Women back, other women do. Men are opportunistic about the whole arrangement, and who could blame them?

So the truth is women will not love any woman running for president. She would portray a direct threat to the female status quo, which is to say, if one is too {the sin of TOO} talented or skilled at anything in particular, then she is most un-feminine and must be punished.

Too Tough
Too Smart
Too Pretty
Too Fat
Too Happy
Too independent
Too Mouthy
Too Confident
Too Connected
Too {fill-in-the-blank}

Women are cannibals. They eat their own.

Sent by sundog | 9:56 AM ET | 02-14-2008

I used to have the same prejudiced opinion of Hillary - until I started paying attention to her, rather than what other people said about her.

I started out as an Obama supporter, and switched to Hillary after the debates started, because I realized she'd be a better president.

I think that there are some deep-seeded gender bias issues, among women and men. Men don't want to give up any power to women, and women tend to be more critical of other women. This hurts Hillary more than the race issue hurts Obama - in fact, I think his race has done more to help him, in the eyes of the media and educated white men, who are eager to show that they aren't racist.

And I'm speaking as a well-educated, politically active, 30-year-old woman, by the way.

Sent by Annaliese | 10:08 AM ET | 02-14-2008

I do feel that sexism has played a big role here. And not necessarily the blatant kind like nasty t-shirts and South Park episodes. It's a more hidden, systemic kind of sexism that people accept as normal. I think that she will unfortunately always be seen as "the wife" regardless of her own accomplishments. And that makes people bitter toward her. Obama is "uplifing and inspiring" and when she says the exact same things, she is perceived as a nagging wife or mother, riding on her husband's coattails. We always hate our own mother even if we know deep down she has our best interests at heart.

Sent by db | 10:13 AM ET | 02-14-2008

Candidates are candidates, and they are judged by how the public and media see them. I am a young, female, open minded- yet moderate democrat. And whoever gets my party's nomination, that is who I will vote for. That said, I like Hillary. I like how she talks about issues, and how they will be handled. She talks about health care--a biggie for me personally. Obama's "brand new day" routine is nice, sure, but he does not really talk about HOW he is going to make his grand changes happen. I find that a little too good to be true. We are still going to have the same congress to deal with, and the tricky biz that the Bush "legacy" has left us with--quite a bit of work. And skipping through the daisy's throwing skittles about is not going to make those problems go away. I think Hillary is a bit more of a realist, and I think that is why people do not like her.

Sent by Ally Randleman | 10:25 AM ET | 02-14-2008

I can only speak to my own reasons for not supporting Hillary Clinton. First, I don't think she is an effective or strong leader and I cringe at the thought of her on the global stage. Second, I am opposed to her health care policy. Third, she embodies for me all the negative attributes of so-called "successful" professionals, whether male or female, whose success is defined by their power and position. She is an operator. She will do whatever it takes, and use whomever she needs to, to get what she wants. It does not matter that she is female or male, I am disgusted. This is my perspective as a professional female (professor, molecular biology), who will continue to listen to NPR, sip cappucino's, and support Barack Obama!

Sent by Sylvia | 10:29 AM ET | 02-14-2008

I had a tough choice, being black and a woman. Then I saw the way Hillary campaigned in Iowa. She made the case for me. I am an avid support of Obama now. I think one of the reasons I don't like Hillary Clinton is because she does not know what she is good for, all she does is poke holes at other people. Why don't you stand on your own platform and convince people that your platform is the best out there. The more she pokes holes at Obama, the more people do fact checking, the more people start supporting Obama, because they find out that her facts did not check out.

Sent by Tic Tac | 10:32 AM ET | 02-14-2008

About one year ago, why Senator Clinton rode high, I was seeking an alternative. Now, with only two left, she should be a better choice. I request NPR also asks the same question ???Why Does Omaba Turn Some Women Voters Off?

We have been fooled and suffered for such a long time. America cannot afford another four-year mistake. We will lose our power and strength if selecting the wrong leader. Obama is the wrong leader.

Think about when you go for a job interview: the only thing you have is "passion"; you say "you can do it" will not convince your potential employers and they will not hire you if you do not have the appropriate experience and qualification.

Obama may be sincere, but, does he have the quality to do the job? No. In fact, a lot of candidates have far better qualifications/experience than him even though they have to drop the race. What makes Omaba unique is his energetic words and charisma. That's not enough for leading this nation!

My fellow Americans, wake up! Do not be frantic. Use your own mind; do not be influenced by media and ???polls???. We do not need drama, we need pragmatism. Eight years ago and four years ago, respectively, I made the prediction that the current administration would be doing a lousy job. And, they are.

Now, I make another prediction: if Obama is elected, America???s downturn will not be reversed during his tenure. His lack of experience in administration will be a mess at least in the first year when we are badly in need wise decisions for a number of key issues facing the nation. I also predict that there will be scandals for his administration in terms of the people he appointed and nepotism. Racial tensions will be a big issue.

I wish every American has a better life in the next four years.

Sent by Jill Jones | 10:33 AM ET | 02-14-2008

Reading some of these comments makes me scared about the future of women's rights in America. Before you go criticzing Hillary based on nothing more than your gut, research her background, and make an educated choice. I also am a 39 year old woman, college educated, and in a Republican state but a registered Democrat, and I work in a male-dominated field. I find unfathomable the talk of any Democratic woman even possibly considering voting Republican. The Republican party has as part of its main party platform anti-choice sentiments. To vote Republican as a woman is akin to shooting yourself in the foot, or slamming your hand in the car door on purpose. Just insane! Just go ahead and vote for our rights to be taken away, and those of your daugthers and granddaughters. I understand being dissatisfied with the Democratic candidates. Let us not as women romanticize the presidency - it's an election, people, not a relationship. These are politicians, even in our own party we cannot expect them to be perfectly honest! That is reality! What you have to do is pick the lesser of the evils, and that is clearly Hillary Clinton. Obama is not even on my plate for consideration. I had "bad vibes" about him from the start, but rather than voting with just my gut, I researched his history and found out why. He blantantly stretches the truth about his family background, his mother, his father, etc. He has a personal agenda in wanting to be president - to live down the truth of his family past. The needs and wants of our country come 2nd. We've already had 8 years of a president with his own personal agenda for being president - I, for one, do not want another one!

Sent by Paula | 10:44 AM ET | 02-14-2008

I voted for Clinton in a recent primary. Not because she is a woman and not because I like her. I voted for her because her stance on a broad spectrum of issues most closely matches mine.

Should she not be the Democratic nominee, I will vote for Obama in the general election. Not because he is black, and not because I like him. But because my views are more aligned with his than with either Huckabee's or McCain's.

Don't care about sex or race. Just want to know that the candidate I vote for can do the job and will try to do the job I think should be done.

The fact that we're talking about gender puts us behind countries like Pakistan, India and Israel, each of which has already elected a woman to its highest office.

Sent by jennifer | 10:47 AM ET | 02-14-2008

I hear people say this all the time and it really bothers me (I'm quoting a previous post on this forum):

"I don't like her equating 8 years as first lady to foreign policy experience."

Why not? Just because it is not a paid position doesn't mean that the job of first lady doesn't involve a huge amount of foreign diplomacy. It is exactly the same prejudice we have about stay at home mothers. It's not a paid position so it doesn't count?
Obama worked as a church volunteer and everyone accepts that as valid experience in the community.

Sent by db | 11:01 AM ET | 02-14-2008

I wouldn't vote for Senator Clinton not because she's a woman, but because she wants everything both ways: on the one hand, she is constantly over-asserting herself in a decidedly male fashion. On the other hand, she makes gendered comments about being good in the kitchen or about the men ganging up on her. I would love to see a woman in the white house but Hillary's particular breed of calculated opportunism makes me feel that she is not only insincere but also not an admirable representative of my gender. If she was truly a strong role model, she wouldn't alternate between acting like a man and acting like a victim.

Sent by Emily | 11:06 AM ET | 02-14-2008

Clinton is not spinning the same tale of promises and change that Obama and his supporters are using to continue to win people over. She has been part of the White House before, in times of both good and bad; as a country, however, we are now so jaded that we believe that that alone taints her as a candidate. Apparently we Democrats prefer someone who is new and fresh, someone who is not as focused on proving their abilities as they are on pointing out the mistakes of those who went before them (war vote anyone?). That being said, Hillary's getting my vote. Given the mess that our country is in (we're kidding ourselves if we call it anything else), I prefer someone who's been in the trenches and knows how to use the shovel over a talking head. By the way, I think Obama would make the perfect VP.

Sent by rpieces | 11:18 AM ET | 02-14-2008

Hillary has brains and moxy. She's smarter than most men. Obama has too many unanwered questions. I believe that Hillary should be given a chance.

Sent by Dorothy Lehmann | 11:29 AM ET | 02-14-2008

I will vote for Hillary in a heartbeat. Other women might not like her because she is independent, strong, and can be agressive. Our country is going to need someone with these characteristics, especially when dealing with terrorist countries and with our congress. I live in PA which is near NY I know what she has done for that state especially after 911. As for as Barack Obama I don't feel he has enough experience---He has only been in the senate for 2 years. And with Kennedys supporting him he will owe some big favors even though he talks about not being corrupt.

Sent by suzi | 11:33 AM ET | 02-14-2008

I am a 36-year-old white woman in the fuchsia (sp?) state of North Carolina. I used to love Clinton when she stood for strong, indepedent, professional women as a First Lady who wasn't going to be staying home and "baking cookies."

As a politician, though, I have grown disinterested as her policies veer more and more toward the center-right. Her support for the war cinched my distaste for her. I would never vote for a Republican over her, but I would take just about any other Democrat including Barack Obama.

By the way, I heard on NPR this morning that older white women were especially inclined toward Clinton. Not so in my family! Both grandmothers told me last night they are excited about Obama and voted/are voting for him in their respective primaries (NY and TX).

Sent by Ruby Sinreich | 11:35 AM ET | 02-14-2008

Hillary gets my vote. She is very strong, and can stand the heat and stay the course. She will serve us well. women of strength can only admire her, weaker women will envy and degrade. She needs our support as a Democrat, not just a woman! I'm proud that my state OK supported her!

Sent by OKIEJ | 11:48 AM ET | 02-14-2008

I drove two hours yesterday with my daughters so they could hear Hillary speak, and it's one of those moments that will always be with them, no matter what happens. Let's not fool ourselves; a strong woman candidate for president is not going to come along every 4 years. Hillary would be a good president and we should seize this opportunity to elect her.

But that's not the main reason I'm supporting her. The bottom line is that she has a deep knowledge on the issues I care about (healthcare, the economy, and education). If you look paste the rhetoric to what we actually must accomplish in the coming years, she's exceptionally qualified.

Sent by Manton | 11:51 AM ET | 02-14-2008

It's sad to read the cynical comments from voters who can only explain a lack of support for Hillary as sexism. While certainly an avowed sexist would not vote for Hillary, it does not follow that evey person who is opposed to sexism should necessarily vote for her. It is proper that voters should evaluate candidates on their own terms, with a view to their stances on various issues. Hillary is no different, and it would be patronizing to vote for her specifically because she is a woman.

Sent by Hugh N. Crie | 11:55 AM ET | 02-14-2008

There is more sexism than racism in this country, either way it is hell being on the receiving end of either gender bias or bigotry. Sundog, I think you nailed it, however, I could very easily insert and replace women, with black, latino, and at the end of the day with white men. Politics is vicious and very discouraging when you hear of what motivates people to vote the way they do. My only hope is that we as Democrats reflect on the last seven years and see the mess this administration is handing over to the next president. I started out ranking the Democratic field and had Obama, Richardson,Edwards, and Clinton ranked in that order based on their positions facing the country. I did not say Black, Latino, White or Woman. I just hope we continue to read the remaining candidates positions and pray that the will of the American people will once again prevail in this contest.

Sent by Roger | 12:09 PM ET | 02-14-2008

I've noticed that Clinton appeals to working class Democrats and older women and Obama to Blacks, younger people, and educated liberals, so it comes as no surprise that the above discussion, which was spurred by and is made up of people who are reading an NPR blog (read: younger educated liberals), would consist of support for Obama over Clinton. But why, exactly, do older women support Clinton over Obama and younger liberals Obama over Clinton? Can we solicit older women for their opinions?

Sent by Drew | 12:33 PM ET | 02-14-2008

I'm a college educated 44 year old white women who's been having a protracted heart felt conversation with my mom (65, also college educated)about Hillary v. Obama. We're both lifetime, active Democrats. Mom's a Hillary woman all the way, but I just can't manage to support her. It pains me, because I WANT to be able to like & believe in Hillary, but I just can't get past her support of the Iraq War & the general impression that she's an opportunist who will do & say anything she has to in order to be elected.
Heard a great analogy the other day, comparing Clinton to Reese Witherspoon's character in the movie "Election" and it's true, I'm responding to Hillary very much the way Matthew Broderick's character reacted to Reese's too perfect, too polished, too ambitious character. You want to support her, you have no real reason not to & yet, you just can't manage to whole heartedly embrace the candidate.
Of course, it's also true that if Hillary does win the nomination, I'll go out & vote for her, but I'll do so reluctantly, no matter how much my Mom nags at me!

Sent by Virginia | 12:36 PM ET | 02-14-2008

I have researched both candidates' voting records as well as the accuracy of their statements and attacks, and I have chosen Obama, period. I like others would like to see a female president, but at this point in time Obama is a better candidate in my mind.

Also, in response to some of the comments on here:
1) I believe people are reluctant to accept Hillary's time as First Lady as experience because none of the rest of us (male or female) would claim experience in our sig other's line of work simply because we were with them while they had a particular job. Sure, we know more about that field than we would if we were not with that person, but no one in their right mind would put that on their resume. Obviously the Presidency is a unique position and I don't know that that is a fair assessment of the First Lady's role, but I *do* think that is the perspective people are coming from when they think about the idea of being the spouse of the president as "experience."
2) I don't understand why people keep talking about a Clinton/Obama or Obama/Clinton ticket. It will never happen either way. Clinton does not want to be VP, period, and Obama could be a very viable future candidate if he does not get the nomination this time around, and the less risky way to maintain his viability would be to stay out of the VP seat. In my opinion people should forgot about that.

Sent by JP | 12:47 PM ET | 02-14-2008

What substantive thing has Hillary talked about that Barack has not talked about. People can't get over the fact that he is a great orator and she is not. They talk about the same things in their speeches, people just want to hear and listen to him more. He gives as much detail as she does, or doesn't.

I am a 44 year old Black American woman and a registered independent. Hillary had my vote to lose and in South Carolina, she and her husband promptly did just that. I will never vote for her if she is the nominee and I know a lot of people who feel the same way.

Sent by Happy Independent | 12:48 PM ET | 02-14-2008

As a woman I would like to see a female president, however Hillary isn't my choice. She is not the woman I would trust to represent women or mothers, let alone this country. I am proud to be a woman, and I can "handle myself in the kitchen." If she does manage to weasel her way back into the white house, we will get the chance to see how she can really manage. If its like anything we've already seen than we are in big trouble. We have already seen that she will play whatever part necessary to win. However, that isn't what this race is about. Hillary doesn't want this race to be about her gender, yet her campaign made it about race in South Carolina. Hillary simply isn't to be trusted. She has her agenda. This is all to clear. She agreed that casino workers would be allowed to caucaus at work, until she found out that some of them supported Obama. She agreed that Florida and Michigan would forfeit their delegates, until it was no longer in her best interest. Hillary will twist and turn her way through this campaign like the snake that she is. Obama has been working to bring this campaign to a higher level, yet Hillary is dragging it back into the mud. She may feel more at home there, but she doesn't need to drag the whole country down for company. Hillary's adaptability with politico-speak is impressive. She can talk her way around anything, and still leave people feeling as though they have received an answer. How can you trust someone with such a power for evasion? In my home state of Iowa Hillary has not payed workers for cleaning her campaign offices, there has been accumulated damages to her rented campaign offices, and I'll never forget that she planted questioners. Rather than answering real questions, she had her campaigners toss her softballs. Do not trust Hillary. I never will. Oh yeah, a lot of people still haven't forgotten the Whitewater scandal which cost taxpayers nearly $60 million. Agendas should be for the well being of this country's citizens not personal, opportunistic desires. Also, a lot of people don't feel that Obama has any real plans of substance. Check his website. Compare it to Hillary's. See for yourself.

Sent by Andrea DeFoe | 12:51 PM ET | 02-14-2008

Why not ride on her husband's coattails? Bush rode on his father's coattails; The Kennedys ride on each other's coattails. Same with the Bayh family, the Dole family, etc. In fact, nearly every representative, senator, and White House executive today comes from a family of political legacy. Most people don't complain that these people rode on the coattails of their ancestors. Hillary should not be skewered just because she was married to a former president. She is using the opportunity just like any other political family.

Sent by R. G. | 12:55 PM ET | 02-14-2008

With all due respect, our country needs executor, not an orator. Further, is it not interesting that both the Clinton AND McCain camps are aggressively addressing the "rhetoric" of Obama's platform? Regarding the statement that Obama appeals to "educated liberals": aren't there many educated, liberal blue-collar workers, as well as many well-educated liberal supporters of Clinton? I'd like to consider myself the latter.

Sent by rpieces | 1:03 PM ET | 02-14-2008

Why is it that when a woman doesn???t support another she is dragging her down? This assessment is TOO black and white.

I'm so tired of women being categorizes as jealous or envious because they don???t support another woman. Stop the victimization! All ???minority??? groups (women, blacks, etc.) have issues the rest within their means to deal with.

Why do we require such a large leap from one another? If you dessert your best friend when you get a new man, or slash each others throats to get closer to the glass ceiling, or look down with hatred and trepidation at women of color, or spread gossip and say hateful things about people and then smile in their face, or look down with disgust at single mothers how do things all of a sudden change at election time? We don???t support each other on the ground, everyday day to day, because of issues within our power to overcome. How, all of a sudden, do we (women = consist of every race, ethnic background, class and education level, marital status, etc.) united around any one women? Were putting the carriage before the horse.

This is precisely why we don???t have an equal pay amendment and part of the reason why women are making 78 cents on a man???s dollar. We haven???t come together in the last fifty years to get it through congress but somehow we (women) can united and agree on a female presidential candidate? The divisions that women interact in have existed before this campaign and they are intermingled with all other oppressive systems that exist in the US (sexism, racism, capitalism, etc.).

Let???s be very clear about something: being a woman doesn???t make you a feminist and being a woman doesn???t mean that you support women???s rights and wanting a woman as president doesn???t mean that you are a feminist or support women???s rights and being a feminist doesn???t mean that you???re not a racist or believe that there is a need for a permanent underclass. Nothing is that BLACK AND WHITE!!!! Certainly not humans beings male or female???..

Sent by Frances | 1:19 PM ET | 02-14-2008

Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama represent change.

Drastic change.

Which begs the question: How much change does the majority of the American public really want?

Sure, the economy is in a slump. We are in a world market where the economic slump is hitting Asia and a lot of other countries. Still, life in America ain't half bad. I would say life in America beats life in certain South American countries where thousands of peasants die from mudslides during hurricane season.

Another benefit of life in America is being able to complain. In many countries, complaining gets peope either shot or disappeared.

When it comes election day, people will step into the voting booths to make that big decision: Is life in America that bad that we need drastic change?

Plus, there is the fact that in reality, change frightens people.

fred camorra call

Sent by fred camorra call | 1:54 PM ET | 02-14-2008

Another thing, she wasn't prudent enough to handle her own campaign's $140 million dollar budget without going broke and having to borrow more money, how the heck can we expect her to handle the country's finances...If she is elected president, we will be in even more debt than we are now.

For all the talk about the Clinton Political Machine, she has been out campaigned by a so called upstart...One who is kicking her butt all cross this country. Barack may not even when the nomination, but he campainged with more dignity, integrity and honesty than anyone.

I for one don't want a President who pulls out the woman card when she doesn't get her way...crying for goodness sake, give me a break

Sent by Happy Independent | 2:02 PM ET | 02-14-2008

They all have a bunch of "rhetoric" in their platforms. None of them has any executive experience. McCain has already started playing the POW/Hero card (and I don't want my country's military in Iraq for the next 100 years), Hillary is playing the Woman card and Barack is playing the card he has been playing from the start of his campaign, The Change Card. He is not playing the race card (and I don't believe he ever will) nor has he changed his platform for political gain. He believes in what he is saying and much more of the country is beginning to believe him as well.

Look, who ever is the next president of this country is going to have one hell of a time getting us back on track and I just don't think Hillary will be able to get the job done. A lot of people are underestimating the real disdain in this country for her and her husband and truth be told, every Black American isn't/wasn't a big fan of Bills; although now, according to her campaign manager, our vote doesn't count anyway...:)

Sent by Happy Independent | 2:20 PM ET | 02-14-2008

I agree with others who have said that Hillary's senate seat was a 'gift' rather than something earned.

Also I question the character/motivations of anyone who stays with a cheating spouse. If you are willing to allow yourself to be treated that way and not stand up how tough are you? Or maybe you have struck some deal with the devil?

Obama's experience is not an issue for me at all. Look back, how expereinced have some of our best presidents been?

I am a 45 year old white male just to set the context of my post.

Sent by Chris | 2:34 PM ET | 02-14-2008

Bill is not running - Hillary is. The former president is touring the country to show his support for his spouse just as Michelle Obama is doing the same for her spouse. That's where the spousal and former president references should end. Bringing the Hillary's marriage and references to Bill's White House performance into the mix demonstrates an inability to make a decision solely based on hard facts and information about the candidate and her platform. In a country where American Idol is the top-watched program, I guess we shouldn't expect anything more.

Sent by tony | 3:26 PM ET | 02-14-2008

Happy Independent: I'm curious...does that mean George Bush plays "the woman card" whenever he cries in public? It's both interesting and disappointing that as a woman, you are making the conscious decision to further that stereotype. Perhaps that takes us to the very heart of the initial question posed by NPR.

Sent by rpieces | 3:37 PM ET | 02-14-2008

I am not a woman, nor am I a Democrat. But from what I gather I see five things at play here.

1. Feminism is as politically vitriolic as it is polarizing. Despite the struggles and efforts of a large part of women in the USA, not all women have embraced ROe v. Wade, ERA, and other feminist causes as much as Betty Friedan had hoped. Hilary embodies this rift very much and as such will be solidly refused by conservatives/moderates/independents among men of all races and yss even women too. It's gonna cost her (if nto already) her 'inevitability'.

2. People (men AND women) will never divorce the ideals that feminism/self-determinism embody with her compassion (some read submission) with her husbands sexual pecadillos. Why? Because people view government as a macrocosm of the family home, that is, if one cannot keep their house in order, then surely 'A House divided cannot stand', and won't stand to elect her. I've heard people say as much. And of course, we people hold politicians to higher standards. It's a fact of life.

3. Her candidacy is marred by imprecision as far as statements regarding experience, and liberalism, which Obama knows and is making use of at this time (especially her track record w/ Iraq). The best she can do is claim is that he is only making promises. People are tired of double talk, which the Bill Clinton era is often cited of. Women value integrity more than men, it seems.

4. Her biggest mistake was allowing the American public begin to believe that her Husband was running, or at least running her candidacy, making her look real incompetent (see SC debacle). Women do not like to look foolish, especially in front of us men, and yes we men are certainly the same way. Almost unforgiveable. Especially since his statements seemed to promote the stereotypes and division that has divided the party before.

5. Her failed attempt at Healthcare reform proved one thing. Unless she has a mandate, and control of both houses, nothing will get done. Her presence is polarizing, and in order for any change, be it right on day one, or ready on day one, has to be hammered out in compromise. Which language (unity) is fluent in Obama's camp, and not Hillary's.

Cheers.

Sent by platonicform | 4:33 PM ET | 02-14-2008

forget gender and forget race forget parties... vote for the BEST PERSON. PERIOD.

Sent by vanni | 4:34 PM ET | 02-14-2008

rpieces: I don't consider George Bush at all; he is the biggest mistake this country made twice.

I don't believe Hillary's tears were real. I believe she and her campaign made a calculated decision to act vulnerable at an opportune moment; and it worked, but it wasn't honest. We haven't heard anymore about Hillary "Hearing her voice" since New Hampshire.

Tony: Of course there is nothing wrong with Bill going out on the stump for his woman, anyone would. Bill made the mistake of insulting me in SC when he made the campaign about him and played the race card. He assumed he could interject race into the mix and the rest of the country would be afraid to vote for a black man to become the leader of the free world. Well, he was wrong, very wrong. So far, Barack has been able to transcend race which is so refreshing. Like I said earlier Hillary had my vote to lose and she has. But know this, I am not voting for him because he's black (although I am certainly proud). I am voting for him because I believe he can move this country forward, where that is, I don't know but I am excited to give him the opportunity and take the journey.

Sent by Happy Independent | 9:56 PM ET | 02-14-2008

Whoa folks, calm down! I've been reading here and really, they are the politicians, we don't have to be. Now is anyone surprised if politicians are the ultimate salespeople? Self-promoters? How many times have we been through this Americans? Jeeze. Now, Happy or Unhappy Independant, I can respect your stance--you like your candidate, that's fine. I think the big picture is that we don't need another Republican in the White House PERIOD. Democrats tend to weaken their own party, as is happening now. We have two very qualified, good candidates, and whomever wins the nomination, we'll be in good shape. So enough with the dramatics! Choose your candidate, stop taking pot shots at their sex or race, and be satisfied with your choice.
Maturity ladies, that's what many think we are not capable of ( and some of these blogs back that up) but we must prove them wrong, no matter which side of the fence we are on!

Sent by Moderatin' Maybelle | 12:54 PM ET | 02-15-2008

Trust me, it's Happy Independent. I'm happy and loving this country and the political process and my freedom to voice my opinion.

Peace & Love

Sent by Happy Independent | 10:17 PM ET | 02-15-2008