| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Politix |
| I Love Polls: 'Shock' in Prez Survey |
| 2005-04-11 |
| Maybe America isn't ready for a female president after all, according to a surprising poll that found only 49 percent of voters may really want to put a woman in the Oval Office. Pollsters say that on sensitive issues, voters often give the politically correct answer when asked what they'd do, but are more candid when asked what their friends and neighbors believe. So pollster Scott Rasmussen first asked Americans if they'd personally be willing to vote for a woman for president and 72 percent said yes — a result comparable to other polls. But he found a big gap and a very different answer when he asked: "What about your family, friends and co-workers — would most of them be willing to vote for a woman president?" Only 49 percent said yes. "Asking about your family and friends will give a better gauge. The number of people actually willing to vote for a woman may be closer to 49 percent than 72," Rasmussen said. The issue is hardly academic to Sen. Hillary Clinton, the leading Democratic presidential prospect for 2008, and to many Republicans dreaming that Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice might carry their standard against her. The discrepancy could raise the question of whether Clinton, who polls as high as 47 percent in some hypothetical presidential surveys, could face a kind of glass ceiling if she runs. The gap on voting for a female candidate is most dramatic among those over 65, a heavy-voting group, but it's also true of Democrats, Republicans, men, woman and all ages, according to the survey of 1,000 adults taken Wednesday and Thursday. Among seniors, 62 percent claim they'd be willing to vote for a woman, but said only 32 percent of their friends and family would. Among Democrats, 84 percent said they'd be willing to vote for a woman, but only 59 percent said their friends would. Among Republicans, it's a 61-to-41 percent gap; among women, 75-to-51 percent, and among men, 68-to-47 percent. Personally, I'm waay past this question and would welcome any intelligent non-idiotarian who grasps the obvious and has the will to do the right thing, but people are ruled by custom - and they keep surprising me. Regards Hillary - the fact that she's a woman has zero to do with what I think of her. I'm still in mourning about Condi, heh. |
| Posted by:.com |
| #6 Might want to ask the Argentinians what they think of Margaret Thatcher... Indeed. I'd barely hesitate to say that Britain hasn't had a leader with such balls since... Er... MAGGIE was the dog's... |
| Posted by: Bulldog 2005-04-11 7:13:48 PM |
| #5 Might want to ask the Argentinians what they think of Margaret Thatcher... Indeed. I'd barely hesitate to say that Britain hasn't had a leader with such balls since... Er... MAGGIE was the dog's... |
| Posted by: Bulldog 2005-04-11 7:13:26 PM |
| #4 Did the pollsters bother to ask what the people would do if both major parties fielded women? As for Billary, it's only "pro-Israel" for political expediency. In fact, everything it thinks/does is for political expediency. At least you can't accuse the Hildabeest of compromising her principles - she doesn't have any. |
| Posted by: Barbara Skolaut 2005-04-11 6:07:24 PM |
| #3 ruthless and machiavellian, but only on dissent here at home - abroad she'd get walked on, and by extension, America would. She has a society to manipulate, and foreign affairs tend to distract |
| Posted by: Frank G 2005-04-11 5:51:31 PM |
| #2 Haven't we learned by now how unreliable the polls are? As to Hillary, she's a ruthless, machiavellian pro-Israel bi*ch who'd most likely be at least as tough on Boy Assad, Kim, Chavez et al as any Republican in Congress |
| Posted by: thibaud (aka lex) 2005-04-11 5:33:11 PM |
| #1 ...and would welcome any intelligent non-idiotarian who grasps the obvious and has the will to do the right thing... Might want to ask the Argentinians what they think of Margaret Thatcher... {HE HE HE} |
| Posted by: BigEd 2005-04-11 3:43:29 PM |