I know a lot of women would love to have a female president. If ever there is one qualified for that job and in the running, she would probably get a lot of votes from the female voting contingency. She would hopefully not get those votes just because she is female, but because the voters would be voting for a qualified female who would deserve their consideration just as much as any qualified male candidate might deserve their vote.
Females have not only been talking about a female president for the last few years, they have been talking about it and hoping for it throughout several of the previous presidential campaigns! Since Hillary seems to be the only female in the running this go-around, logically, it would seem that if women at large want a female president, she would be the candidate of choice.
I hope with all my heart that if women at large want a female president, they wait for one who is qualified. And if there is one out there — a potential female presidential candidate — I hope she is able to come to the fore as soon as possible…if not this go-around, then maybe the next.
It might be impossible to find any presidential candidate — male or female — who does not lie. That said, at the very least we would hope for one who doesn’t blatantly lie to us even after the truth is known. Just as our very own parents likely lied to us at times for their own good reasons, once we knew there would not be a “pony,” or that our turtle had really died, it would be worse than useless for them to go on lying as if a pony would show up under the Christmas
tree, or that little “Tuttle” would crawl out from under the furnitureone day. Even children recognize lies.
There is never any sense in criticizing a candidate’s personality — either we like someone or we don’t — but if we found out some heavy-duty secrets about a person we liked that would cause us to not trust them, we could go on liking them even though we would never give them the keys to our home or our car, and we’d surely never let them babysit our children.
Political campaigns are great for highlighting all the good points of a candidate and reminding voters why this or that candidate is the man (or woman) for the job. Campaigns are also the time for those who wish to cast aspersions on the opposition to bring out their buckets of mud. When a candidate cannot really stand on his (or her) own laurels, a little mud judicially splashed here or there will do the trick to remove “stars” from the report card of one’s opposition.
While it is easy to see the advantages of one candidate over another when such “advantages” are carefully culled from the chaff of one’s political past, often a voter will get stuck in that
“you-convinced-me” mindset and never research any deeper into the kind of behaviors that show a candidate’s worst — and true — side. Lying is only one aspect of such a side. Perhaps one would discover something like cheating the public by misusing taxpayers’ funds. Or perhaps one would discover false stories about one’s own family history, or one’s own list of accomplishments. Sometimes one discovers that those with whom one might be “enemies” today, were friends in the past — there might be photos that surface and speeches that can be revisited, reminding voters about “that side” of the candidate.
And there are all those many books on the market, written by those who have had access to secret or hidden pieces of information that, if finally known by the general public, would make it hard for the general public to want such a candidate as president of our United States. I would suggest that before we cast our precious vote for that
most important office, that we check out all the books that are available on all the candidates and see if we really want to vote for a person with THAT in their past, or their present, which means they will carry THAT into their presidency, which is our future.
I do not know any of the candidates personally, and I would probably like a female president as much as any woman might, but I don’t believe that women are sheep and I don’t believe that they will automatically vote with the “herd.”
I’m a big fan of reading up on candidates, learning all I can, and eliminating those right off the bat that don’t even qualify to be trusted with my family, let alone with the whole country. As I often told my daughter, if you were in love with some man, and he was everything you ever wanted, but you felt there was something about himthat bothered you (he had this one little fault — in addition to everything else, he was a serial killer), you need to trust your gut,
do whatever research you can to learn what you need to know, and be willing and able to let him go when you discover that “flaw.” Nobody is so perfect they don’t have some little secret they’d rather not let the world know, but when the secret gets out, and it’s bigger than a breadbox or bigger than a puff of marijuana here or there, it might be time to reevaluate where you want to put your vote.
People will attempt to persuade you to vote for the most “logical” candidate, even one who might have one of those major flaws; and they might even expect you to vote with the “herd” just for the sake of getting a female in office. You’ll hear it all and be convinced and persuaded one way or another by each and every candidate and their advocates, but you may change your mind back and forth six times or more before election day rolls around, since you’re not sure what to believe. That in itself tells you that you need to do your homework.
In the end, you’ll likely vote for the candidate with the least known flaws and hopefully the most honest potential. And if you’ve done your homework well, and picked right, maybe we’ll get a new start with a new president and get this country into a much better groove.
Maramis Choufani is the Managing Editor of the Las Vegas Tribune. She writes a weekly column in this newspaper. To contact Maramis, email her at firstname.lastname@example.org.