Started wondering today what kind of person (maybe not in my lifetime) would be voted President first?

Ronald Reagan was divorced once when he was elected President in 1980, so your poll has already been answered. He had been married to actress Jane Wyman and later would marry Nancy Davis. Reagan was married to Nancy and had been for years at the time of his 1980 Election, so evidently, the divorce had little effect on the outcome of the election.

I doubt there will ever be an openly gay President in my lifetime. Also, I seriously doubt a single person, especially a woman even more than a guy, would be able to be elected with the way both parties make having a spouse and family such a big freaking deal in the elections.

I chose a woman. America is going through this phase I guess where "no group is left behind".

As much time is required to be the commander in chief I would think at this point, persons would want a single man/woman to take the job.

swami,

Here's a rhetorical question though, how would a single person relate to a family that is struggling? For instance, trying to balance working with raising kids and making ends meet?
I personally wouldn't have a problem with voting for somebody who is single, but I know alot of people would.

Just for the record,the "single man" part of the poll was also satified way back in the 1850's with the election of James Buchanan. He was a confirmed bachelor all of his life. Furthermore, he very well may satisfy the "homosexual" answer for the poll as well because while Buchanan was never married, he did have a male "companion" who, to my understanding, was with him almost constantly. Naturally rumors at that time, and some historians today, question Buchanan's sexual orientation. However, I am not positive it has been definitively proven either way.

One must keep in mind that in the middle of the 19th Century male behavior towards other male friends was much different than what is treated as masculine behavior today. At that time, it was very common practice for men to sleep in the same beds with other men for years and they openly expressed love and affection for one another in letters and exchanges. For example, there continues to be speculation as a result of his extremely close relationship with Joshua Speed, "a lifelong friend," as to whether Abraham Lincoln was gay.

Good post, Oldtriple.

Lots of really, really interesting studies done on 19th century male behavior. Really interesting to study letters between male friends, and think about what people would think of them today. They're more affectionate in their letters to friends than i am to my GF of three years, haha.

But, i don't believe they were homosexual, just a different attitude toward friendship, i guess.

Maybe I should have said next instead of first. It may have happened before but opinions have certainly changed.

Probably a woman maybe in '12, but if the right personality would surface any of the above

I don't think I'd ever vote for a homosexual. Maybe because of morals, or maybe because I'm a homophobe. I don't know.

The gays are going to turn you into a raving, insatiable gay. Beware.

Woman. It makes sense as it is the closest one out of the ones not satisfied.

I do not see why gender, race, ethnicity, religous affiliation, sexual orientation, maritial status ought to be a determining factor in whether one is a capable candidate for President. And, it saddens me that in 2008 (yes I'm aware race and gender were major issues last year) and now late 2009, there are people who would still consider these type of things to be determining factors when choosing for whom to vote as President.

^^^^^^
2009 has nothing to do with it. You will ALWAYS have that, and they will ALWAYS be determining factors.

Why?

unique,

Because humans are flawed and there will never be a perfect society....unfortunately. But, that's what it is.

Because that is the way humans are.

I voted Latino. They will soon be the majority population in this country. Not sure if all will be able to vote though, but I see that group getting a US presidential representative before the rest are satisfied (for the first time or again).

See, to me, that "that's the way humans are" really means "that's the way many people choose to be".

That type of mentality can be changed if one wishes to NOT hold issues like this as major factors when considering for whom to vote in an election.

I don't know. I think as long as people make opinions, there will be flaws and disagreements. And alternative voting.

unique_67 wrote: I do not see why gender, race, ethnicity, religous affiliation, sexual orientation, maritial status ought to be a determining factor in whether one is a capable candidate for President. And, it saddens me that in 2008 (yes I'm aware race and gender were major issues last year) and now late 2009, there are people who would still consider these type of things to be determining factors when choosing for whom to vote as President.

I wouldn't vote for a woman. Every 28 days, she'd be ordering an airstrike on numerous countries just for the hell of it.

Can you imagine the State of the Union? Every part of her platform that passes would be cause for praise. Everything that went down to defeat would result in crying in a feeble attempt to win the argument.

That's to say nothing of the fact that the energy bills would skyrocket as a result of alternating the thermostat from 62 to 84 degrees all the time.

oldtriple wrote: One must keep in mind that in the middle of the 19th Century male behavior towards other male friends was much different than what is treated as masculine behavior today. At that time, it was very common practice for men to sleep in the same beds with other men for years and they openly expressed love and affection for one another in letters and exchanges. For example, there continues to be speculation as a result of his extremely close relationship with Joshua Speed, "a lifelong friend," as to whether Abraham Lincoln was gay.

If you look even 50 years ago in sports, there's a dramatic difference. There's plenty of pictures that have stuff like full arm-over-shoulder embracing, rather than the pat on the back of today.

And then there's Brett Favre, who feels the need to swat every man in the country on the ass at least once.

Unique - It'll never happen.

Will Obama even let there be another election?