DW_a_mom wrote:
I’m not so sure. Whole other topic but the women who can rise in the Republican Party all fall within a very narrow set of parameters that women like Ivanka Trump personify quite well. Know your stuff, but still come across as profoundly feminine.
Eh, I think that's changing, I mean Sarah Palin in many ways blazed the trail that Trump would eventually march down, and I wouldn't call her profoundly feminine, her whole shtick was being the tough as nails hockey mom who could shoot and dress out a deer (and look good doing it), Lauren Boebert is seldom seen without her pistol on her hip, Winsome Sears just won statewide in Virginia running as a rough and tumble former Marine, and Ivanka Trump was never really a Republican anyway. I could totally see a brash female CEO (a real one this time) sweeping the GOP primary with tough talk and a touch of trolling, they'd go for it just to own the libs and elect a female president first.
DW_a_mom wrote:
Overall, I’ve come to accept that America has too complicated a relationship with powerful women to elect one president anytime soon.
It would certainly take a particular kind of powerful woman, Hilary just wasn't it, and let's not even start with Kamala. I kinda do feel like the GOP would have the advantage here, almost a Nixon goes to China kind of situation.
_________________
Your boos mean nothing, I've seen what makes you cheer.
- Rick Sanchez