Can a woman running for president of the U.S. afford to be anti-death penalty?

[fried eggs]

Women who want to be leaders, therefore, run into two problems: The first is the “double standard”: A female candidate for a powerful role has to put her agentic side on display to reassure people that she can take charge, which is hardly ever an issue for men. The second is the “double bind”: When women in leadership roles do act tough, there is a backlash against them for being too tough.“You can see a problem here,” Eagly said. “The men and leaders match in our general stereotypes, and women and leaders don’t match as much.”

Read more: http://www.ipr.northwestern.edu/about/news/2016/why-so-few-women-hold-positions-of-power.html

[bvf]

1. Pause...

Play.

[cherokeeprogressive]

2. Better question: "Should a human being running for President of the United States be truthful?"

[fried eggs]

3. both candidates have told white lies to stay in the game

Was Sanders lying when he said Obama was progressive?

[cherokeeprogressive]

4. Wow we got off track on that one fast, didn't we.

[kath]

14. LOL.

[Motown_Johnny]

21. White lie ? People are being killed. Sometimes iinnocent people.

If this is just a (little) "white lie" to you then your priorities are seriously screwed up.

Also, if Hillary is such a weak candidate that she can"t be honest about this she should not be our nominee.

[Kentonio]

22. Yes he was lying

It disappointed me, but I understood why it was necessary.

[Kokonoe]

24. If President Obama considers himself a progressive, than that's what he is.

Its the person of interest who decides what they are.
The brewhaha is Madam Hillary claims guilty of being a moderate and liberal at the same time.

[Kentonio]

29. Two things..

Firstly that is absolutely not true. You dot get to label yourself whatever you want. Your actions show what you are.

Secondly Bernie had just (rightly) called Hillary out on the same issues. He had to double talk to justify not doing the same to the President. I'm a huge fan of his, but it was uncomfortable to watch.

[Ed Suspicious]

5. Should a woman running for president of the U.S. find a set of core principles and hold true to

them, or is every issue one that can be negotiated away?

[fried eggs]

8. Can you answer the question posed in the OP?

If a female candidate, such as Elizabeth Warren, appears softer on crime and punishment, can she win a general election in this country?

[Ed Suspicious]

10. She'll have my vote.

[tecelote]

26. Absolutely.

Softer on crime and punishment or fair? We've been too harsh and obviously many agree.

How about an anti-war stance? That would be a powerful stance most Americans would back.

A women that competes to be more of a hawk than Republicans has the opposite problem. We want an end to the killing and we're appalled that Hillary does not share our morals and compassion.

[merrily]

9. Only a misogynist would expect principles or the correct stand on the death penalty from a woman.

I never suspected you were a misogynist before I read that post. I'm so disappointed in you.

[Ed Suspicious]

15. I suspect you'll forgive me in due time.

They really seem offended at the idea that one can run on principle and actually get elected. They're so trained that politicians are snakes that they now see it as a major qualification to the point that to not be a sneaky snake is a disqualifier for public office. That makes me sad to even think about it.

[merrily]

16. The idea that women must take horrific stands is beyond the pale and harms women.

I guess we don't mind harming women in general, as long as we think it might help out Hillary.

[merrily]

6. Every time you think the spin can't possbly get more ludicrous.....

[fried eggs]

11. what if the woman in question were Elizabeth Warren?

Can you answer the question, taking into account the double standard that women face?

[merrily]

13. If your point is that I would tolerate Warren playing the female victim card on the death penalty,

then you have absolutely no idea who I am or what I have ever posted.

Is that your point, or was it something else?

[BlueCaliDem]

7. Her stance on the DP is something I can't agree with. I'm anti-DP. I understand that as president

she or he must be president to ALL the people, not just one's own Party - something Republicans have no problem ignoring since, well, they're dictators in heart and soul - and that my opposition to the DP isn't shared with the majority of Americans.

Still, I would love to see the DP abolished from the Federal level down to State level. I'm certain that the families of victims of the DC Sniper and Boston Marathon bombing disagree with me, and I can totally understand that, but it doesn't change my mind that the DP is archaic, cruel, and outdated. It needs to go. Life without parole is bad enough as capital punishment. But that's just my personal opinion.

[Ed Suspicious]

12. And it allows for some sort of rectification in the event of a horrific mistake.

[BlueCaliDem]

18. Exactly. Death is so final. And I can't trust our justice system where judges and prosecutors can

actually deny a possible innocent inmate a DNA test just to be sure they have the right person on death row. How ridiculous is that??

DNA testing should be mandatory in all capital cases, and it should be conducted by independent DNA labs if people want to keep the DP in place. I'd prefer they do away with the DP, though.

Anyway, all death row inmates should have a clean DNA test done or they should be placed in life without parole until it is. The last thing we need to do is kill an innocent man or woman.

[SheilaT]

19. To me it's appalling that anyone is this day and age still supports the death penalty.

Almost every other country on the planet has abolished it. And it's not as though the presence of the death penalty has cut way back on murders in this country.

[beam me up scottie]

20. They're considering bringing back firing squads in Tennessee.

Since they might not be able to use lethal injection they're going to use the electric chair too.

Think about that, legislators are actually discussing the most efficient "humane" way to kill a human being.

It's unconscionable.

[Ino]

23. Some women may think they are trapped just like that...

and try to decide which way they should go in order to get approval and votes. Do they even know, or care, what they themselves really feel & think? Can they afford to be so cynical, phony & triangulating?

Others may actually have inner convictions, principles and integrity. They don't waffle or parse their words. They don't shift their position depending on prevailing political winds. They take a stand, and make their case for it. Even if you don't agree with them, you find yourself respecting their sincerity. This is the only way an honest and courageous woman... or a man... can afford to be -- double standards or not.

[saltpoint]

25. Very possible and in my opinion very

agreeable that people, across the entire gender spectrum, should oppose State-sanctioned killing.

I'm not into dog fights. And I'm not into the Death Penalty.

Of note is the overlay among fundamentalist "Christians" who do not question the severity of State authority on the Death Penalty but do not hesitate to invoke "God's Judgment" as the prevailing authority for social issues. Tom Cotton and Kim Davis phone home.

The Death Penalty sits well with many of these fundie-types because the State appears aligned with them for a change, and of course, their belief in literal hell and literal heaven matches the legal geography.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

27. Yes, the real question is can she afford to support state-sanctioned murder?

Killing people we've already jailed, who might actually be innocent?

I forget the exact number, but there were around a hundred and fifty people or so exonerated this year, including a handful who were on death row, and the AVERAGE time spent in jail of those innocent people was 14 years, iirc.

The state shouldn't be killing ANYONE.

We shouldn't be murdering people in jail, we shouldn't be murdering them on the street for jaywalking, for running away from petty crimes, for daring to try to defend themselves when attacked by police, for selling loose cigarettes, for being annoyed when they're stopped for supposed traffic violations.

When the state is murdering its citizens, the state loses its authority over them.

[cali]

28. Anyone who supports the death penalty for political expediency

deserves contempt.

[Vinca]

30. I think a person who supports the death penalty needs to examine themselves and decide

if they could pull the switch . . . especially since so many of the executed have been exonerated after they're dead. This isn't a gender issue, it's a moral compass issue.

[restorefreedom]

31. China, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Iraq

These are the countries we share the top spot with for the DP.

so the question for me is, why are we squabbling about political appearances and gender when this is our legacy?

no DP. no excuses, no qualifiers, no "double standards". just no.

-----


At least 22 countries were known to have carried out judicial executions in 2014, the same as in 2013. At least 607 executions were carried out in 2014. This figure does not include the thousands of executions that were believed to be carried out in China. Beginning in 2009, Amnesty International ceased to publish minimum figures for the use of the death penalty in China, where such statistics are considered to be state secrets. At least 2,466 people are known to have been sentenced to death in 2014, an increase of 28% compared with 2013. The increase was mainly due to large numbers of death sentences in Egypt and Nigeria, where mass sentences were imposed in single cases with large numbers of defendants. View the Amnesty 2014 report here.

Countries with the Most Confirmed Executions in 2014
1. China (1,000s *see above) 4. Iraq (61+)
2. Iran (289+) 5. United States (35)
3. Saudi Arabia (90+) 6. Sudan (23+)
At least 22 countries were known to have carried out judicial executions in 2013. At least 778 executions were carried out in 2013. This figure does not include the thousands of executions that were believed to be carried out in China. Beginning in 2009, Amnesty International ceased to publish minimum figures for the use of the death penalty in China, where such statistics are considered to be state secrets. View the Amnesty 2013 report here.

from deathpenaltyinfo.org