Memo for 2012, half the candidates need to be women. It doesn't matter if they are

[CK_John]

qualified or not, they have be there if women are to be considered. They need to have a presence in order to have a comparison. The game is about competition and women need to be in the game. It cannot be 7 to 1 again.

They have to be there even when they have no chance at all. They have to make all the mistakes, but they have to be there.

2012 is the perfect training ground, since the incumbent has a huge advantage and a run may well symbolic, it will be time to build a base and get known and get the public ready for women candidates.

[peacebird]

1. i hope you just forgot to add - :sarcasm:

Otherwise that is just the single silliest idea I have heard.

Why would I want to vote for someone based solely on their gender, sexual orientation, religion, or skin color?

:wtf:

[CK_John]

2. Would the race be very different if is was 4 and 4 in the debates. I think so. n/t

[peacebird]

3. four equally qualified candidates of each gender, with a good mix of skin tones and religions also?

Yes - but again - I want the best qualified people running, without regard to sex, color, creed, religion.....

What I liked as this campaign kicked off was that there was a woman, a hispanic, a black, and yet the coverage was surprisingly balanced. It was mentioned that this was historic but then things got down to brass tacks (issues and money) instead of the gender and race. Your approach seems more interested in gender and race than in issues and qualifications.

[CK_John]

5. I'm talking numbers not skin tone. n/t

[DURHAM D]

4. You didn't get the memo?

It is time for a black man. They have had the vote 50 years longer than women so it is their turn.

Women will need to wait until 2060.

Slow down - the time will come.