311
Michelle Obama says US ‘not ready for a woman’ to be president: ‘Don’t even look at me about running’
(www.independent.co.uk)
this post was submitted on 16 Nov 2025
311 points (92.6% liked)
politics
26422 readers
2560 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I mean, she's right.
I don't care if Hillary won the popular vote. That's not how presidential elections in our country work. You can stop talking about it, because it's a moot point.
We've run a woman twice now and lost twice. This country is a racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic, and xenophobic trashcan.
Get the hint. Play the game to win.
She's not. She's throwing out an easy answer to a very complex question. "Two ladies ran for President and lost? I guess ladies can't win the presidency."
But you could play this game with literally any presidential campaign and be wrong.
Obama beating Hillary in the primary in 2008 proves that our country hates women more than black people. And when he beat both McCain in 2008 and Romney in 2012, it allowed us to conclude our country hates Veterans and Mormons.
Then Trump beat Hillary, proving the country hates women again (but not before Trump's primary win proved it hates Latinos, Black People, People Still on Their First Wife, and Ohioans). Then Biden beat Trump, proving the country hates Septuagenarians. Then Trump beat Harris, proving you need to be a billionaire before you'll be seriously considered for the White House.
And all but once when a woman was the VP on the ticket, the ticket lost. The only time when there was a woman on the ticket and the ticket was successful was after the first Trump term.
There's never been a woman that won any presidential primary (other than Hillary if you count that)
It's what /u/DarkFuture said; the US is a racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic, and xenophobic trashcan. It always has been. This was the case back when America was more progressive; it's certainly the case today.
A full three time, total. Twenty four years between the first two of them.
How do you not? But in between Geraldine Fererra and Hillary Clinton we added 20 women senators and six governors.
Politics is a numbers game. You have to run before you can win. And I've seen very little evidence to suggest women do worse than men on average. By the number, they run at parity with their male colleagues. You simply have fewer candidates.
Why do you think that is? Might it be that strategists are reading the room (the country)? Nah, it couldn't be...
Is that a serious question? Are we going to ignore the DNC shenanigans around Hillary / Bernie?
I guess we can ignore each of the instances where there was a woman on the POTUS / VPOTUS ticket. Got it.
Because men had a 120 year head start at electoral politics. More time, more opportunities, more generations of fathers training their sons to be politicians than mothers training their daughters.
Hillary out-muscled Bernie the old fashioned way. You'd have an easier time arguing Obama pulled the rug out from under Hillary (re: Michigan). At least that was a close race.
You're ignoring all the instances where there wasn't. You think LBJ would have lost to Goldwater if Humphrey had tits? Or that Reagan needed Bush's dick to crush Mondale by 20 points? Do you think Obama needed to be a man to win, when he was already playing with the biggest handicap in national politics?
Put your name on the ballot and, statically speaking, your gender simply does not matter.
You should read more about Political Science, you'd understand a lot more and you wouldn't have to pull made up numbers from your ass.
My Brother in Christ, you need to read more English, because you don't seem to understand the words on your screen.
The two female candidates who lost were WILDLY more qualified than felon rapist pedophile Donald Trump.
If that doesn't tell you that this country isn't ready for a female president, then you are actively refusing to acknowledge objective reality and I can only presume you have a fetish for losing.
Ready to gamble what's left of our democracy?
According to whom? You're trying to apply an objective rubric to a purely subjective selection process and mistaking the job of President for job of Running For President.
That's long before you get into Harris's "qualifications" as a party flak riding the coat tails of her superiors. Let's not forget that Harris has never won a national primary. She couldn't even win her home state the one time she put her toe in the water in '20. She was unqualified for President for the same reason Bernie Sanders and Marco Rubio and Michael Bloomberg were unqualified. Because they were losers.
I will put all my chips on a Zohran Mamdani or Rashida Talib before I bet a bent penny on the next Pete Buttigieg or Beto O'Rourke.
We need winners, not nepo hires, running the party going forward.
If you want votes. You appeal to voters.
Not people who only care about politics once every four years, to systematically go through everything you've done for 30 years, to see if your the right flavour of obscure political ideology.
You're absolutely right. Gotta play the game as presented.
This is a stupid take. Give the people a viable candidate that doesn't thank Dick Satan Chaney for his service and cheerfully announces the desire for the "most lethal military" when the voting base is expressing discontent with the governments support for an active genocide, and she'll win.
People didn't reject KH because she was a woman, they rejected her "centrist" campaign that was to the right of GWB's on several key issues. People didn't reject Hilary because she was a woman, they rejected her being forced on them instead of Bernie.
And both of them had the same attitude, that voters owe them their votes, simply because they're not Trump. People didn't reject women, then rejected the DNC.
Both female candidates who lost were INSANELY more qualified than felon, rapist, pedophile Donald Trump.
Still lost.
Stop ignoring the reality of what America is.
Don't gamble with what's left of our democracy.
Qualifications aren't how presidential elections in our country are won. You can stop talking about it, because it’s a moot point.
You realize that no matter what you say, running a female for president is a gamble.
You are openly admitting you are willing to gamble what's left of our democracy at a critical juncture in American history.
Not very bright.
Running anyone is a gamble, there are no guaranteed wins.
I said no such thing, you don't even know my opinion. Arguing with someone in your head is certainly very bright though, no notes.
The fact that you believe any candidate is an equal gamble indicates you are not taking this conversation seriously.
I can't take someone seriously that tries to equalize all things. That is not reality and you are not living in it.
It is less of a gamble to run a white male and you fucking know it. I could care less for your contrarianism.
Any unnecessary gamble while literal fascists are trying to end our democracy is a fucking disgrace and anyone engaging in such a gamble is a fool.
Stopped reading, didn't say that. Have a good day, or don't, whatever.
The person you're responding to isn't American (at least not US American).They aren't gambling anything.
Yes I am
Oh, my bad!
When you said "your country" made me think you were outside of here.
You people really need to make up your mind and pick a lane. Either she didn’t win because you all protested her centrist views, or your lack of support didn’t make a difference.
But watching you flip flop the outcome based on the discussion is getting sad.
You people really need to make up your mind and pick a lane. Either she didn’t win because you all protested her centrist views, or it didn’t matter because she would have lost anyway.
But watching you flip flop the outcome based on the discussion is getting sad.
You're absolutely right, but 2 things can be true at once. She was kinda forced into being the candidate, while also being a bad candidate.
But ffs! 1/3 of this country voted FOR "I got concepts of a plan"! Being funded by Peter Thiel who openly said he is hostile to the state. Republicans are literally anti American. Sorry for the rant, I'm just incredibly disappointed in my country.