This could become a Great Debate (well, if enough people respond) so if this gets moved, I won’t be peeved.
So! Seems to me the a presidential hopeful is more likely to suceed in the U.S. elections if they’re a middle-to-old aged, white, “christian lite” male. With that in mind, rank these attributes of a presidential hopeful in the order you think are most-to-least likely to be voted in in the U.S.
[ol]
[li]Fundamental Christian[/li][li]Muslim[/li][li]Fundamental Muslim[/li][li]Jew[/li][li]Orthodox Jew (“Fundamental Jew” didn’t sound right)[/li][li]Agnostic[/li][li]Athiest[/li][li]Stringent Athiest (as in the equivalent of a fundamental religious person)[/li][li]Black[/li][li]Hispanic[/li][li]Female[/li][li]Homosexual[/li][li]Bisexual[/li][li]Young (Teenage to 30 year old)[/li][/ol]
The list assumes that it is widely known that the hopefuls have this attribute - they don’t hide it (in the cases where it could be hidden).
1)Female
2)Hispanic
3)Agnostic
4)Black
5)Jew
6)Fundamental Christian
7)Bisexual
8)Athiest
9)Orthodox Jew (“Fundamental Jew” didn’t sound right)
10)Homosexual
11)Stringent Athiest (as in the equivalent of a fundamental religious person)
12)Muslim
13)Fundamental Muslim
(This is impossible according to the Constituation) Young (Teenage to 30 year old)
Using the rule of “Who I believe would win if running against one another”:
1)Female
2)Hispanic
3)Jew
4)Fundamental Christian
5) Agnostic
6)Orthodox Jew
7) Black
8)Bisexual
9)Homosexual
10)Muslim
11)Athiest
12)Fundamental Muslim
13) Stringent Athiest
14) Young
female
2)homosexual
3)jew/orthodox jew (many wouldn’t draw any differences between the two)
4)bisexual
5)stringent athiest
6)agnostic
7)fundamental muslim
8)fundamental christian
9)athiest
10)black
11)hispanic
12)muslim
13)young (that’d be me anyways)
now, the debate rages…why your list?
personally, i think that a muslim male in good standing could win a pretty high office these days.
[ol]
[li]Fundamentalist Christian (arguably already happened in 2000 & 2004)[/li][li]Black[/li][li]Female[/li][li]Jew / Orthodox Jew (already had a VP candidate)[/li][li]Hispanic[/li][li]Muslim[/li][li]Bisexual[/li][li]Naturalized citizen[/li][li]Young, under 30 yr old[/li][li]Homosexual[/li][li]Atheist / Agnostic[/li][li]Stringent Atheist (as in the equivalent of a fundamental religious person)[/li][li]Fundamental Muslim[/li][/ol]
I added #8. I realize #8 and #9 requrie changes to the Constitution, but I think that’s still more likely than those below.
[QUOTE=scr4]
[list=1]
[li]Fundamentalist Christian (arguably already happened in 2000 & 2004)[/li][/QUOTE]
Probably not would be my opinion. Bush is fairly conservative-leaning as far as Methodists go, but in general the United Methodist Church isn’t associated with fundamentalist christianity. Nor is the Episcopalian church that he was raised in and attends semi-regularly.
Why does my list look like it does? Black men did get the vote in this country before women did, so I can see a minority male (though I opted for Hispanic instead of black, as that’s a larger population) getting a shot at the Presidency before a woman does. I think Hillary Clinton and Condoleeza Rice are both overrated as candidates - even if they both run (I think Clinton will), I think they’ve got a name recognition edge now that won’t be much help in two years. After them, I’m not sure which women will be future contenders. But in general, I see politicians recognizing the impact of Hispanic voters.
Yes, fundamentalist christianity. Apologies for the poor wording, but I didn’t think there was that much difference between “fundamental” and “fundamentalist” in this case - clearly I was wrong. But yeah, fundamentalist.
Muslim–would have been more likely before 9/11, now unlikely until most people who have personal memories of it die
Fundamentalist Muslim
Young–as noted, impossible without a constitutional amendment
I think only those up through 6, perhaps 7, are likely in any of our lifetimes. I’d love to be pleasantly surprised, but I don’t think most Americans are that accepting yet.
OTOH, there are more women (both white and POC) in the US than people of color, so there’d be a larger pool which might vote for gender over political ideology.
My list:
Fundamentalist Christian (has already happened)
Young (by which I mean 35, the youngest age)
Jewish
Hispanic
Female
Agnostic
Orthodox Jew
Black (I think there are still far too many people who would vote against a black person. I also think our first black president is far more likely to be Republican.)
Bisexual (with the caveat that they are in a monogamous opposite-sex relationship at time of election, otherwise see below)
I don’t think a lot of women would choose gender over ideology. Generally, I’d say women don’t any problem voting for a man, and I’m sure some men would have a problem voting for a woman. And women are a full part of the electorate now; there’s not much outreach going on toward women. But the Hispanic population is relatively new territory, and it’s a fast-growing segment of the population. The first Hispanic Attorney General is in office right now, Bush has widely been expected to appoint a Hispanic Supreme Court Justice, and I wouldn’t be surprised to see Bill Richardson as a Democratic VP candidate soon-ish.
Without reading any of the other responses in this thread, and having given the matter about three minutes of thought, here are my responses:
Female
I’d be willing to put money that this will be the first “minority” group to be represented in the White House
Hispanic
Black
Jew
5 Orthodox Jew (“Fundamental Jew” didn’t sound right)
Maybe I’m naive, but I don’t really think that there’s rampant anti-Semitism in this country, at least not among Mr. and Mrs. Middle America. But I still think a black/Hispanic Protestant/Catholic stands a better chance, just on the basis of being less “different”.
Fundamental Christian
Agnostic
Athiest
Stringent Athiest (as in the equivalent of a fundamental religious person)
I originally had “Fundamental Christian” down at number 11, but I think that the overwhelming majority of voters on this country firmly believe in God, and that “any religion is better than no religion”
Homosexual
Bisexual
It just ain’t gonna happen. Whether it’s a sin, a lifestyle choice, or a part of one’s genetic makeup, too many people just can’t understand or accept it.
Muslim
Fundamental Muslim
Islam being the exception to the “any religion is better than no religion” rule. It’s not right, it’s not “fair”, but that’s the way it is. It would have been impossible on September 10th, 2001, and it’s less likely now.
What does “Christian-lite” mean? GW Bush and Jimmy Carter are both born-again Christians (aka evangelical/fundamentalist Christians). Bill Clinton was Baptist, another evangelical denomination.