In the present US climate, I’m going to say No. No single persons, no homosexuals, no avowed atheists.
Presumably all these standards will fall, if the country lasts long enough, and I’d be happy to see it happen. But I wouldn’t really look for it in the next few cycles.
Funny how a lot of people add “avowed” to the word atheist.
I think a gay person could be president in 25 or so years. Don’t think being single is a big problem even now. Atheist might take the longest.
I think that’s because there are plenty of “unavowed” atheists in Washington. Just no one who’s willing to say it out loud. Wouldn’t surprise me if we’ve already had an atheist president.
I don’t think it’s nitpicking at all. You didn’t define your scope.
Pierre Trudeau was elected as the Prime Minister of Canada in 1977 while being a bachelor. He married a few years later while still in Office.
Kathleen Wynne is the current Premiere of Ontario and was elected to a majority government recently and is openly gay.
And guess what? We don’t have a clue about any of our politicians’ religious beliefs. It never comes up in conversation because it doesn’t matter in the least.
I do know we have elected members of parliament who are Sikh, but that’s kind of obvious.
The mayor of Calgary is a Muslim, but with a name like Naheed Kurban Nenshi, that’s also pretty obvious, and everyone knew it before electing him.
The US is behind the curve in the western world in electing bachelor, gay and ethnic politicians. I’m just pointing out the facts.
Sorry. It was actually 1968 when Trudeau was first elected as PM: almost 50 years ago now.
While I can’t speak to whether President Buchanan was a virgin, he did have at least one woman in his wife; he was engaged to marry Anne Caroline Coleman, but she died shortly after breaking off the engagement.
Now, a cynic who is inclined to believe that Buchanan was indeed gay may note that Ms. Coleman was the daughter of a very rich family which didn’t exactly approve of Buchanan (he was not allowed to attend her funeral), so his interest may have had more to do with personal ambition than love. And, in fact, he never did carry on any known relationship with any woman after he death.
Instead, his later affection does seem to be towards his male companion, Rufus King. And there is at least one quote from one letter (written after King left him to go to France) that does verify this love (although I am willing to be educated to the contrary; I do realize that male friendships back then did have a familiarity that would be unexpected today, and our own modern perspective may cause us to confuse societal norms of the 19th century).
[QUOTE=President James Buchanan]
I am now ‘solitary and alone’, having no companion in the house with me. I have gone a wooing to several gentlemen, but have not succeeded with any one of them. I feel that it is not good for man to be alone, and * should not be astonished to find myself married to some old maid who can nurse me when I am sick, provide good dinners for me when I am well, and not expect from me any very ardent or romantic affection.
[/QUOTE]
As for the OP’s question, I am among those who think that it will be possible for an openly gay person to be elected president, albeit in a few decades (after gay rights have been firmly established by the Supreme Court, and the panic over equality has died down). But, I do think it would have to be somebody who is in a long-term, committed relationship; bachelorhood would connote too many lurid thoughts among the more conservative voters and too much sexual innuendo from the press.
And as for Lindsay Graham, I hope he is gay, and I hope it comes out publicly. He has been a long-time opponent of gay rights, so I think being exposed as a self-hating hypocrite is a just result.
That, except I hope he does it himself. No need for anyone else to be vindictive or retributive about it; just say what he is and that he’s the same person he’s always been and that South Carolinians have entrusted for many years of public service, and anyone who is upset about needs needs to get over it.
Well, yeah, if Graham is indeed gay, it would be best if he was open and honest about it. But his atrocious record on gay rights leads me to believe that he’ll never be able to discuss his sexual orientation without fear of reprisal from his conservative constituents, so I think it would only come to light if it was exposed by someone else.
Then again, if Graham is gay, why hasn’t any of his prior romantic companions come out and discussed their relationship? Perhaps he (like, I believe, Ralph Nader) is just asexual? Has Graham ever been in a verified relationship with anybody, man or woman?
Yeah, it sure sounds like he was setting off people’s gaydar, even back then.
Compare & contrast with Abe Lincoln, who AFAIK has no such stories, but a century later random idiots claim he was gay because he was married to an unattractive woman :dubious:
Oh, the story I heard about Lincoln had to do with the fact that he used to travel alone during the 19th century, when single male travelers might be asked to share a room (and a bed) with a stranger. So… must be gay, right?
Moriarty writes:
> . . . he did have at least one woman in his wife . . .
Supply your own punch line.
We had a local mayor who was rumored to be gay. Finally married at age 45 and now has 4 kids. So he’s either straight or really going overboard with the beard thing.
Chelsea Clinton took over the state hostess duties of First Lady during Hillary’s NY Senate campaign so she has experience
Chelsea lives in NYC and has her own family now. She might fill in a day or 2 but not on a regular basis.
One of Bill’s mistresses then.
His niece, not his sister.
Other non-wife first ladies were Zachary Taylor’s daughter, Grover Cleveland’s sister, Andrew Jackson’s niece and daugher-in-law, Millard Filmore’s daughter, William Henry Harrison’s daughter-in-law, Benjamin Harrison’s daughter, Thomas Jefferson’s daughter, John Tyler’s daughter-in-law, Martin van Buren’s daughter in law, and Woodrow Wilson’s daughter.
Barack Obama would certainly challenge the idea that the U.S. is “behind the curve” in the western world when it comes to electing “ethnic” politicians.
Granted an ethnic Turk would have no problem being elected Chancellor of Germany and France has had plenty of Arab PMs.
Sorry, you’re not “stating facts”.
Monica knows the White House well. Not sure Hillary is a fan of her though.
Strictly speaking, the husband of a gay president would not be the “first gentleman”, as that would be the President himself: Of all men in the US, the President (if male) is the one with the highest social precedence. I’m unsure of what the rules of precedence are when the highest office is held by a married woman, and the second-highest is a man, though: Would a husband of a president have higher precedence than a vice president?
Of course, very few people care about social precedence any more, so I’m sure that most people would call the husband of a president “first gentleman” anyway.