2008
Obama, the first non-full Anglo on a major ticket wins the Presidency.
Hillary Clinton for a while stood a chance of being the first female presidential candidate for a major party.
Sarah Palin was the second female vice-president candidate for a major party.
Flash-forward to 2011 and Michelle Bachman is a strong contender for the Republican nomination or could conceivably be put on the ballot as vice-president to appease the tea-baggers. Sarah Palin is being discussed although there is no chance of her being nominated for RNC toilet attendant. Yet no one is talking about these 2 players for the 2012 presidential nomination as having a vagina. It’s almost as if gasp a candiate’s sex doesn’t matter.
Are the two related?
I think that their polarizing politics is much more of an issue in terms of their getting elected than is their gender. If polarizing politics works they get elected if not the fail, regardless of what the electorate thinks about women. With Obama and Clinton, they were pretty much middle of the road, so their race and gender could tip the balance as to their being elected, and so became an issue.
Or to put it another way, if your choice is between 2 ice creams then flavor matters, but if its a choice between ice cream and pizza, the flavor of the ice cream makes little difference.
What, only one? Do they swap custody of it every other week, or does each of them only have half a vagina?
