Well, that’s what I was thinking of–will it be another 24 years before we see another female VP or Presidential candidate or either party?
I think not, not due to Palin, but due to all the other “middle managers” in political office and Hillary. (middle managers meaning state senators, congressmen, governors and senators). I hope not.
Dr Deth–I was referring to women(not the GOP), not just GOP women. However, since Reps tend to be more conservative, a disinclination to putting up female candidates would tend to effect/affect(see below) that party more than the Dems.
I see quite a bit of sexism re the treatment of Palin. I can’t stand her, but that doesn’t mean I agree with any attack is warranted re a female(or any) candidate.
sailor: explain, please. My dictionary say “affect” is to have an effect. So if I had written the title as “Will the Choice of Palin Have a Negative Affect Re Future Female Candidates?”, would that have been correct or is that backwards? (that is, it’s a negative effect, but negatively affects?)
I never had a problem with affect and effect until I started posting here and by god, I can no longer figure out which one is “right”. I now have trouble with lay and lie as well.