Is a first lady necessary?

[SuzySunshine]

I think if it was the right single person, yes, the country would elect them. The Clintons ran on the "two for one" campaign and while Hillary accomplished a lot while Bill was in office I think they proved that the American public want a first lady in a wife role, not a co-president role. I think its great that each first lady chooses a cause and highlights it during her time, I think if there wasn't a first lady that those duties would be picked up by the VP's wife or someone at a similar level.

[alison]

It sure seemed to matter when Theresa HEINZ Kerry was a possibility. It doesn't matter to me, either. If I like the candidate's spouse, then that's great, but I wouldn't be up in arms if the candidate was unmarried.

[Stella]

It sure seemed to matter when Theresa HEINZ Kerry was a possibility. It doesn't matter to me, either. If I like the candidate's spouse, then that's great, but I wouldn't be up in arms if the candidate was unmarried.

Blech, I couldn't stand her! But I also didn't like Kerry so who knows?!

Would I vote for an unmarried person? I don't know, but I don't think that an unmarried person would win in the end.

[pstone]

Wow, is funny when you realize you have certain thoughts / beliefs that you had not really realized.

I would not mind a pres that lost a spouse, but would probably not vote for one that had 'never' been married, or had crazy divorces (that ny mayor guy)

I am sure others think differently....but people that have never been married draw some second looks from me...there I said it.

whew

[Deebs]

I wonder what percentage of politicians in high enough positions to make a run for president are unmarried. My assumption is not many. I think people like the idea of the nuclear family running the country (and not just in the White House).
Personally, I think it would be simpler to chose a candidate who wasn't married. No wondering how much influence the spouse may have on huge decisions. It just seems like it would be less to analyze.

At this point (and in this day and age) anyone who is old enough / qualified enough or has the right pedigree and a brother who is the governor of Florida would also probably have had previous serious relationships that *most likely* involved premarital sex. That would start the press on a whole new feeding frenzy.

I don't honestly think that I would have an issue voting for a single person - but I can't imagine that we'll be faced with that option anytime soon.

[pstone]

Well, since this IS the debate forum....

40+ unmarried man = either creepy as all get out, or gay.
40+ unmarried woman = blinded by career, lost in feminism, or gay.




I realize that these are horrible generalizations, and that is probably not the case for everyone, but really, when you see the 45 year old guy that has never been married what do you think?

[MissCrabette]

I'd personally think that if he/she was not mature enough to setle down by that age then he/she is not mature enough to be president.

[DCJenn]

I don't know how much maturity has to do with getting married. There are far more immature people who are married than there are wise people who smartly remained unmarried.

I have several friends who remain Very Happy single people. (male and female) and no they're not gay. However, they are very career-driven people who realized that they didn't want to sacrifice the freedom to do what they do to meet the demands of a spouse.

Interestingly, though most work in the hospitality industry or are military, both of which require very frequent moves. So, it would follow that it would be difficult to establish roots long enough to start to date.

I really can't think that it would matter much to me if the person was single for whatever reason. I'm divorced. Sh*t happens. It certainly doesn't make me any more or less qualified to do my job.

Jenn

[Vishenka69]

Well, since this IS the debate forum....

40+ unmarried man = either creepy as all get out, or gay.
40+ unmarried woman = blinded by career, lost in feminism, or gay.




I realize that these are horrible generalizations, and that is probably not the case for everyone, but really, when you see the 45 year old guy that has never been married what do you think?

I think that he/she hasn't found the right person. I don't think marriage is for everyone, just like having children is not for everyone. Do you also think badly of a married couple who isn't interested in procreating?

I don't see how a person's personal life choices (marriage, divorce, etc.) has any bearing on ability to do one's job. A woman can be a wonderful wife and mother and a horrible worker or brilliant at her job and divorced. Most people don't get to the top because the best use of their skills is at home.

[pstone]

Well...this is fun...

I suppose I don't think that in general life choices matter to how one does a 'job' but I see president / politician as more then a job. Perhaps that is a whole different thread, but if it is just a job then I think you should find something else. Politicians are in my book supposed to be people that can listen to the people they represent and make choices to help the country evolve. (I am also for term limits)

That being said, I personally have chosen marriage, children, and the life of a family. I also personally think it is what is meant for us, people can do what they want, but my vote will be with what I want.

I have relatives that are married with no children and now much past the child rearing age, I have heard them all offer some serious regret. But again, I am libertarian and a quasi-christian / buddhist so to each their own. But it is my vote.

[PrincessFiona]

Absolutely NOT...I prefer a first man (I preferabl Sven...but I'll take Bill) :>