Letters to the Editor
-
To the person who brough up Kathleen Sebelius
She's now 59. Exactly how does someone who is now one year younger than Hillary is now, and would be 67 after what many people here would hope to be 2 terms of an Obama presidency , appeal to the under-35 demographic that many on here insist is now key to expanding the electoral demographic?
Please. Someone give me a women who would have a shot in 4-8 years who will be around 50 at that point. Or, the next time they start talking about which voting group is most dangerous to alienate, nobody better say it's the under-35s. Because, if you keep giving me women candidates who will be much older than Hillary is now after possibly 8 years of Obama, you are completely blowing that argument to bits.
This is absolutely the last time I will address this topic in any thread. The lack of any answers that make any sense pretty much gives me my answer. There are no women in the pipeline who can win on the Democratic side any time soon. Clinton was the closest candidate there was. And, as I said, it isn't 'necessary' that there be a woman President anytime soon. But for all of you who said that you would vote for a woman, but just not this woman, who couldn't even be bothered to, or just couldn't, give a legitimate answer to the topic, thanks so much. You will say you will vote for a woman, but won't specify one who even has a chance of winning. Because I think you all know, there isn't one, other than possibly Clinton. So, it isn't real. So, you can say it, but not really mean it.