I was worried, seriously. Thought she was walking off a short pier with the Carpenters blasting "Top of the World" on her ipod.

I love this bit:

"The good news is that the vast majority of voters think the country is ready for either a woman or an African-American. But I was sad to see lower support for a woman -- though after this campaign, I wasn't surprised."

Get that? She is sad to see that a lower support for a woman than a black. In other words, she would be happy to see higher support for a woman than a black.

I'd be happier if both were 100%. It's not a contest, except for Walsh.

Love the Star Wars theme, though!

I think the poll is flawed because of the political context. You simply cannot ignore that the female candidate on people's minds has been Hillary Clinton, and Clinton alone. A better female candidate in the background would have upped the people's perceptions about our country's readiness for a woman. And they are out there, btw, working their way up, particularly through the governorships.

I wonder how much of this has to do with the overly pervasive Hillary hatred, and how much is genuinely against having a woman for a president. Several examples of the irrational Hillary hatred can be found right on the NY Times op-ed page, from Maureen Dowd (why does she still have a job?), Frank Rich, Gail Collins and even Bob Herbert. She's had a pretty rotten go with most of the media, as well as at the hands of a lot of Obama's supporters. As far as the right, they're going to hate the democrat no matter what, and I don't really think very many that are voting for Obama are really planning to vote for him in the fall, but I could be wrong about that. I've seen no convincing evidence either way, but the burden of proof is on those who think they'll somehow cross over and vote for a "liberal" democrat.

May I remind you, you seem more ready for a black President than a female president? And, as I recall, you are un-equivocal in your support for B.O. more so than H.C. In another perspective, black Americans seem to be banding together in support of a black president more than women are for a female. What is dreadful to me are the few women of Hil's stature who could run in 4 or 8 years. There are certainly fewer women than men and/or black men in a position to run in the future.

I really think this primary season will not end until this Summer.

No, I don't think that's what she's saying, and it's wrong to assume you know what another person is thinking or what their motives are. It's something Maureen Dowd does all the time, and no sane person should want to emulate her!

<<Get that? She is sad to see that a lower support for a woman than a black. In other words, she would be happy to see higher support for a woman than a black.>>

One of the things about this campaign that is troubling is that so many women can't see past... well being a woman.

Hillary is a plodding, bland campaigner. Is there a reason so many woman are blind to this?

Barack is leading not because he is black (are you people brain dead) but because he is brilliant and inspiring.

So many women are projecting THEIR prejudices on this campaign. Oh, they're being mean to Hillary. Oh they ask her the first question. Or as Bill says, they're ganging up on a girl.

The idea that this is true is laughable. Hillary had every advantage possible and she's being beat by a junior Senator with a funny name.

Joan, if you could somehow think of these people as humans instead of men and women, you might actually be a good editor.

But when women obsess about women, they are being prejudiced in the same way they claim men are sexist.

I'm ready for a black woman president, but I am NOT prepared to put another Clinton in the whitehouse. It's time for new talent and new ideas, not Hillary and Bill, four more years.

If Americans were ready to vote for another white male for president. I can't think of a better example of why not than GWB.

How much of it is ready (or unready) for a woman president in general versus people ready (or unready) for a woman president who happens to be Hillary Clinton? That's the thing that I think gets muddled in the mix -- the only way to test it would be for there to be more women presidential candidates in future elections, to see how they perform, to see whether it's objection to a woman head of state, or objection to HR Clinton as the candidate.

"But at the highest levels of society, in politics, entertainment, academia and sports, Americans are ready to embrace elite black leaders -- Obama, Colin Powell, Henry Louis Gates, Tiger Woods, Oprah -- and be proud of themselves for it. If only more of them would feel the same pride in embracing a woman president."

Is there a credible study to back that up? Could be the case (in fact, would be my guess) I´m just not convinced.

I think the sexist abuse we´ve seen is a reflection of the comfort, in general, we have with sexist humor vs. similar racist remarks. It has more to do with the fact that gender tension is lower than racial tension than it has to do with the fact that the presidency is at stake.

This in no way justifies the remarks, they are really unconstructive and hurtful, but I just don't see where Ms. Walsh is going with them in this piece.

Ask this question 2 years ago and the answer would likely be completely different. To even try to use this to say something about "attitudes" in this context is just plain silly.

If any of you actually think this is meaningful, run the thought experiment: If it was Nancy Pelosi vs. Al Sharpton as the two main contenders in the Democratic primary and the same question was asked, would the results be the same?