ginger@ssc-vax.UUCP (Ginger Grover) (08/02/83)
The votes have been counted and comments evaluated. To
reiterate, the question was "Would YOU vote for a woman for
U. S. President?".
Yes - 25 No - 2 *#&?! - 1
Assuming the contributors are representive of general public
attitudes, I am pleased to announce that the Acquarian Age
has truly dawned. The respondees included the very liberal,
the politically disenchanted, and one sorehead who can ex-
pect to be arc-welded to his terminal sometime soon.
1 Margaret Thatcher's track-record as Prime Minister was
offered as evidence for arguments both pro and con;
very strong opinions are held about the lady.
2 Regrets were expressed about the dearth of *qualified*
female candidates for high office, and hope that the
liberation movement may change that.
3 Some doubts still remain about how a woman's monthly
cycle might affect her ability to deal with a crisis.
Testosterone poisoning was mentioned as a corollary.
4 Over all, the consensus is that candidates should be
judged on their abilities and their political records,
regardless of sexual persuasion.
Well, I think we've beaten *that* do death. Let's find
something new to discuss. How about "The effect of Princess
Diana's hats on the British economy"?
Ginger Grover
ssc-vax!ginger
PS - No, I do not intend to run for President. Unless,
of course, I win the state lottery. Besides,
I wouldn't have a *thing* to wear ........ :-)