.
March 26th, 2008
01:29 PM ET

McGovern: easier to elect black man president than woman

 Click the play button to see what Jack and our viewers had to say.  Sen. Hillary Clinton, with George McGovern at the Johnson County Democrats' annual barbecue, 2007, in Iowa City, Iowa

Click the play button to see what Jack and our viewers had to say.

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

It will be easier to elect a black man president than a woman.

Those are the words of former senator and 1972 Democratic presidential nominee George McGovern. He's actually a Hillary Clinton supporter, but he says he feels that where this country stands today in its thinking, it's going to be harder to elect a woman. He also says, "I wish that weren't true... I'd love to see Hillary as president."

McGovern says he sometimes hears from men who don't think a woman is ready to assume the responsibilities of the top office in the land. Some worry it's "too big a job" for a woman or that she wouldn't be able to "handle those terrorists." McGovern says he rarely hears the same concerns about a black man.

Some may question whether McGovern is just saying this stuff to lower the bar for his candidate, but a recent survey suggests he might be on to something. The CBS News poll shows 39% of those surveyed believe a woman candidate faces more obstacles in presidential politics today compared to 33% who feel that way about a black candidate. However, African-Americans disagree, saying by an overwhelming margin that black candidates have a harder time.

When asked if people they know have judged Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama more harshly because of race or gender, 42% say Clinton has had a tougher go of it and just 27 percent say Obama.

That's despite the fact that polling shows Americans see racism as a much more serious problem for the nation overall than sexism.

Here’s my question to you: George McGovern, who supports Hillary Clinton, says it'll be easier to elect a black man as president than a woman. Is he right?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

Dee from Montclair, New Jersey writes:
I don't agree with that at all. I think because it's a Clinton it's so, but another woman may not be the case. Personally I think this is a small-minded, stupid comment. The American people vote for a person who we feel is qualified, not based on gender or race. People like McGovern have small minds!

Ron from Richmond, Virginia writes:
Neither one has happened yet, Jack. Only time will tell, but Obama seems to be losing ground as Hillary gathers more supporters. One thing is for sure: the time of old white men running this country is about to change! McCain? Not a snowball’s chance in.... San Antonio!

J. writes:
George McGovern is a classic bigot, who owes a lot of favors to Bill and Hillary from when the two campaigned for him years ago. McGovern is another Hillary Clinton surrogate injecting the race card and whispering buzzwords to white voters in this already vicious Clinton campaign! Please try and understand what these old coots are trying to do at this stage in this already "lost cause" to further hurt Obama's chance to win against McCain.

Amy from Woodstock, New York writes:
I am a woman and my answer is this: it is easier to elect a man who is sincere and transparent than it is to elect a woman who is dishonest and not transparent. Jack, this is not about gender and race. It is about who we can trust in this election. The Clintons have proven they can not be trusted. There are no joint tax returns for the past 6 years, there is no accountability, nor transparency. We have had enough of this political game.

Ralph from Long Island, New York writes:
He's as correct on this as he was in making Thomas Eagleton his first choice as VP. In retrospect, not too shocking, really.

Kathy from Georgia writes:
Jack, I am more concerned that it is easier to elect someone with an IQ lower than their shoe size than I am about an African- American or woman.


Filed under: 2008 Election
soundoff (240 Responses)
  1. Marilyn

    I love George McGovern but he's supporting the Clintons and it's affecting his judgment. The fact is, it would be easier to elect anybody than it would be to elect Hillary Clinton. Her performance under pressure has not been reassuring. Far from appearing strong, she appears more strident under pressure...a sure sign of weakness and people can sense it.

    March 26, 2008 at 1:32 pm |
  2. Rachel (Mass)

    Yes Lou. Just look at the number of African-American govenors and in the US Legislature vs. the number of women in these roles.

    Give me a break. I tell you it certainly is a lot more work for the secret service when a black man decides to run for president of the united states.

    March 26, 2008 at 1:35 pm |
  3. Terry from Calif

    Jack,

    What does gender and race have to do with a candiate being electable? Can't we focus on political issues, such as the war, health care, and our economy? I want to know if a candidate is electable based on their stance on political issues, not on gender or color.

    March 26, 2008 at 1:38 pm |
  4. Raphael Texas

    I do not agree with that statement by Mcgovern. I think race and gender both play a role in the voters mind.
    When Obama makes statements on radio interviews like "typical white person" I think it is going to be more difficult for a black man to become president. Especially with all the negative news coverage coming out about Obama's pastor.

    March 26, 2008 at 1:40 pm |
  5. Vera /Fr: Edmonton Alberta

    When the women candidate tell so many lies, how do you have a choice, I sure would not want Hillary as my President. I think she tells so many lies that she beleaves her lies.

    March 26, 2008 at 1:40 pm |
  6. Oliver Kendall (Ann Arbor, MI)

    It really depends on who the candidates are. Barack Obama really embodies the change that so many in our nation are desperate for. Hillary on the other hand has run a much more negative campaign than Obama, which is damaging the democratic party. I know several independents and even republicans who have said that they would vote for Barack Obama if he were the nominee, but would definitely not do the same for Hillary. Obama is clearly more electable than Hillary, so in this case, McGovern might be right. However, if Obama used the same campaign tactics as Hillary has been, and Hillary ran a positive campaign, embodied change the way Obama does and was as terrific a speaker as Obama, it might work the other way.

    March 26, 2008 at 1:40 pm |
  7. Barbara

    Well Jack, I think that in this particular case the statement is true. It will be easier to elect a Black man rather than this particular woman. Even though I began this campaign season as an ardent Hillary supporter, I have come to loathe even the sound of her voice! She is mean, spiteful, and willing to do just about anything to get elected.
    Senator Obama on the other hand, appears as a calm, reasonable, and capable candidate. I'll take a candidate like him anytime over a candidate like Hillary: his being a Black man just makes it all the sweeter.

    Barb From Michigan

    March 26, 2008 at 1:41 pm |
  8. Frederic from Doylestown, PA

    It would be easier to elect just about anyone than Hillary Clinton. She is the most polarizing candidate this country has ever seen. She never seizes to amaze me... and her supporters too, they are like spouses who are continuously cheated on and keep on coming back. I say we should start CA (Clinton's Anonymous).

    March 26, 2008 at 1:41 pm |
  9. dl

    I think it is easier to elect Barack Obama than it is to elect Hillary Clinton...

    Let's see, a little over half the population is women... and 12.7% of the population is African American...

    Even with sexist and racist views...you do the math.

    March 26, 2008 at 1:43 pm |
  10. dl

    I think it is easier to elect Barack Obama than it is to elect Hillary Clinton...
    but as far as woman or black man...

    Let's see, a little over half the population is women... and 12.7% of the population is African American...

    Even with sexist and racist views...you do the math.

    This is about the candidates and even with the above statistics Barack is the better candidate for all.

    March 26, 2008 at 1:44 pm |
  11. R. Lopez in South TX

    I really don't see that there are any pros or cons about being either a black man or being a woman as far as winning a presidential election America is already past that, thank God. I couldn't wait till old prejudiced people were so low in number that they ceased to imprint their backwards and ignorant beliefs on America anymore. It's finally happening. Now the sun can finally rise in our great country...

    March 26, 2008 at 1:45 pm |
  12. Baby Boomer of Michigan

    I actually think it's going to be hard for either one of them to get elected, but I personally think that Obama will win because of his message of "Change".

    March 26, 2008 at 1:49 pm |
  13. Tony, Seattle Wa

    Jack it depends on if the woman is white, black, asian or hispanic. If it's a white woman I have to say no if not than yes. In this country it preceeds to think that white people in general are better at authorities roles than other minorties groups. But that way of thinking is changing.

    March 26, 2008 at 1:50 pm |
  14. B Ashley

    Like most of Hillary's supporters McGovern is inventing a "Cry in your Beer" excuse why Hillary is behind in the Democratic race. Remember when she was a "done Deal". Well sorry George she is the second best pick because Barak is the best option for the US and the rest of the World. Lets get some honest folk in the White House for a change.

    March 26, 2008 at 1:51 pm |
  15. C. Farrell, Houston, Tx

    Yes, George McGovern is absolutely right and without prejudice. A black man as president is easier to elect at this time than a woman because the international community is focusing on Obama rather than Hillary Clinton.

    March 26, 2008 at 1:51 pm |
  16. sayno2clinton, cambridge, MA

    It depends on who the woman is. I would say people like Nancy Pelosi, who really has experience, more than Hillary Clinton.

    Does George McGovern mean a son of an African father and a white mother, raised by the single mom on welfare, in general has more chance to succeed than a white daughter from an upper-middle class family?

    March 26, 2008 at 2:35 pm |
  17. James D (Cary, NC)

    The Clinton camp seems determined to move the discussion away from the personal qualities of each candidate by focusing on minority status and stereotyping. I'd be more sympathetic to her concern if she hadn't run on the "inevitablility" platform originally, and wasn't part of an influential political power-couple.

    March 26, 2008 at 2:39 pm |
  18. Vana

    I disagree. I think that the majority of Americans would accept a white woman – even if with some reluctance- over a black male as our next President – BUT, if Hillary was a black woman, Barack Obama would be the favored one. We have a long way to go when it comes to racial equality.

    March 26, 2008 at 2:39 pm |
  19. Uche

    Jack, I would take courses on how to dodge sniper fire!
    Brooklyn, NY

    March 26, 2008 at 2:39 pm |
  20. Kevin Leo (Jonesboro, GA)

    Jack,

    I want to see the best person elected to serve as the President of the US, regardless of whether they are male or female, black, hispanic or white. For this current election year, my disgust for Hillary is not due to her being a female but because of who she has represented, or misrepresented, herself to be.

    March 26, 2008 at 2:42 pm |
  21. AverageMan

    That would true be great if Obama were running as a Black man. Many people admit he couldn’t win if he ran as a Black man. I think he would have only half the Black vote if Bill didn't treat South Carolina Blacks like ignorant fools on his jock. What I want to know about is secret clubs. What secret powerful clubs do these people belong to and how does membership effect their decisions in the White House? Usually people in clubs have carte blanche access to others in the club. Hilary is in the Family, a Republican, fascist right wing religious cult, why? They reached out to Nazi’s and Hitler and other notorious right wing leaders. She has to know the history of the organization it is usually a part of the initiation. Hell, what is McCain involved in are these people crazy?

    The Family: The Secret Fundamentalism at the Heart of American Power will be published in May.

    March 26, 2008 at 2:43 pm |
  22. Grif

    Another thought!! You say one day, that if Borack Obama is the Nominee, then the.

    Democrats would vote for McCain

    Now you're saying the opposite... The Voters Prefer Hillary???

    Yet Obama is more Electable. Where is there not.. Hypocrisy

    March 26, 2008 at 2:43 pm |
  23. Terry from North Carolina

    Jack
    I have these two book ends in my State today and tomorrow. Obama is in Greensboro today and Billary is in Winston Salem tomorrow. The last two days I have received five phone calls from the North Carolina Democratic party asking me who I will vote for on May 6th. I believe Barack Obama will have a better chance against McCain than Hillary, because he is more electable than Hillary. Even though when she was first lady she brought piece to Northern Ireland and on her trip to Bosnia she was dodging snipers left and right, she has also solved all our health care issues. She must have an S on her chest. If you believe all this than vote for Hillary.

    March 26, 2008 at 2:43 pm |
  24. pat

    All Candidates should expect Scrutiny since their running for our highest office in America. DNC should "Demand" all true personal files and tax returns from all Candidates seeking this position.
    Were not running a "Popularity" Contest and all the Candidates are equal coming into this. If all these Candidates think were asking to much of them, I think they should withdraw their name..After all if they cannot deal with us, How will they ever handle all our problems or Foreign affairs & Leaders?
    We should all be Independents and Scrutinize each one of their files & tax returns supplied by DNC and then pick a Candidate....

    Patty
    Michigan

    March 26, 2008 at 2:44 pm |
  25. roger dowdle lockhart, tx

    Inthis particular case, with the woman being Hillary and the black male being Obama, yes. Given different people ther would probably be different opinions. I don't think it is as much Hillary being a woman as all the negatives she has. Lying is merely "misspeaking" and besides she was "tired". As if she wouldn't be tired when answering the phone at 3 a.m.- what if she misspeaks and causes a war? What is she hiding with her returns- does anybody really believe she intends to go public with her tax returns or her husbands library, or anything else? She has a history of vindictiveness and revenge. If she truly believes in sexual equality, why was DeeDee Meyers paid $10,000 less than one of the subordinates even though she did more work and had more responsibility? Turns out she couldn't sit in on security meetings due to a lack of clearance. But, she will stoop to any level to win the primary, even if it destroys the party!

    March 26, 2008 at 2:45 pm |
  26. lee from Florida

    No, it is not easier to elect a Black man as President than a woman. In my humble opinion...the problem is...this woman. Barrack Obama is exceptional, an unknown who swept the country like a rock star, with style and grace, always appearing presidential.
    But Hillary entered half defeated, with her name despised by all Republicans, 1/2 Independents and even some Democrats. This was just the WRONG WOMAN. The country was looking for change and she represents more of the same Bush -Clinton Clinton Bush Bush – Clinton? Not to mention the Scandal ridden past she brings with her when the country wants to repair our image. This was just the Wrong Woman...and Barrack is just exceptionable, extraordinary exceptional...and it will be a shame if we let him get away.

    March 26, 2008 at 2:45 pm |
  27. Chuma, Herndon VA

    I wonder if he is trying to imply that a black man is not capable of being the president of the United States of America?

    Ofcourse he is dead wrong. Lets not forget that voters voted heavily for Hillary over other presidential candidates that are males. I am getting seek and really tired of all the racism and sexism that is being injected into this presidential campaign.

    All these claims were not present while Hillary was enjoying a comfortable lead over Obama. All of a sudden the tone starts changing when Obama took the lead.

    March 26, 2008 at 2:45 pm |
  28. peterpaul

    Of course I believe a woman could lead a country, case in point Margaret Thatcher. However I do not believe Hillary Clinton qualifies, her whole run for the presidency is more of a career move than a genuine effort to better America as a whole, which is similar to when she ran for the NY state senate .

    Now I know you might say this is just my opinion, but in a televised interview with Rep. Charles Rangel, from NY, he stated that it was he who encouraged Mrs. Clinton to run for the senate as a pathway to the White House, by telling her "If you want to become president of the United States, you have to first become a New Yorker". So far Mrs. Clinton, as a "New Yorker" has not done anything significant for the people of NY state and true to Mr. Rangel' words she is now running for president.

    March 26, 2008 at 2:46 pm |
  29. April in texas

    Well I dont really see how either plays into my decision. I am a 39 yr old white female who is supporting Obama. I would guess some may use this to help in the decision but then the polls dont reflect everyone. I do wish there were some links so that I could participate in these polls.

    Obama 08
    Austin Texas

    March 26, 2008 at 2:46 pm |
  30. James Austin Tx

    Jack, he's right, only if it applies to clinton. Because among all the "misspeaking" she does on her campaign trail, she claims to have experience on day one. However with BOSNIA-GATE in play, it's more or less "imagination on day one". And after all we have seen and heard, i don't think she can be my president.

    March 26, 2008 at 2:46 pm |
  31. Mike in Houston

    When any of the parties present a real candidate, black or female, who does not really have "affirmative action" as their only qualification, then the country will be ready for either.

    March 26, 2008 at 2:46 pm |
  32. Dave

    No. Mcgovern makes the same mistake as Wright in assuming that this country is static. This comment ignores the dramatic strides that women have made in being elected to governorships, congress, and state elected positions. For the last few years, it has seemed to be an advantage to be a woman when running for office, especially as a Democrat. Meanwhile, African American candidates have not been quite as able to be elected except in primarily African American dominated electorates. Obama in my opinion is succeeding because he is a compelling candidate not because he is black or a man.

    March 26, 2008 at 2:47 pm |
  33. S K Humphrey

    George McGovern is abosolutely right. Men for generations have held the view that women are "too soft". They just don't say it aloud much anymore. I submit that men have ruled the roost forever. Perhaps a woman's perspective is what America needs to change direction. After all, black or not, Barack Obama is still a man!

    March 26, 2008 at 2:47 pm |
  34. Arnold,WV

    Ask Obama if it's been easy.

    March 26, 2008 at 2:47 pm |
  35. John

    It's not that simple-

    Hillary Clinton is not just any woman- she had the privledge and luck of being married to a former President.

    Barack Obama is not just any black man- he was raised by white people in Hawaii.

    It really depends on the individual who is running.

    By the way, Barack Obama wouldn't have gotten this far in the race if he didn't have significant support among white people.

    Hillary Clinton has not shown the same significant support among men.

    March 26, 2008 at 2:48 pm |
  36. Maria Perez

    I don't think McGovern understands America. As a woman, I have absolutely no problem with a woman president. We would all welcome the right woman. The problem here is Hillary Clinton and the Clintons' character. Her gender is irrelevant.

    The millions of people that have voted for Obama have done so despite her name recognition and being First Lady. She may even have more experience. But to many of us there's more to a leader than that. There's leadership, integrity and honesty. Something the Clintons don't understand.

    This has nothing to do with gender or race.

    March 26, 2008 at 2:48 pm |
  37. Jermaine McCaskill, MS

    Jack,
    Absolutely, I happen to believe there is more sexism in this country than racism. Hillary Clinton is a strong and formidable woman and presidential candidate. If she does not capture the nomination, it will be years before another woman of her magnitude could run. It will set back the progress of women rights and equality in this country.

    March 26, 2008 at 2:48 pm |
  38. Justin, Chicago

    I think some of those difficulties have melted away and right now the country just wants or needs someone different in thought and appearance. It’s still going to be difficult for women and minorities to climb the ladder of success in this country but they should keep trying.

    March 26, 2008 at 2:48 pm |
  39. Jay

    This is a joke, Right? People lie, the numbers do not. There are more women governors than African-Americans and more women in Congress than African-Americans. This is another ploy that has been magnificently orchestrated on behalf of the Clinton camp. And low and behold, it has worked because ultimately it keeps the conversation focused on race and the networks have obliged by the mere mention of this story.

    March 26, 2008 at 2:49 pm |
  40. Gary in High , NC

    Jack,
    George McGovern isn't right. When my grandchildren are able to vote race, religion, sex will really be a separation of the past, in the mentime we have to put up with those voters who are still of narrow mind.
    Since McGovern insists on continuning the situation, the answer is NO !!, all you need is a woman who wants to be President because she wants better for our Country, not one who would sell her soul and first born to be back in the White House basking in the publicity she thinks she so rightly entitled to.

    "Dirty Tricks" comes to mind again.

    March 26, 2008 at 2:49 pm |
  41. Rose, London

    McGovern is right on target. Women were the last group to get the vote and their salaries are still less than men doing the same job. When I was a professor, I had a black male student assistant. When students came into my office for counseling they would more often go to his smaller desk at the computer and hand him the forms to sign. And Jack, you always design questions and /or make remarks that smear Ms. Clinton, but have nothing but nice comments about Mr. Obama.

    Rose, London

    March 26, 2008 at 2:49 pm |
  42. Carol, Springfield, MA

    I believe he is wrong. A president is not chosen because of race or gender. They are chosen for what they can do for their country. They should represent us to the world and reflect the best in all of us.

    I can see where he got that idea though. He is pro Hillary so of course he is saying that American don't want a female president. What he doesn't get is that she is NOT the RIGHT woman for the most important job of this land.

    She is vindictive, manipulative, a liar and maybe cares for her country, as far as I know.

    As a woman, her kitchen sink strategy and the people she chose to run her campaign and the way her campaign is being run is very telling. Since she cannot manage her campaign or her fundings properly how am I suppose to allow her to run this country with the present economic crisis we are facing now.

    I want a "King Solomon" to lead America. A man or woman who is wise and have good judgement and who walks with God. I think that Obama who is black and white, and was raised white by his white mother and white grandparents is that wise man for the job. If he were a white woman I would still vote for him. And if Hillary was a black man I would not vote for her. Infact if she was black and a man she would not be where she is right now!

    BTW, when Obama said "a typical white woman", he forgot that we see him as black. It would not be an issue if he was white and said the same thing. Give him some slack, Jack.

    March 26, 2008 at 2:49 pm |
  43. G Chapman

    McGovern may have a point but Hillary, though she's a tough fighter, is just being way outclassed by Barack Obama.
    If Mcain were a democrat and she were running against him in this primary instead of Obama I think she'd win hands down.

    G. Chapman
    Toronto, Ontario

    March 26, 2008 at 2:49 pm |
  44. Tre, Chesapeake, VA

    When I see topics like this, two things always come to mind:

    1) Does math no longer matter in this country, and
    2) Is this a serious question?

    I would conclude that since the majority of the American public is white, and that half of that number are white women, and that only 17% of the country's population is black, that it would NOT be easier to elect a black man to the White House, given that little more than half of that minority number are black, which is 8% if we assume a biased vote. The fact is, that on the topic of equal rights, a white woman has an overwhelmingly higher chance of being elected. Just ask Bill Clinton. Unfortunately, that prospective woman candidate happens to be Hilllary Clinton.

    (Insert reason not to vote for her here)

    Obama 08

    March 26, 2008 at 2:49 pm |
  45. Dan (TX)

    Especially this particular woman!

    There are plenty of other, better qualified women that could be President. Too bad the 2 party system discourages that from happening.

    March 26, 2008 at 2:49 pm |
  46. FELISA from chattanooga

    OK JACK,
    for once and for all. Sen Obama's mom is white. His dad is from Kenya. For all intents and purposes, by U.S. law, Obama should be considered white.

    Are we judging Sen Obama by the "one drop of black blood rule or the "child of a slave owner rule".

    For those who do not know, the one drop of black blood(by the way all blood is dark red) means that even though the person looks white, if one of his parents is considered "black," they are considered "black".

    If we go by the "child of a slave owner rule" which is that because the black slaves were raped by their white slave owners, they either went by the race of the mother, but if the child appeared "white", they could claim to be "white". They were somehow more acceptable.

    So, Jack, which rule applies.
    I will tell you Sen Obama is not black, he is indeed white like his mother.
    And by the way, he's more electable because he is honest and straighforward, unless his opponents.

    March 26, 2008 at 2:49 pm |
  47. Brian

    He's kidding right? I really hope so because America has had a much more racist past starting from when slavery started which we still haven't gotten out of because the discussion of race was suppose to be resolved many years ago. If anything its equal however I believe that being black in America leads to much more disadvantages then being a woman in America. The stats of women to men in high position roles is much higher then women to african americans.

    March 26, 2008 at 2:50 pm |
  48. NickNas

    Honestly Jack

    With the rabid attacks we see everyday against Obama you ask this question??

    People can say ANYTHING they want about this man and it gets press.

    I had HOPE for us but as I expected my heart is broken. These people would rather elect a Bull Moose or a Lab Rat to this office than a Black man! If Obama was White these same people would have laughed both Hillary AMD McCain out of the race and crowned him King for Life.

    Seems the Majority of this country still wants to live in the 50's and 60's

    Nick San Diego CA

    March 26, 2008 at 2:50 pm |
  49. Ken

    No Jack, be it a woman or a black man should not make a difference, What McGovern said is really stupid coming from him and he should know better! Look around our world and see how many women are great leaders. That is why I am supporting Hillary to be our next President.

    March 26, 2008 at 2:50 pm |
  50. Richard

    As a active duty Sailor and a African American college student, I am becoming very weary with the “should we elect him because he is black man running for President ” questions. When we as (Americans) will ever get past this issue of race and focus on who has the “crediable credentials” and standards it takes to lead and repair the image of America as we are viewed among other countries. I guess Hillary is too busy dodging sniper fire to respond to George McGovern statement and voice her opinion??
    Richard
    Charleston SC

    March 26, 2008 at 2:51 pm |
  51. Vicky

    Jack, he might be right if we had a different black than Obama. I think it would be much harder to elect someone who has racial overtones in his church, that he has gone to for 20 years
    Boston Ma

    March 26, 2008 at 2:51 pm |
  52. Deb, Austin, TX

    Jack,

    It isn't about Race or Sex it's about who would do the best job.

    Obama is no longer a viable candidate because he showed us all with his close relationship with the Rev. Wright that his head is not in the right place at all!

    Obama should never been allowed to run for office-it is that serious and that simple, we will never elect an Anti-American to our Highest office.

    March 26, 2008 at 2:51 pm |
  53. Thomas, LA

    With all due respect to McGovern, what the heck is he talking about?

    All the race baiting going on in the Democractic nomination patently shows it's far more easier for a white woman to get elected than a black man, a sad testament to the true state of race relations in America.

    TK

    March 26, 2008 at 2:52 pm |
  54. Judy from minnesota

    Jack,
    I think we would like it to be easier for a black man to become president than a woman but in reality the opposite is true. Unfortunately, we are farther away from equality in the country than I think most of us would like to admit. One only needs to read the blogs regarding Rev Jeremiah Wright's sermons to know that. The only reason Hillary is behind is because she's Hillary. However, I am holding out hope that I am wrong and that this nation will finally get beyond race and nominate/elect Barack Obama as our next president.

    March 26, 2008 at 2:52 pm |
  55. Independent Voter Fort Worth, Texas

    How could anyone say that a junior senator would have it easier in a Presidential election bid than the wife of an ex-President?

    All you need to do is look at the numbers in Obama's column and who that ex-president's wife happens to be. Then you can understand why this election has gotten so bitter and ugly. How dare any junior senator be beating Hillary in her presidential coronation.

    We need to take the black candidate/woman candidate comment from McGovern for what it is. A supporter just spewing more divisiveness.

    March 26, 2008 at 2:53 pm |
  56. Dorothy Gerard

    Jack.....I always thought you were a fair person....but.....why no coverage about Jack Murtha endorsing Hillary Clinton? Why is it all about Barack Obama all the time???? I am an undecided senior female and you are not helping with your biased coverage of Obama...

    March 26, 2008 at 2:53 pm |
  57. Brian - Trinidad

    He is partially right. The lack of support from the prominent Democratic leadership can be construed as part of the bias against women, as it would greatly affect the male dominated leadership in all walks of life. As George Bush would say, a woman President of the USA would embolden women every where,the leadership landscape will change and I think with much better results for the country.One immediate impact, the images of bloated, booze-disfigured male carcasses we have in government and big business will no longer fill the TV screens.

    March 26, 2008 at 2:53 pm |
  58. POLITRICKS

    Jack I'm afraid to post a comment because the obama camp will accuse Hillary camp and supporter McGovern of RACISM....... thats there tactics

    March 26, 2008 at 2:53 pm |
  59. Jeanie

    I don't know about whether it's easier to elect a "bi-racial" man. But I would imagine it's easier than trying to prop-up a race baiting, fear mongering liar.

    March 26, 2008 at 2:53 pm |
  60. Samantha

    I believe McGovern is right. The virulence with which Hillary has been attacked even from the first suggestions of her candidacy have suggested that this is the case, plus the fact that Obama has been lionized and turned into an icon while his accomplishments are small and his liabilities are considerable. The troubling thing is nations, including Pakistan and India have had women leaders and we are supposed to be the leader in womens' rights and we are still pulling up the rear.

    On the other hand, does that mean Obama is as electable as McGovern? I believe that is right too. McGovern and Obama are too far to the left even of the Democratic party to survive a national Presidential election.

    March 26, 2008 at 2:54 pm |
  61. Orman

    You're right, polls do show Americans as seeing racism as a more serious problem than sexism. And as a result of that truth, the mass media goes out of their way to be as polite and as respectful of Barrack Obama as possible. A culture has been created whereby people get away with murder when directly criticizing Hillary in sexist and sometimes misogynistic ways, but are crucified by the media when there is any indirect hint of racial innuendo, or even general criticism levelled toward Barrack. I still can't get over the amount of flak that her campaign took over the "drug use" issue, which in many cases they were baited into. Somehow, by "bringing up" his past drug use, they were showing him as the black candidate. Lord knows only black people use drugs. But I digress, the truth is that there is a wide disparity in the treatment between the way the media treats Hillary and Barrack, and what's utterly hillarious is that it took Saturday Night Live to get the media to take a look at itself.

    A Young Black Male Hillary Supporter

    March 26, 2008 at 2:54 pm |
  62. John B from Arlington

    McGovern suffered a 60%-38% defeat to Nixon...NIXON!! I think any of his political analysis should be taken with a grain of salt. The reality is that anyone who wouldn't vote for a woman simply because she's a woman isn't going to vote for a Democrat; and anyone who wouldn't vote for a black man simply because he's black isn't going to vote for a Democrat. The real question isn't race or gender, it's Obama or Clinton, and that is why we have primaries.

    March 26, 2008 at 2:54 pm |
  63. Lucyna

    It doesn't matter if it's a woman or a man as long as she can be trustworthy and have some personal dignity. Hillary is missing some brain cells and she has to step aside. She did so much damage to this party already that despite of who will be nominated, sadly to say but McCain will win the election and that will be a disaster for this country and that means:

    1. More Americans will be dying in Iraq

    2. People will be losing their homes by going broke because they can't afford health care. For the same reason, some of us will by dying.

    3. There will not be any country left that would respect America.

    4. There will be higher gap between rich and poor.

    5. There will be high possibility to get into war with Iran

    6. We will go even further behind other countries educating our kinds.

    7. There will be more corruption in a White House

    All this will happen because some maniac like Hillary who thinks that presidency is her birth right is ripping this party apart. Those who vote for her must be on drugs. If she or McCain wins the election, then I will convinced that this country deserves what this country gets. I will be ashamed that I am US citizen.

    March 26, 2008 at 2:54 pm |
  64. Ruslyn Schultz

    Jack, I would disagree with George McGovern. I think it will be much tougher for a woman if she is named Hillary Clinton because there is so much animosity out there for the Clinton's in general.

    If Condeleza Rice were running on the Republican side, I don't think there would be anymore obstacles for her than there would be for an african-american or white male (and a lot of folks wanted her to run, and she's been mentioned a lot for VP rumors throughout this campaign).

    Clinton has a tougher go in this election because she is a Clinton though, not because she is a woman.

    Rus Schultz
    St. Paul, MN

    March 26, 2008 at 2:55 pm |
  65. Mac

    Mac from N.C.
    No, Jack, I don't agree...It is just THIS woman who can't be elected!!!

    March 26, 2008 at 2:55 pm |
  66. hoang, UC Berkeley

    That is true, Jack.
    Looking at the Congress right now, I don't see any woman who actually stands out to have a real chance against Obama or McCain in an election.

    March 26, 2008 at 2:55 pm |
  67. Diane

    The status quo answer would be yes. The glass ceiling definitely applies in this campaign. The media should have at least looked as closely at Obama.

    Obama’s record, what has he done for his state? Now that new information about Obama comes out Americans are asking questions. Does he have the ability to lead to bring the party together or will it divide all Americans?

    Hillary has a proven record and would definitely be able to lead the country today! Obama has not really worked long enough as a Senator to have any record for his state.

    Obama played the sympathy card from the beginning and the media attacked Hillary from the beginning. The real questions for leading have not been asked in this campaign.

    Race or gender does not qualify a person to hold the highest office in this country.

    This country cannot afford separation by electing a person that may well divide the Democratic party and the country.

    March 26, 2008 at 2:55 pm |
  68. Jim, Charlottesville, VA

    I think it all depends on whether or not the media is able to find suitable video footage, out of which they can take out 30 second clips in order to falsely portray Hillary Clinton as a man-hater, just as they have falsely portrayed Obama as bigoted. Every black man in America has at least one friend that has made remarks criticizing whites, just as every woman in America has at least one friend that has made remarks criticizing men. If America is so quick to label Obama as a bigot based on the remarks of someone he knows, they would be just as quick to label Hillary Clinton as sexist. If this is truly the case, I think the chances of America electing a black man or a woman are the same....0%

    March 26, 2008 at 2:55 pm |
  69. Diane,WY

    It is getting UGLY JACK, and you are helping to make it UGLY!!! :)

    March 26, 2008 at 2:56 pm |
  70. hoang, UC Berkeley

    That is true, Jack.
    Looking at the Congress right now, I don’t see any woman, besides Clinton, who actually stands out to have a real chance against Obama or McCain in an election.

    March 26, 2008 at 2:56 pm |
  71. Anna, SW Missouri

    This statement is just as stupid as the statements by both the Clinton and Obama supporters that say they will vote for McCain if their candidate doesn't win the nomination. As an Obama supporter, I do feel that Clinton has taken on the role of "destroy him so I can win in 2012", but with that said, I will still vote for her if she accomplishes her mission for one very important reason-Roe vs. Wade.

    March 26, 2008 at 2:56 pm |
  72. Mark Berwyn, PA

    I don't think he is correct. This appears to be more Clinton politics; i.e. ask for more sympathy for poor Hillary. First in NH, she cried to garner sympathy votes. Now it's because she has a harder road to travel than a black man. Boo hoo, Oh poor Hillary. You'll get no tears (or votes) from me!

    March 26, 2008 at 2:56 pm |
  73. Zeppo! Santa Cruz, CA

    The percentage of people voting for Barack based on his race is much larger than the percent of people voting for Clinton based on her gender.

    The numbers dictate that McGovern may be right, except that many Clintonians will not vote for Barack, mainly because he is too young and more you dig the less you like, but also because they will resent him for what he stole. McCain, the alternative, is seen as an honest guy residing in the center so Clinton's peeps won't have to think long before switching.

    March 26, 2008 at 2:56 pm |
  74. Lewis

    Depends on which woman and which African-American man. I am constantly amazed that many Americans seem unable to see beneath the colour of Obama's skin or beyond Hillary's gender. He is a great politician, irrespective of race, and she comes up way short in ethics and honesty, irrespective of gender. Edmonton, Canada

    March 26, 2008 at 2:57 pm |
  75. Luis

    I agree with George McGovern.

    We men are still treating women as property just as we used to treat slaves.

    This election will hurt the cause of either women or blacks.

    I hurt for the black and white wives, daughters, mothers and grandmothers of all of us.

    March 26, 2008 at 2:57 pm |
  76. Gerry Schnaible

    Jack,
    I think this is very true. While the majority of males have moved a long way they are not quite there. Over the past 40 years (aprox.) the wage disparity has moved from 56% to either 78.4% or 80%, depending on which study you follow. I believe this to be indicative of this very thing. Another words about 20-25% of the male population still agrees with the same thought they did 40 years ago. The race problem is more serious in that it becomes so inflamed with passion on both sides of the equation.
    Perhaps more importantly, a woman is someone most of us as males try to compromise with on a daily basis.
    Gerry, AZ

    March 26, 2008 at 2:57 pm |
  77. Jeanie

    I don’t know if it’s easier to elect a “bi-racial” man. But I would imagine it’s a lot easier than trying to prop-up a race baiting, fear mongering liar.

    Sparks, Nevada

    March 26, 2008 at 2:58 pm |
  78. myriam

    Jack,
    There was a time when being a woman would have made things very difficult to be elected president. Those days are gone, see what is happening in Germany for instance or in Argentina.
    The difficulty to elect one dem candidate illustrates in my mind how divided people are between the man and the woman vying for the honor to represent the American people.
    Right now, Clinton is compromising her chance of success by lying about her trip to Bosnia. Anyone has now the right to ask her/himself: what else has she been lying about? Would she also "misspeak" (what a wonderful word) that famous 3AM phone call for instance? We know where that lead American people when Bush "misspoke" about Saddam Hussein...
    Myriam St Martin, French West Indies

    March 26, 2008 at 2:59 pm |
  79. Kab

    I do not agree. I was REALLY excited about Hillary being the first woman President WAY before I knew of Obama. It was Obama's personality, policies, ideas, and energy that drove me to this black man. It has nothing to do with Clinton being a woman.

    March 26, 2008 at 2:59 pm |
  80. Forde Woodcock

    Well I denounce, repudiate, and reject Hillary and Bush fear mongering, and I will do what Obamas doing trusting in the American people to turn to their inner strength that leads with conviction courage and Honor and its genius and rejects the fear of race, religion, orientation, and free speech. Some one who's stuck on race in todays day and age is as Hillary sang SO YESTERDAY. I asked my grade 5 niece what does she thinks of other races, she said no different then some one wearing glasses and I don't, well not all the time just when I read. I thought out of the mouths of babes, well being a humanist still isn't against the law yet.

    March 26, 2008 at 2:59 pm |
  81. Obi

    I think it will be harder to elect a candidate who appears to be more economical with the truths, shows visible desperation for the job, and exudes unapologetic sense of entitlement to the highest office. What matters, at this time, should not be either gender or race, but the “fierce urgency of now” that has become the true state of our falling housing market, rising gas prices, dwindling foreign relations, sinking economy, escalating immigration problems and unending war.

    Nashville, TN

    March 26, 2008 at 3:00 pm |
  82. Zeppo! Santa Cruz, CA

    The percentage of people voting for Barack based on his race is much larger than the percent of people voting for Clinton based on her gender.

    The numbers dictate that McGovern may be right, except that many Clintonians will not vote for Barack, mainly because he is too young and the more you dig the less you like, but also because they will resent him for what he stole. McCain, the alternative, is seen as an honest guy residing in the center so Clinton's peeps won't have to think long before switching.

    March 26, 2008 at 3:00 pm |
  83. aware

    Yes, if the candidate was Colin Powell. But, Obama is not electable because of his lack of judgment, smooth lies, obfuscation and untrustworthiness. Reading manipulative speeches doesn't correct his problems. :(

    March 26, 2008 at 3:01 pm |
  84. AverageMan

    Damn who are these people?

    March 26, 2008 at 3:01 pm |
  85. Sophie, North Carolina

    McGovern is resorting to Gender Rhetoric...trying to make Hillary the underdog, so to speak. America is clamoring for a President who has an open mind, an open ear, and an agenda that's 'of the people' , 'for the people', and 'by the people.' The problem Hillary faces has not one thing to do with gender or race...her Problem is that 'She's mighty pleased with the way she's turned out'...and can not understant why others don't understand how special she is. This attitude of Entitlement is weaving its way through her campaign and causing folks to think she and her surrogates will do anything to win...even at the expense of others. The 'Look at Me...I'm special' attitude has nothing to do with gender.

    March 26, 2008 at 3:01 pm |
  86. Jeff in Arizona

    Jack...Let's be frank. The leadership skills of men and women are vastly different. Men are more likely to act first and analyze later. Women are more likely to analyze first and then act. And it doesn't make a difference whether they are black or white. Because we have never experienced the leadership style of a woman, we are hesistant of that style. It is a human instinct for us to be afraid of the unknown. So, until we take the giant leap of faith towards this new style of leadership, women will always be at a disadvantage. The question is, when will America be ready to embrace the need for this change? And will it be too late, when they finally realize that they need this type of leadership?

    March 26, 2008 at 3:03 pm |
  87. Dennis in Spokane

    Jack, at this time even McGovern would have an easier time getting elected then Hillary Clinton.

    March 26, 2008 at 3:04 pm |
  88. wiser

    The mean-spirited sexism displayed by the media has been palpable. So much so, that SNL found humor in it with their portrayal of an MSNBC debate.

    It is truly pathetic that the entire media is so biased in it’s coverage of this democratic primary.

    Grow up America and vote for the most competent, not the most popular candidate portrayed in the media, to lead our country during these difficult times. That leader is only Hillary Clinton!

    March 26, 2008 at 3:04 pm |
  89. Aaron B.; Champaign, IL

    I don't care if women can guide unions, own and operate a successful business, serve as brilliant minds in the field of science, and even lead countries... as long as they aren't allowed to play football.

    March 26, 2008 at 3:05 pm |
  90. J.C. from Raleigh, NC

    Jack,
    Has McGovern been right about anything since his lopsided loss in 1972? Remember he let his platform be characterized as amnesty, abortion and acid.
    Where does Hillary dig up these cat's paws? Was he given electroshock therapy to forget that American men have heard of Nefertiti, Queen Elizabeth I, Queen Victoria, Margaret Thatcher, Angela Merkel and Cristina Kirchner to name a few who make a lie of the glass- ceiling argument? Perhaps he's willing to take a bullet for his choice who never saw any in Bosnia.

    March 26, 2008 at 3:05 pm |
  91. Geoff from Halifax, Nova Scotia

    Jack,

    Looks like McGovern is both speaking the truth and lowering the bar for Clinton. But I think it will be harder to elect *this* woman rather than a black man. And I blame Bill. As much as I love the guy, he makes a lot of people mad and that's what the difference has been.

    Oh what am I saying...go Barack!

    March 26, 2008 at 3:05 pm |
  92. sam

    I remember reading a question on CNN.com asking whether or not Marting Luther King Jr.'s dream has come true the other day. It's sad that we even ask these questions in a country that "holds these truths to be self evident that every man is created equal." Truth is... election is in November. And whoever comes out the Democratic nominee will face a white man. I'd think to save this question until after the election before anyone can speculate about who would have a tougher time getting elected.

    March 26, 2008 at 3:07 pm |
  93. sidney jacobs, Los Angeles

    There have been 31 – female senators in the U.S. about 13 serving right now.

    There have been 3 – Black senators since reconstruction, including Obama, and one was a female.

    There have been 29 – female governors in the the history of the U.S. about 10 serving now.

    There have been 4 – black governors in the history of the U.S. Two are serving now, and one was not elected (Patterson – N.Y.).

    Come on folks, wake up!!!!!

    March 26, 2008 at 3:07 pm |
  94. JOHN BERNARD

    Given the "right" black man or the "right" woman, I think their chances are equal. But it would be hard to find a more divisive man or woman in recent American politics than Clinton. She says she would leave the church if she were Obama, but she didn't leave Bill when he lied to the American people. Her standards are like shifting sands, based solely on political ambition.
    Obama has been trying to run as a man....not a black man...just a man. Would Jesse Jackson have the same chance to win as Obama? Or Al Sharpton? No, because they have a more radical image to most of America. Obama was avoiding that image until last week and, hopefully, his speech will return him to being just a man.

    March 26, 2008 at 3:08 pm |
  95. Habib, Washington D.C

    Jack, I do not agree with McGovern assertion, I do however, believe that President Clinton baby mama can not beat McCain in the general election. It is obvious that McGovern is indirectly asking Senator Clinton to give up the race, period! She need to quit and shut up!

    March 26, 2008 at 3:08 pm |
  96. Maggie, VT

    Hillary doesn't think that is true, so it must not be. Hillary needs a reality check. It's not 1992, it's 2008, you can't go back, it doesn't work and who would want to. The Clinton's good years??? EEKKKKK!!!!

    March 26, 2008 at 3:08 pm |
  97. onenibble

    Jack, McGovern is probably right. Men do not want to see a woman become president because If she does a good job others might be elected and men would lose thier control over the highest office in America. Many men will vote for an African American Man before they will a woman candidate. Hillary would make an outstanding president.

    March 26, 2008 at 3:08 pm |
  98. Jill

    Hillary has had it tougher because no one trusts the Clintons, it is not because she is a woman!

    March 26, 2008 at 3:08 pm |
  99. JIMMY LUTHER SMITH

    Hillary Clinton is using George McGovern as a pawn, a feel sorry for the little white girl story. A form of brain washing the people to get their vote. The Clition will do anything to be elected again. But the people will not br fooled this time.

    March 26, 2008 at 3:08 pm |
  100. Mary - Santee CA

    Oh PLEASE! A woman could be elected just not this woman. As with male candidates, we expect them to be open and honest and not use "kitchen sink" politics. With the recent "misspeak" by Hillary Clinton, is just another example of why this woman should not be elected. I watched a brief covering of her daughter the other day and she said whatever her mother said about their Bosnia trip she supports. Now the Clintons have involved their child in their lies. Just another reason to NOT vote of Hillary.

    March 26, 2008 at 3:09 pm |
  101. jess

    A good question! But, I think the question should be a white woman vs. a black man instead of a woman vs. a black man...

    Let's see...

    1. Who, in this nation, first got the right to his freedom, a white woman or a black man?
    ans. a white woman.
    2. Who, in this nation, first got the right to own property, a white woman or a black man?
    ans. a white woman
    3. Who, in this nation, first got to vote, a white woman or a black man?
    ans. a white woman.
    4. Who, in this nation, has got it easier to get to the presidency, a white woman or a black man?

    I think the answer is obvious from our history.

    I guess, the hillary supporters are trying to show now that hillary is a victim of gender discrimination for not getting the presidency she is so entitled to.

    First of all, no, she is not entitled ot the presidency of the United States.

    Secondly, Obama has shown that he can win despite all the odds against him. That's the person we want at the oval office!

    March 26, 2008 at 3:09 pm |
  102. Mel of Michigan

    I disagree Jack. Sadly enough, I think anyone in America who is not a White Caucasian male faces greater obstacles. This is deeply rooted in American history where women, African Americans, Hispanics and anyone outside of the status quo profile are scrutinized more heavily and sometimes discriminated against if they don't fit the typical candidate. Change always dictates greater scrutiny because most people are more comfortable with what we are familiar. Yes, gender and racial biases do exist in America, therefore these candidates have to work to overcome this divisive mindset. However, I do believe that racial bias is more sensitive and challenging to overcome than gender. However, how one presents themselves to the American people also weighs in lightly.

    March 26, 2008 at 3:10 pm |
  103. Mike

    Jack,
    I don't think that it is harder to elect a white woman compared to a black man. It's just harder to elect this woman, and all the baggage that she brings with her.

    March 26, 2008 at 3:10 pm |
  104. Jon Olson, Austin, TX

    Americans are every bit as ready to elect a woman president as they are a black man. What Americans are tired of are all the negative political games the Clinton's play. The reason Obama is winning this campaign is because he's trying to stand for a new style of leadership. If there were a woman candidate that did the same this race could have gone either way. Give us a respectable woman candidate like Margaret Thatcher and I would vote for her any day.

    March 26, 2008 at 3:10 pm |
  105. James - Miami, Florida

    Obama will not win.

    HRC's campaign has started to robo-call pledged delegates in Texas and other states that already voted (despite Ickes lying about this on Monday) to try to move them from Obama to HRC.

    Basically, in her win at any cost – she is over-riding democracy. She is saying that the individual voters mean nothing. How anyone can support someone like that is beyond me.

    That said – she will win so I don't believe the McGovern was correct or took into account who the woman is in this case.

    March 26, 2008 at 3:10 pm |
  106. Vaxe

    Jack,

    When I moved to the US 5 years ago, in my American-History class, my teacher had told us that “It is impossible for a black man to become president of the United States” by the way he was a white man. I have been followed this election closely. Although I think that the Americans are hungry for that, I don’t think it will ever happen. You have the media, like FoxNews who’s looking at every possibly to stop that by attaching Obama or any black man for this matter to some racist comments. On the other side the Clinton who’s pretending that they are for blacks while they trying to take this one time chance away from them. I do think that Hillary Clinton would had a good chance, should she didn’t have the whole package of negative and untrustworthy around her

    Vax
    From FL

    March 26, 2008 at 3:10 pm |
  107. Marcus mt.olive

    Maybe just not the woman running now;

    March 26, 2008 at 3:10 pm |
  108. Ralph from NY

    Jack, let's look at reality. Obama has a lead in elected delegates and in the popular vote, but Clinton is not far behind and has proven she can win the big states - most of Obama's victories may be in states normally captured by Republicans. The Democrats are essentially split between the two, and the only way for the party to capture the White House is to rally behind a Presidential Candidate everyone can and will support. It would be a shame to see the GOP, who should be the big losers in November because of the economy and the war in Iraq, capture the Presidency because the Democrats continue to be split through their infighting, and will be unable to unite behind Obama or Clinton as their Candidate for President.

    March 26, 2008 at 3:10 pm |
  109. Eden

    Of course it's easier to elect a black man than a woman... simply because it's THIS black man and THIS woman.

    And what is McGovern's point? Is he trying to say we should feel sorry for her because she's less electable? I don't usually vote out of pity. I'm supporting Obama because I believe he's the best person for the job, not because he's not Oprah.

    March 26, 2008 at 3:10 pm |
  110. stirlingmclaughlin

    Well, I'll let you know if we ever manage to elect a black man or a women. So far, that hasn't happened. If we keep going after each other like we have been until the democratic convention, we'll never get the chance to find out.

    March 26, 2008 at 3:11 pm |
  111. Heather B W

    Yeah.............. Because life in america is so EASY for black people. He is a Clinton supporter and this is his lame attempt to rally woman behind Clinton. Its not gonna work.

    March 26, 2008 at 3:11 pm |
  112. Kyle from Philadelphia, PA

    I think McGovern's generalizing of black man and white woman should be applied to the specific individuals in this case. So far we've seen Senator Clinton teary-eyed, scornful, angry and rebuking, and "mis-spoken" during this campaign. Based on Senator Obama's composure during the ups and downs of this contest, I'd have to agree that he would indeed be a preferable choice to be President. we are not voting for concepts as McGovern claims, we are voting for the individuals.

    March 26, 2008 at 3:11 pm |
  113. Margaret

    Jack, he may be right. Gender discrimination is older and more widespread by centuries than is race discrimination which only came about as races began to mix geographically across the oceans. Hard to believe it's still so potent here in the ...what are we called?...land of the free.

    March 26, 2008 at 3:11 pm |
  114. Roni Liberman

    No. As a white woman and an Obama supporter (and former Clinton supporter), I think Hillary Clinton was well on her way to being the Democratic candidate and according to the polls, had a chance of beating McCain. Her slip in popularity is related to dirty politics and raw ambition which both men and women are sick of. Obama has kept his dignity and shown discipline and good judgment in the face of his tribulations and her mud-slinging. American democrats seem to be responding to issues of character more than race or gender.

    March 26, 2008 at 3:11 pm |
  115. CRAIG R. MCNEES

    TAMPA, FLA. THAT'S LIKE ASKING IF I WANT SEX OR FOOD JACK. WHAT IS THE FOOD AND WHO IS THE SEX WITH? I KNOW SEVERAL BLACK MEN I WOULD VOTE FOR AND SOME WOMEN AS WELL FOR PRESIDENT. I WOULD PREFER EDDIE MURPHY OVER CLINTON. I WOULD PREFER SOPHIA LOREN OVER EDDIE. NOW I'M HUNGRY, SO I GOING OUT TO THE MEXICAN BUFFET, STUPID QUESTION ANYWAY.

    March 26, 2008 at 3:12 pm |
  116. Phyllis

    This time around ; If it was a differnt woman other than Hillary Clinton .I have no reason not to vote for one . What the rest of the world must be thinking of the USA . is that we only Bush's & Clintons to run for Presidents . I or anyone I know will not be voting for Hillary , God has everyone forgotten all baggage she will bring with her , Whitewater , Foster just to mention a few .I can't believe Ohio elected her in and I'm furious that Our Gov . spent 38 thousand dollars here to drive around and indorse her. I'm letting him know .

    March 26, 2008 at 3:12 pm |
  117. GW Cooler

    Just the remaining pipes from the kitchen sink!!

    March 26, 2008 at 3:12 pm |
  118. Mike

    I think in this political environment that it will be easier to elect Barak vs Hillary. I think a woman is electable but not one with the Clinton name. With many republicans not really happy with McCain, McCain /Feingold, that the independent republicans would vote for Barak over Hillary. There is too much hatred on that side towards the Clintons that the independent republicans will just not vote for her . If the woman running did not have the Clinton name I don't know if McGovern's premise holds water.

    March 26, 2008 at 3:12 pm |
  119. Cathy, Los Angeles, CA

    No, I don't believe it is easier to elect a black man over a woman. This is interesting posturing on the part of Clinton supporters. I believe it is part of her whole "victim" pathos that permeates everything she says and does.

    March 26, 2008 at 3:12 pm |
  120. Gerry

    Jack

    The country is in two wars, 2 million folks are going to lose their house, millions are without healthcare, America's reputation around th world sucks, and overall the economy is tanking big time.

    I think it's time to forget the gender/race discussion and deal with the issues instead.

    March 26, 2008 at 3:13 pm |
  121. Ryan, Champaign IL

    Despite everything we've been hearing from unelected politicians from the past, it may really come down to the person rather than politcized race or gender issues. That is, if America and the media can concentrate on the issues for more than 3 seconds.

    March 26, 2008 at 3:13 pm |
  122. mandy

    I can't wait to see this devil woman to get out of the race. She has twisted everything. I pray to God thousand times a day to ask that please do not punish this nation by giving us this devil woman as our President. This woman has character issues.

    March 26, 2008 at 3:13 pm |
  123. Bill Tx

    This appears to be a tactical attempt to draw division along lines of race and sex. They are both good candidates and the Democrats should have the ability to win on the issues, given the GOP's position or lack thereof on the economy and Iraq, no matter who the nominee is. Statements like this, work against that eventuality because the diversity that should be celebrated in the Democratic party, becomes something that can divide the party. I would hazard a guess that because neither one has ever happened, both are extremely difficult.

    March 26, 2008 at 3:13 pm |
  124. Paul

    Hillary will not just be our Nominee, but the next President of The United States of America

    HILLARY 08!

    March 26, 2008 at 3:13 pm |
  125. Nancy from Streator, IL

    Of course not Jack, we all know it will be much easier to elect a White Man...no matter how old and senile he may be over a qualified Black Man or an equally qualified Woman.

    The voters in this country are not willing to vote for what best serves the country...they only what to vote for what the talking heads and media tells them to based on the most recent non issue.

    March 26, 2008 at 3:13 pm |
  126. Chuck in Eugene Oregon

    Jack

    McGovern is right only when it comes to this woman. I do not believe that a woman president would be a bad thing as I do not think American in general thinks a woman is harder to elect. America is just tired of "OLD" politics, and this one woman represents the core values of "OLD" Politics. Given any other female political figure would have a less of a problem as Sen Clinton.

    March 26, 2008 at 3:14 pm |
  127. tami

    It's interesting that when McGovern says "woman," we can deduce from his statements that he is not talking about a black woman, or an asian woman, or a hispanic woman. The pages of American history show that no matter how many great accomplishments you have made, you will always be looked at by race first and gender second. That has always been and still is the hierarchy of American society.

    March 26, 2008 at 3:14 pm |
  128. mayaka From Bloomington MN

    Jack!McGovern is wrong it this. Using terms like a woman and a black man. This has nothing to do with this elections. Americans are not stupid they know who will bring this country together and to make them hope again. Be it A woman Like Hillary or a black man Obama not forgeting an old Man Mcain what we need is unity.

    March 26, 2008 at 3:14 pm |
  129. Kathy/ GA

    Jack,
    I am more concerned that it is easier to elect someone with an IQ lower than their shoe size than I am about an African American or woman.

    March 26, 2008 at 3:14 pm |
  130. Jesse, Staten Island, New York

    Jack,
    At this point in time I do think it is harder to elect a women president only because of her (hillary's) compitition. When i go on youtube the only thing i watch is the "Yes, We Can" video. Every time I watch the video i can feel hope, i can see the country once again becoming the economic power house it used to be.
    I used to think that i would never see a black president in my life time and im only 21. Now I want one and I cant wait to cast my first vote for someone so deserving of this prestigous position.

    March 26, 2008 at 3:15 pm |
  131. Robert Lauer

    McGovern is as wrong as he can be. I am a middle aged male and can honestly say I don't care if my lawyer, doctor, gardener, pilot, mechanic, preacher, bookie, chef or president is a man or a woman. Exactly what is it that a man can do as president that a woman can't do??? We're talking about a job that requires smarts, guts, compassion and vision. I think Oprah would make a better president than one helluva lot of men. Surely Hillary would win by a land slide if George Bush was running for his second term against her. Obama will probably win because like Kennedy, Reagan, and Carter... Obama has the magic charm. He's smart and powerful too. Hillary can't win or loose on gender.

    March 26, 2008 at 3:15 pm |
  132. Aidyn

    I think he is complete right. We cannot forget that African American men had the right to vote before women. Women still make less than men and unfortunatelly it will be harder for Hillary to get elected.

    March 26, 2008 at 3:15 pm |
  133. Frank

    What is this? is McGovern suggesting that we are now in the dredges of electability.....I do not think Hillary Clinton's difficulties are rooted in her gender. Her negativity amongst voters goes back....way back to her role as first lady and possibly beyond.....with all the scandals she has faced she has failed to react as most people would, and that kind of seems disingenous to most. I would not want to go there, but Hillary does not naturally connect with most people that is her problem. Back to electability....there have been more women governors than there have been black governors. That should be an indication of just how hard it is to get elected as a black person.

    March 26, 2008 at 3:17 pm |
  134. misfit (Richmond, CA)

    Yes, it is harder to get a woman elected president.

    No one denies that the fact that Democrats will elect either a woman or black man as their presidential nominee. But as entrenched as racism is in America, I do believe that gender bias goes even deeper.

    No one likes to come right an say it, but most African-Americans vote for Obama because he's "one of them". Just as some others vote for him to make up for historical injustices. But I doubt that men would crossover to vote for Clinton for similar reasons. They would not vote for her simply to make up for gender inequality. People just don't see it as much of a problem, even though women still face salary discrepancies and glass ceilings.

    Women still face having to be twice as good as their male counterparts. The current race for the Democratic nominee is a perfect example: Clinton's experience is looked at under a magnifying glass, while Obama's lack of experience is barely an issue. In fact his lack of experience is almost seen as an asset, simply because when you haven't done much, you also have fewer mistakes and regrets.

    The media is quick to discuss racism, but has yet to address gender bias. I think this is the perfect time to address both issues head on. Only through an open discussion can we ever hope to deal with the problems we tend to sweep under the rug.

    March 26, 2008 at 3:18 pm |
  135. AreUkidding

    We'll is he?

    March 26, 2008 at 3:19 pm |
  136. rhian

    I fear he speaks the truth. I would love to see Hillary as president too, but she's been held to a different standard throughout this whole process.

    Just think if the roles were reversed and SHE were the JUNIOR senator with only a couple of years in the senate. Would SHE have been able to last this long in the presidential race? She would have been laughed out of the competition early on.

    But a man...he can skate by on relatively less experience, a couple of well-received speeches, a booming male voice, and voila...he's perceived as suitable, presidential.

    Hillary has to fight for every bit of good press she gets and every good result she earns. She's criticized for showing emotion, getting angry, the color of her pantsuits, her hairstyle, etc. Just think of all the terms used to describe her, and the latent sexism they betray.

    March 26, 2008 at 3:19 pm |
  137. matt

    i think that we should go beyond race and gender and instead look at the quality of each canidate in this race.

    and if someone is to disagree, then i will hence forth call them biased pigs. lol.

    March 26, 2008 at 3:19 pm |
  138. lee

    Of course, he's right. And in a way, in this time and place, this is what Ferraro was saying. But because she's a female, no one wanted to hear it.

    March 26, 2008 at 3:19 pm |
  139. Karen P

    Here we go again. Typical Clintonian remarks. We're ready for a real woman president....Hillary ain't her.

    I hope McGovern is right...Obama SHOULD win.

    Hillary hasn't had a hard time because she's a woman...she's had a hard time because she's HILLARY CLIINTON!

    March 26, 2008 at 3:21 pm |
  140. Pat Overland Park KS

    Jack,

    I don't think that it easier to vote for a black man than it is a woman. I think it's the woman running that makes the difference. A great many people, including myself just don't like Senator Clinton.

    I am well in her demographic, but for personal reasons I just don't care for her.

    I am a democrat and will remain loyal as such. I won't vote for Senator McCain under any circumstance, but I would have a hard time pulling the switch for her, especially in light of her recent "mis-statements" (Lies) and she comparing herself to Senator McCain instead of uniting behind Senator Obama, which is what she should be doing to unite the democratic party and quit playing nice with Senator McCain all the time.

    She is tearing this party apart and I have a bad feeling come November that we are going to have 4 more years of Bush policies because of her.

    Pat
    Overland Park, KS

    March 26, 2008 at 3:21 pm |
  141. Jen

    Maybe it would be easier to elect a woman if it was.... ANOTHER woman!

    March 26, 2008 at 3:22 pm |
  142. Michael

    It has nothing to do with gender/race issues as far as I'M concerned...Obama's simply a better candidate than Hillary.

    I'm completely for a female president, provided we find the right candidate. Hillary is not the right candidate.

    March 26, 2008 at 3:22 pm |
  143. Dave

    Until a black man or a woman gets elected it will be hard for anyone to have any idea on this. All we really know at this point is that it will be easier for a black man or a woman to be elected than it would have been to elect a candidate as poor as McGovern was.

    March 26, 2008 at 3:22 pm |
  144. W. J. Godfrey

    Dear Mr. Cafferty:

    Considering the fact that you have shown your preference and it is not for Hilary Clinton perhaps, you might be able to offer some thoughts. Are you against Hilary Clinton because she is a woman or because of the issues? Do you think that your thoughts about the candidates could have anything to do with gender?

    Just wondering...Willy from Canada

    March 26, 2008 at 3:22 pm |
  145. woodwater

    Senator Clinton and her husband realise that she can no longer win the nomination and so she is trying to stop Obama from winning the general election in November so that she can apply again in four years time.

    This is all about ambition for the Clintons. Senator Clinton is on a personal crusade to become president. She has to become president. Its clearly not about America. Its about Senator Clinton. To prove this, I will tell you that she really does not care about the people of Florida and Michigan. Florida and Michigan were stripped of their delegates before a single ballot was cast. If she really cared, that was the time she would have ran riots by insisting that those delegates count. She is just trying to use the people of Florida and Michigan to increase her delegate count and has no sincere feelings for them. Now she has raised the Wright issue again. This desperation is turning into foolishness except offcourse that it is a calculated move to stop Obama from winning the general election.

    I think the people of Ohio and Pennsylvania are biased voters. They are only voting for Senator Clinton no matter what she does. Obama knows what it feels like to be a working class white male because he was involved in helping white steel plant workers whose jobs were taken from them in Illinois get their jobs back. This should qualify him to get their vote. Hillary has no such experience. She is giving the Republicans some tools to use against Obama. She has said that McCain will be a better commander in chief than Obama. Its quite obvious that she wants Obama to lose. This is so unfair. The United States does not belong to you, Hillary.

    Woodwater
    Pennsylvania

    March 26, 2008 at 3:23 pm |
  146. M. Gaudreau

    Of course he's right. Keep up with the news; it's not that hard to see.

    The most glaring example of this fact is that people (including women themselves) are criticizing her for something her husband did over 10 years ago! That was personal business then, and it's personal business now.

    Get over that and get back to the issues that affect us every day, please.

    March 26, 2008 at 3:23 pm |
  147. Sharon from Illinois

    Jack, I don't agree with Mcgovern, it is just harder for this woman to be elected. If we had the right woman running, it would be so much easier, but when you carry as much baggage as Hillary, forget it. If she is nominated, Mccain is to reign.

    March 26, 2008 at 3:25 pm |
  148. Ralph

    It's harder because woman will not blindly set aside ideological differences for the sake of seeing a woman in the White House. This is clearly not true for Senator Obama's African American supporters.

    March 26, 2008 at 3:25 pm |
  149. Isaac from Waldorf, MD

    This question is not a real reflection this Democratic nomination race. Asking whether a woman or a Black person is more electable than the other is a completely different question than asking whether Hillary Clinton is more electable than Barack Obama. I believe that most Americans, both men and women, would have some margin of concern with the prospects of electing the "typical" woman as President because historically, men have been portrayed in these roles. The biggest obstical for voters would be fear of the unknown. Not only would a Black candidate present those same fears, but an additional element would be included; deep seeded hatred. You can search the entire surface of the Earth and you will not find a single man who hates women. You probably don't even need to leave the building your sitting in to find someone who hates Blacks, Whites, Latinos, Asians or Arabs. However, my original point was that the question of woman versus Black, is far too generalized to compare to Hillary and Barack. In my personal opinion, Hillary is far from your "typical" White woman, whereas Barack is more in line with your "typical" Black man. In a contest of woman versus Black, I think that the woman has the advantage due to the previously stated reasons, but in a contest of Hillary versus Barack I believe that Barack has the advantage because Hillary's association with President Bill Clinton and the numerous questions surrounding the Clinton "brand name" is a huge anchor around her neck. There are other women who are far more electable than Hillary Clinton. Condi 2016?

    March 26, 2008 at 3:26 pm |
  150. Sean

    What country is this man from. Compare the number of African-American governors and senators to women. Need i say more. Is this one of Clinton's talking points to gain votes or sympathy from women? This lady never stops.

    March 26, 2008 at 3:27 pm |
  151. jdona

    Well, heck, Jack. It doesn't take much to see that is true. Look at yourself – you can't stand the fact that a woman named Hillary Clinton might become the Commander in Chief. You, yourself, are about as sexist as they come.

    March 26, 2008 at 3:27 pm |
  152. Vi

    No – he is not neccesarily right. It depends on the character and integrity of the woman. Could she handle affairs of the nation and foreign countries with diplomacy and tact. Would she be capable of good judgment. Hillary Clinton has none of the above – so this woman could not be the President.

    March 26, 2008 at 3:32 pm |
  153. John

    Hard things require hard fortitude. Breaking the gender barrier, or the color barrier, or the sound barrier, or landing on the moon. Victor Hugo once wrote, "Nothing can withstand the force of an idea whose time has come." Maybe the time has come, something else for us to break.

    March 26, 2008 at 3:32 pm |
  154. Jim James

    Wow, what a useless question! I figure it would be hard for either to become president – what does it matter which is harder. I'm far more interested to see whether it's easier for someone tied up in politics through family and connections (Hillary), someone who has proven his worth and heroism over years of hard work but that ended up in the dismal shadow of the Bush years (McCain), or someone who is newer (and a bit scarier) for his ideas; approach; and vision of America (Obama). This is the far more important question that will be answered soon enough. The answer will prove little about race or sex – there will only be one outcome!

    March 26, 2008 at 3:33 pm |
  155. Dom

    With all due respect... I guess this question depends on the woman and "black" man in question. Sen. Obama is an exceptional statesman and leader – you can't take that away from him, and unfortunately Hillary Clinton and Bill are like two old shoes that we just got tired of wearing.

    Pose this question with the candiates being Jessie Jackson or Minister Farrakhan and Gov. Janet Napolintano or Gov. Kathleen Sebellius, and you'd probably get a different response.

    McGovern is an idot. No more of this stupid racist or sexist crap.

    March 26, 2008 at 3:33 pm |
  156. Edward Bennett

    Actually Jack, I agree with Sen. McGovern. If Hillary gets the nomination, I will vote for her, but I would rather I get the opportunity to vote for Senator Obama. My issues with Senator Clinton are not related to her being a woman, but to her seeming insincere and too calculating.

    As for the rest of the country, I think Sen. McGovern is probably correct. This country, in spite of it's acumen for industrial progress, still has a lot to do in terms of social progress. I find that unfortunate because I think Americans should be resilient enough to do what is necessary to once again be viewed as THE world leader, but we do need to open our eyes beyond our own historical aristocracy.

    Edward Bennett; Sandy, UT

    March 26, 2008 at 3:33 pm |
  157. Amy, Kalamazoo

    Jack,
    Sexism is alive and well in the US, but it's much easier for people to chalk up to "boys will be boys" and "that's the way things are" than racism. Racism is more embarrassing for people to admit they partake in because of our nation's history with it. It's difficult for us to move past our hang ups about a woman in power equating a b*itch, when she's just displaying the same confidence and deliberating judgments of her male counterparts.
    That said, I think the hardest thing Clinton has going for her is not her ovaries, but her mouth. I liked her, supported her even, but when she came down with a case of verbal diarrhea, the latest of which brings her under phantom sniper fire in Bosnia, I switched sides.

    March 26, 2008 at 3:35 pm |
  158. Lisa, Centerville Iowa

    Perhaps all candidates should run anonymously, so we couldn't see their gender or their race. We could read a nameless resume, and read their plans for health care, the economy, Iraq war, etc. and vote on Candidate A or Candidate B.

    We should not care about the package that the candidate comes in!

    March 26, 2008 at 3:35 pm |
  159. Franky

    You know what I think Jack??? I think Hillary is arguably the best to try and meet that standard. I mean, just look at her record and it says it all. I will say that she knows as a woman that she has an advantage. TRUST ME, whichever woman tells you otherwise,

    March 26, 2008 at 3:35 pm |
  160. Abraham, Pittsburgh, PA

    No he's not. Perhaps its more accurate to say that its easier to elect Obama than it is to elect Hillary. I believe the character of a person superimposes itself, little by little, onto the race or gender of that person. And in consistently exposing itself to the perceiver, without the interference of superficiality, it becomes more readily read than race or gender. Next time, when measuring our candidates, McGovern should wrap the tape around their hearts.

    March 26, 2008 at 3:35 pm |
  161. Katie

    YES! And anyone who says it isn't...is probably a MAN!

    March 26, 2008 at 3:35 pm |
  162. Erin in Battle Creek

    Sadly George is wrong, though “easier” is a misleading adjective. It would be “harder” to elect an African-American; Just look at the suspicion directed at Obama. A white woman might fend off sexist steroetypes but at least her cultural orientation is familiar to her fellow white voters. The racial gap will just grow wider if we continue to indulge our most primal fears.
    Maybe the real question is “Is it easier to put a republican in the white house when the democratic party is embroiled in such a quagmire?”

    March 26, 2008 at 3:35 pm |
  163. Efren

    The question posed simply demonstrates the ignorance of this country. Its 2008. Who the hell cares whether our President is white, black, man, woman or whatever?

    March 26, 2008 at 3:35 pm |
  164. Rick in FL

    It shouldn't be so, but it probably is true. It would depend on which predudice is stronger in each individual. My concern is how would foriegn leaders see it. Would a women in charge be less able to negotiate with say N. Korea or Middle Eastern leaders. Many cultures around the world view women differently than we do. I know Margaret Thatcher did it, but she wasn't leader of the free world either, just a country in it.

    March 26, 2008 at 3:36 pm |
  165. Pat

    It depends on which woman and which black man. Hillary Clinton will be hard to elect because she continues to be a devisive personality. While Obama has the potential to be a unifying force- if the Clinton campaign (and our own prejudices) don't get in the way.

    March 26, 2008 at 3:36 pm |
  166. Dave Coulter

    I know mrs Clinton misspoke about Bosnia, But just where was she under snipper fire and had to duck down and run to cars. or did she just dream it up.

    March 26, 2008 at 3:37 pm |
  167. barbara santarelli

    Jack,
    I am a 60 year old white middle class woman, feminist and life long
    Democrat. That should put me in Hillarys' camp...... In this election
    I have opted for truth, change and integrity.....I have opted for Obama.
    He more closely represents who I am and what is most important. It
    goes beyond gender....Not this woman at this time !

    March 26, 2008 at 3:37 pm |
  168. Bill from Alabama

    I really don't know. I guess we'll have to wait til we have a black man running. Obama is only half black,so I am told, so this political race doesn't really make a good assessment, I don't think. I don't see black when I see Obama! He is just a man who has ties to Africa,the muslim faith. I am concerned about his ties,his churches allegience to Africa,and the fact that his father is a citizen of Africa. It makes me wonder why he chose to live here and why he thinks he would make a good President of The United States of America. I want a president who is proud of being an American. But in answer to your question,I am hoping and praying that it will be easier to elect the real American ,here.

    March 26, 2008 at 3:38 pm |
  169. Darrell, Keller, Texas

    I think the men in the media can answer this one. Of course it is more difficult for a woman to become president than a black man. Just look at how the media treated Hillary during the beginning of the primaries and still continue hanging on to every single word she says trying to find any bread crumb they can to beat her down. Had there been equal views in the beginning Obama would not be a contender. And on the other aspect had the person in Clintons shoes been a white male Obama would not have even bothered to enter the race for president. He saw this opportunity and grabbed on knowing a man would be more attractive running for the white house than a woman.

    March 26, 2008 at 4:15 pm |
  170. Susan, Seattle

    McGovern is both right and wrong. Obama is more electable than Clinton but not because of race or sex. What is most electable is the person who is nominated by the majority of the people. If Hillary gets the superdelegates to "appoint" her the candidate, she will lose in the general election. Obama supporters will either stay home, vote for McCain, or write him in.

    March 26, 2008 at 4:15 pm |
  171. US John

    Jack this question shouldn't have to be answered. If we as white Americans would stop denying our ancestors cruel mistakes, we could begin to understand 250 years of slavery, 100 years of segregation, unfairness. It's obvious black men have been targets since 1776, how has the white woman actually been oppressed. Obama would've been executed just for looking at Hillary just 60 years ago, let's not forget that. America

    March 26, 2008 at 4:15 pm |
  172. Sylvia

    I think that the right woman can be elected President. Voter perceptions about the electability of a woman are influenced by the type of candidate that Hillary Clinton has turned out to be. She relies on her husband to do much of the heavy lifting, she uses emotional blackmail –tears–to get her way, she manipulates, and at times she seems to be dominated by her campaign instead of exerting leadership from the top. Yes, the country is ready for a woman. If Brack Obama were a woman, I'd vote for her. If George McGovern were a woman I'd vote for her too.

    March 26, 2008 at 4:15 pm |
  173. Deb

    I think it depends on the candidate. For a while I thought Obama could transcend his race and be a president in spite of the biases against his color. But since the Reverand Wright and Bosnia controversies, its seems that if you are black you are judged by your pastor words and if you are a white woman you can say anything and it's ok.

    Deb/Albany

    March 26, 2008 at 4:15 pm |
  174. jim andresen

    I think this country is ready to vote for a woman for president. Just not a Clinton. 8 years is enough. The law that limits the President to 8 years should also apply to the First Lady. A vote for her would be like voting for BC again. There has got to be another woman in this country that is qualified besides her!!

    March 26, 2008 at 4:15 pm |
  175. Christopher Draghi

    A black man. He's the best friend, colleague and sports buddy of the white (or other) politician. Doesn't intimidate the male ego like a woman.
    Psychology 101.
    When can we get back to the candidates programs and stop instigating fights Media?

    March 26, 2008 at 4:15 pm |
  176. Herb - Tampa, FL

    I will be harder to elect this woman. No matter who the Democrats nominate the right-wing "Swift Boaters" are going to make it a nasty general election. They won't like losing to Obama, but they will hate losing to Hillary which will give McCain a better chance to win. Also, a Hillary administration would be forced to govern under a fierce bombardment from the right which will make everything we've seen to date seem tame. It will really be ugly out there.

    March 26, 2008 at 4:15 pm |
  177. Alfreda from Tuskegee, AL

    I think both the woman and black man will have difficulty being elected president in this country. But Hillary Clinton will not be elected, and not just because she is a woman. If somehow she manages to wrestle the nomination from Barack Obama, she will not win. I, for one, will vote for McCain, and most of my African American friends feel the same. Most of them, however, will not vote for McCain, they will just sit this one out. Hillary needs to get out now to give the democrats a fighting chance. The longer she stays in with the negative campaigning, the less chance the democratic nominee will have to win. Shame on her! Seems to me her attitude is.. "If I'm not the nominee, I'll make sure no other democrat wins. She and Barack will be so bloody by the time they get to PA, neither will win the general election.

    March 26, 2008 at 4:16 pm |
  178. TONI

    I live in Pennsylvania and will be voting for Hillary in April. If Obama wins the nomination, I will ABSOLUTELY vote for Mccain for president. There is no way in the world the I want Obama to be president. I don't like his wife. She seems to have a "chip" on her shoulder and Obama just seems to have too many questions about him. His book said he was a drinker, smoked pot and occasionally used cocaine when he was a young man. He didn't have a father as he was growing up which makes me wonder if he has other issues like many regular people who didn't have a father growing up. And his pastor IS having a HUGE effect on my feelings about him. All around, I just don't like his style. Not to mention that I couldn't stand hearing the name "President Obama".

    March 26, 2008 at 4:16 pm |
  179. Christopher

    Jack,
    I don't think that Senator McGovern is right, but I don't think that he is wrong either. As I think some have tried to say recently we've made quite a bit of progress with regards to race relations in this country. That being said I don't think we've completely moved away from stereotypes, discrimination, and prejudice which Obama will undoubtedly face. Nor have we moved away from sexism as McGovern's note. I think his comment is similar to Geraldine Ferraro's comment in that it assumes that African American men are some sort of privileged class. As an 21-year old African American male I'm waiting for the day when I'm part of this class. I think Obama's accomplishments as an individual will cause some to give him a chance, but if we think race, religion, et cetera are hot buttons as we go Democrat vs. Democrat, what will the contest really look like if it's Obama vs. McCain?

    March 26, 2008 at 4:16 pm |
  180. Tyler from Fayetteville, AR

    I think the main issue is that voters are more likely to talk about their issues with a woman being president than to talk about their issues with an African American being president. Those who still hold racist views are not willing to talk about them because of the social stigma involved, but anti-feminists do not have as much social stigma attached to them. There are probably just as many who are opposed to an African American being president as are opposed to a woman being president; those who see gender as an issue are just more willing to express their concerns than are those who see race as an issue.

    March 26, 2008 at 4:16 pm |
  181. John Kelley

    Yeah! It is true. It is harder to elect a women in the country. If you have been brought up Roman Catholic, many Catholic men believe it's like a nun wanting to be a priest. That is why Chris Matthews is so hard on Hillary Clinton. Needless to say, I would not say anything about CNN!
    But with Americans, there is a tendency not to vote for a women for President. We in America are sort of backward.

    March 26, 2008 at 4:16 pm |
  182. Kristen Ingram

    A voice from Eugene, Oregon. I think the operative word is "this." It's a lot easier to vote for THIS man than THIS woman. He is exciting, elegant, and brilliant, and I would vote for him irrespective of his skin color. She dissembles and is snide. So, No to THIS woman, Hillary; Yes to THIS man, Barak Obama.

    March 26, 2008 at 4:16 pm |
  183. Joan Hopkins

    Yes, I think McGovern is right. That is why Hillary Clinton should step down right now! Not only does Barack Obama have the advantage of having the most delegates, popular votes and number of states won, he has the advantage of being a man.

    March 26, 2008 at 4:16 pm |
  184. Toni South Carolina

    I agree and we will see. Something is going on here and I truly think that the United States and the world is going to be stunned. We have power but there is a higher power.

    Toni, South Carolina

    March 26, 2008 at 4:16 pm |
  185. Suzanne Gillum

    I don't agree that it is true in general but I do agree that this black man is much more electible than this white woman.

    March 26, 2008 at 4:16 pm |
  186. Karen K Baker

    Jack,
    Let me answer your question with the 15th Amendment passed february 26, 1869 which allowed black men to vote. This was followed by the 19th Amendment in 1920 ALLOWING ALL women to vote!
    Gee Jack, you think sexism is dead?

    March 26, 2008 at 4:16 pm |
  187. Rosalind

    No. He is not right. Racism is still something some people love to hang on to no matter what. Even if he is saying everything they could agree with; they would still vote for the white candidate.

    Rosalind
    Cols., OH

    March 26, 2008 at 4:16 pm |
  188. McKeeg

    I don't think it will be easier to elect a black man than a woman. Race is still sadly a huge issue in this country but people, the media included, seem to be more afraid of backlash from attacking a black man than a woman. It's obvious from this campaign. How many times have you heard comments about Hillary being too emotional? and how many comments have we heard about Obama pandering to the black community when he speaks to an all black crowd(he gets that inner city slang)?I'm a Hillary supporter, but I think both of these candidates are on the right path, it's almost funny that the media is so scared of making Jesse Jackson angry... it always easier to attack woman than a minority. well played media.

    March 26, 2008 at 4:17 pm |
  189. glenda

    Of course it is easier to elect a man to the Presidency. Black, Asian or Hispanic. The sexism in this country is indigenous to all races and both genders, unfortunately. The result of a Hillary win is a defection to McCain, and unfortunately, the same is true for Obama. In the first case the reasoning is old school sexist and the second, perceived common sense. Most Americans over 40 in this country are looking for solid experience to bail the nation out of a war, a recession, and a deficit.

    March 26, 2008 at 4:17 pm |
  190. Meredith

    It is not a question of whether I would choose a black man or a woman. Rather, I would choose a candidate who knows what they are talking over one who cannot tell the difference between warfare and a welcoming ceremony.

    March 26, 2008 at 4:17 pm |
  191. Tracy, Fort Mill, SC

    It will be harder to elect a black man president than a white woman because white women are the majority of voters. For a white woman to get elected she can play the sisterhood card shamelessly – despite the fact that affirmative action has favored white women over all other minority groups since its inception.

    March 26, 2008 at 4:17 pm |
  192. Ronald

    I dont know Jack, but lets put this in perspective.Hillary is not a profound candidate so its hard to blame her gender for her campain failure. I truly think that givin a talented female candidate that America will show her as much love as Barack has received.

    March 26, 2008 at 4:17 pm |
  193. James

    In this race, we will see two types of groups, those who see policies and those who focus more on the ethnicity and gender. In the more modern race, i wouldnt say much about any poll that would grasp the true sense of what the people in the united states feel today, its a major climax, some would say, pakistan would've had a female leader, before the united states, because of how some people may feel, but this race is not about gender nor race, but it is about policies, people are done with the past, and its lies, and have set up a more serious plateform for a reform, cafferity all i know is that we will be more shocked with the policies rather then the gender or race, by the end of this democratic convention.

    March 26, 2008 at 4:17 pm |
  194. Tom in Desoto Texas

    Hmmm, going for the sympathy vote huh? Poor, poor Hillary....and people would have voted for Hitler after the Battle of the Bulge just because he lost another

    March 26, 2008 at 4:17 pm |
  195. Brian

    Jack,

    I don't agree with the polls or with McGovern. Race is much more of a sensitive topic than is Gender. I think people are more likely to hide their bias when relating to race versus gender.

    We have made more strides in gender equality in this country than we have with racial equality. It only seems easier to Elect Obama over Clinton because of the character and background of these candidates. Replace them with another black and female candidate and the results would be different.

    March 26, 2008 at 4:17 pm |
  196. Ron Fendel

    I'm on my knees praying and begging that he is right. Amen.

    March 26, 2008 at 4:18 pm |
  197. Ellen

    Yes we are ready for a woman president,but not that woman, clinton

    March 26, 2008 at 4:18 pm |
  198. walt

    THe problem with most American men is that their egos are so big they don't want to vote for a woman fir president. What a shame. Egos often get in the way of progress.

    March 26, 2008 at 4:18 pm |
  199. CJ, Catlettsburg, Kentucky

    Jack, I would take either one of them over a white man who supports "King George's regime" and the continuation of this war in Iraq for a hundred years running around the country singing "Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran."

    March 26, 2008 at 4:18 pm |
  200. Karim

    in the US rascim is alive and well. Reporters and pundits are so afraid of looking racist that they tip toe around Obama like a sacred cow. To me this makes me glad I am a Canadian...

    Cheers,

    Karim,

    March 26, 2008 at 4:18 pm |
  201. john walker iowa

    i think it would be easier for obama to get elected,but not why you would think. most of us have worked for a woman in some capacity,and most of us would say that they are domineering, almost to a hitler like style. not knowing if this is because they feel they have to prove they are worthy or if it is just their nature. i am sorely afraid that if she got in it would be her way or the highway, and that is not what we are looking for. we want change and we need a person who will listen and take the best road to a solution.

    March 26, 2008 at 4:18 pm |
  202. Jeff, Minneapolis

    For those of you who espouse hatred toward Obama because of the Reverand Wright, I ask whether you've actually watched his speech on Racism and his critique of Reverand Wright. If not, shut up.

    March 26, 2008 at 4:18 pm |
  203. Sondra

    Yup. McGovern is right...especially when it comes to this black man. People are obsessed with the moment and the man. He's savvy,a pretty good orator, easy on the eye and damn he looks good in those dark suits...hmmmm. Wonder if Hil had a makeover and took a few inspirational speaking lessons Might that help?

    March 26, 2008 at 4:18 pm |
  204. Tom Daniel -----Florida

    That comment is dead wrong ! I am a white Eoropean male and I don't hate blacks or women. If anything I strongly dislike some of them ...very few. But it only takes one loud mouth , either black or white ,to send the herds running for cover from an unknown danger. There is no entitlement in this country to every white person. And many blacks have risen in this rascist society to the highest levels of business , education and politics. Let's get with it. I don't hate Barack Obama but I fear him because of some associations he has with people and some comments made by his wife. But O don't like Hilary either for the same reasons. McCain is not the answer either so we need an Independent candidate in this race and it's not too late.

    March 26, 2008 at 4:18 pm |
  205. Dino IL

    Jack,
    I must say a white woman would have the easier path. Why you may ask? Well, the biggest beneficiaries of affirmative action have been white women. The reason being that thse in positions of power can relate easier to someone who reminds them of their mother/wife/sister/or daughter than they can with a black male. Unfortunate legacy of our nation's history...
    Now the reason that I believe that this has not played out in this year's election is that Hillary simply has too much baggage. But if this were generic white women running against a generic black male, I firmly believe that the white women would win that particular election.

    March 26, 2008 at 4:18 pm |
  206. Scott Auger

    I covered this subject yesterday. As opened minded as I would like to believe I am, if I am put in a position to have to vote for a woman as President, I can only draw on MY life's experience to decide if I can.......Please take VP Hillary, Pretty PLEASE !!! SA(DR)

    March 26, 2008 at 4:18 pm |
  207. Diane

    Who are we kidding? Men love women; sometimes too many at once. So let's be serious when it comes to positions and electibility when it relates to race. White women have had more opportunities than black men. All you have to do is take a good look at major corporations and particularly our government. When it comes to Hillary and Barak, they both are electable. It's their INTEGRITY (NOT EXAGGERATION) that will ultimately help us make the decision. The fundamental question that must be addressed is: whose heart is really in it (carrying out the best interests of the Democratic party)? That seems to point to Senator Obama.

    March 26, 2008 at 4:18 pm |
  208. Luenda

    No – it is easier to elect a honest person than one who persistant proves she is willing to be dishonest in order to try to gain the nomination

    March 26, 2008 at 4:18 pm |
  209. Roxane from MN

    Jack, it's sad to say, but I think it's true. Here it is 2008 and I have heard a few comments from people who feel this way. Not me personally though. I would love to see a woman get to be president. Just not crazy about Hillary. Too much baggage.

    March 26, 2008 at 4:18 pm |
  210. Idriss from Minneapolis, MN

    The US has been much more proactive in dealing with issues of racial discrimination than those of gender discrimination. This has been the opposite of the European stance because the American left has not adopted the socialist tradition of gender equality. On the other hand, the racial history of this country has forced progressive politicans to deal wth racism up front. While sexism is far more subtle, it is still far more accepted in American society. As a result Clinton's task may very well be as difficult as Obama's.

    March 26, 2008 at 4:19 pm |
  211. reginald

    This guy is running, by himself, against a former President and First Lady. He's fighting against bigger problems than being black.

    People dislike Hillary because she and her Husband have shown themselves to be self centered and mean spirited.

    If they weren't so arrogant they would have put Obama away a long time ago.

    Ross

    March 26, 2008 at 4:19 pm |
  212. Dennis Meharchand

    Yes – he is right – it is harder to elect a woman especially when that woman is white and is clearly being overwhelmingly discriminated against by a racist African American poulation. Dr. Martin Luther King would turn in his grave if he knew that even Republican African American votyers plan to vote for Obama simply because it is "their" chance. Where I come from, South Africa, decisions to hire someone or vote for someone based on race is racist – let's call it what it is – question is will the rest of America allow this racist vote to stand.

    March 26, 2008 at 4:19 pm |
  213. Shirley

    No he is not right. Race is an issue and Hilliary proved that when she commented on the Jeremiah Wright situation a week after the incident happened . By addressing it she is playing the race card with Obama. McGovern is just trying to side track America by saying that. The only reason Obama is where he is right now is because he is a true candidate, he knows what he is doing, he is offering change for America and I myself would love to see change for once with out a Bush or Clinton in office.

    Shirley Ohio

    March 26, 2008 at 4:19 pm |
  214. Chris cary

    Jack,

    Mr. McGovern apparently sampled men to help formulate his opinion. How many of them were black men? How many of them would never even entertain the notion of a black person as president? Was America more receptive to Geraldine Ferraro or Jessee Jackson as a politcal figure 20 years ago?

    Sorry for answering your question with a bunch of questions, but the context of who's forming the opinion and history tell the answer to your question.

    Signed,

    Typical White Person

    March 26, 2008 at 4:19 pm |
  215. Jim Winiarski

    Obama yes! Clinton NO! I 1st voted for Jack Kennedy in 1960 and have never voted for a Clinton and never will. Why don't the Obama people show footage of Bill protesting against America in London, the draft dogger.

    Jim

    March 26, 2008 at 4:19 pm |
  216. joanne from Santa Barbara

    So, are there more racists or more sexists in this country? That's a tough one. I'll go with more racists, but whether Obama or Clinton wins the nomination, they are going to have a tough time beating St. John McCain, so be prepared for 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue to become a long-term care facility.

    March 26, 2008 at 4:19 pm |
  217. Gigi in Alabama

    McGovern may be on to something. That is the highest of glass ceilings and men really do not like to take orders from a woman. At least American men do not.

    March 26, 2008 at 4:19 pm |
  218. Marilyn Durham

    It isn't the woman who's running for president, it's the man she would bring into the job with her.

    March 26, 2008 at 4:19 pm |
  219. Jo

    Hi Jack,

    It will be easier to elect the most suitable candidate to lead this Great Nation, regardless of their race, gender, disability, etc.

    Jo

    Mukilteo, Washington

    March 26, 2008 at 4:19 pm |
  220. Paul

    Let's do the math, Jack. Most candidates elected to the white house were former senators or governors. How many women have been elected senators or governors versus how many blacks have ever been elected to these positions. Ask Senator McGovern to do the research and do the math!

    March 26, 2008 at 4:19 pm |
  221. Jason

    Jack, the issue should not be if it is easier to elect a Black man or woman.It should be is it easier to elect a liar or a patriot? As Americans we need to move past the kindergarden conversation of race and gender. Neither topic will save American lives,homes or business. I personally challenge Americans to see past gender and race to the core of the candidate that will save our country.

    March 26, 2008 at 4:19 pm |
  222. Jim, Honolulu

    As in many things, Hollywood's products can be help illuminate the truth. From the series "21" to the movie "Deep Impact", Hollywood has repeatedly shown, with grace and intelligence, African-American presidents for whom race is not at all an issue. You can point to very few such depictions of women. Shirley Chisholm herself said her gender, not her race, was her greatest impediment. Gender bias is much more genetically ingrained than racial bias, so of course is will be one of the last to truly fall.

    March 26, 2008 at 4:19 pm |
  223. Sly - Alpena, Mi.

    Hi Jack, listen, this is the 21st Century, It's so easy to elect an African American Male just as it's so easy to elect a White Female as President. Let's not forget who we have in there now.

    March 26, 2008 at 4:19 pm |
  224. Ian Bradshaw

    If the woman was Condoleeza Rice it might be a landslide but even then the problems of dealing with the Arab world for a woman would be nearly insurmountable because of their culture. As for having a lying woman President – forget it.

    March 26, 2008 at 4:32 pm |
  225. sudhir sanghvi

    Come on America, wake up and live in 21st century. Worlds largest Democracy had a female Prime Minister in 1964. We need to get away from the steriotype of minority and female candidates. Qualifications and ideas for better America from a candidates should dictate our mind and soul.

    March 26, 2008 at 4:32 pm |
  226. Bob Fleming

    The Democrat presidential primary has degenerated into a situation similiar to a battle between "two cats who have had their tails tied together and thrown over a clothes line".

    If it continues much longer it won't make any difference if the candidate is black or a woman. McCain will coast in November.

    The party leadership is at fault for this sad situation.. Had they permitted the Florida and Michigan primaries to take place, the Democrat nominee would have already determined and they would not have to suffer the consequences of having disenfranchised voters in two critical states. The Cable channels would have to resort to covering the war in Iraq rather than playing up what O'bamas' pastor said or what Bill Clinton said in order to maintain their ratings.

    "Defeat has been snatched from the jaws of victory" and we are going to have four more years of the War in Iraq and an inept monetary policy.

    March 26, 2008 at 4:33 pm |
  227. james

    I always knew if I stayed black long enough, it would come in fashion. i have always been proud of my color and my heritage, but now I am overjoyed. After thirty-seven years on this earth, it took George and Gerraldine to convince me of how easy i have it in my life. I think I will run for office. I would win in a landslide, unless my opponent is another black man. God Bless America!

    March 26, 2008 at 4:33 pm |
  228. Walt

    Jack, I think FDR's statement of "the only thing we have to fear is fear itself", is the only thing that applies here. This country will be just fine with either a African American or a Woman president. The issue is that we have had neither! And so, there are fears that each presents that are ALL unfounded and have no place in our electoral process. Both Obama and Clinton will do well. They both love this country very much and they both are fiercely loyal to this country's interest.

    March 26, 2008 at 4:33 pm |
  229. Pam

    I know we all tend to see the world based on our own personal experience so I cannot help that my view here comes from living life as a woman. Having said that I doubt many would be surprised that I agree it is harder to overcome being a woman in our society. I say this because I believe that women are more sexist than ethnic groups are racist. I have felt this since I was in first grade and my grandmother told me that boys would never like me because I was a show off and got moved to 2nd grade (when everyone knows that boys are smarter than girls). Women see this in the cattiness of most offices filled with women. I think most women know that women will attack other women long before men and give them far more responsibility for things that go wrong. I heard many African American women tell me that the reason they were supporting Obama was said by Hillary herself. They say Hillary said Women make $.76/hour as compared to men’s $1/hr and black women make $.10 less. So since women are not helping black women they are supporting the “black” candidate. I find it interesting that these women blame women who have not helped themselves yet for not helping them.

    March 26, 2008 at 4:33 pm |
  230. Robert Whitus

    Concerning a woman being elected president. There are many "Macho Men" who don't think a "Skirt or Pants Suit" should be in the White House. Obviously men do a much better job ruining, OOPS, running" the government. However It also seems Pelosi thinks there is only room for one powerful woman in Washington.

    March 26, 2008 at 4:33 pm |
  231. Jeri from IL

    I think playing the race card is wrong, as the media keying in on OBama's preacher and continuing after OBama's great speech. I am a white woman with many black friends and many of them I trust with my life. I personally don't believe a woman has any business being in the office of President. I believe that we need a person who is honest and has some new ideas. I believe that Obama would be in a better position to talk with leaders from other countries. I have never heard Obama once in an interview to not think before he said anything, which is a very good quality to have.

    March 26, 2008 at 4:34 pm |
  232. Michelle, Pennsylvania

    It is far easier to elect a woman if her husband's name is Bill Clinton. Most of the people I know in rural central PA who plan to vote for Hillary are doing it solely because they firmly believe she will be President in name only and Bill will both wear the pants and run "her" White House.

    For any other woman with any other husband "running the show", I'd give it about even odds.

    March 26, 2008 at 4:34 pm |
  233. Mike, San Diego

    People are more affraid to be labeled a racist then a sexist. So in open voting, i.e. caucases, people will lean towards Obama. But when no one is watching, i.e. primaries, racist prejudices are allowed to flurish.

    Just use the results from Texas to extract the anwser to your question.

    March 26, 2008 at 4:34 pm |
  234. thelma nashville tn.

    put it in a frame because it will never happen again this is bush fare well check to americans for being such a terrible president

    March 26, 2008 at 4:34 pm |
  235. Jane -- Manhattan Beach, CA

    McGovern is right on. A woman will be elected President when she mirrors the negative stereotypes men hold, not when she defies them. Men are more comfortable when women are deferential, attractive, take care of their needs, make them laugh, cook them dinner, and bring them their slippers! They want Mary Tyler Moore.

    March 26, 2008 at 4:34 pm |
  236. DCG

    That is he silliest statement I have heard in a long long time. History itself tells us that premise is clearly incorrect. McGovern's logic is just plain flawed. Sounds like a ploy by McGovern to garner female support for his candidate Hillary.

    Black men have had a tough time winning anything. Look at the history of the grammys for example. What about elections for U.S. senators in the various states? What about state govenors?

    March 26, 2008 at 4:34 pm |
  237. concerned american

    Yes, she has to be tough and femine at the same time. I'm blonde and a woman. When I was running my own business, I was the blonde B--. Now that i am retired and a homemaker, I am the dumb blonde with the big boobs.

    That's just the way it is.

    March 26, 2008 at 4:34 pm |
  238. Reece - Atlanta, Ga

    More specifically a white woman vs a black man? Race and gender should not have anything to do with electing a president. The issues of race (and gender) that the Senator so eloquently spoke of are still alive and well in today's America. Even though I am a loyal supporter of Mr Obama, I do not think that he will overcome the race issue.

    Qualifier: I am black, my spouse is white.

    March 26, 2008 at 4:35 pm |
  239. SG

    WHO cares??? Will someone please just get to the real issues!!!!! How about telling me what you will do when you become president, since you are running for that position!!!!!!!!!!

    March 26, 2008 at 4:35 pm |
  240. Rebecca S.

    It seems to be socially acceptable to question whether or not a woman is too weak for being a woman.In the same breath,what's more frustrating is anytime you attack a black candidate on issues you are perceived as a racist by so many.The playing field isn't even for sure.

    March 26, 2008 at 4:35 pm |