What qualities do female or black politicians need to possess in order to be taken seriously by the establishment press?

A penis.

So that’s Nancy Pelosi’s secret to success!

You need to be a Democrat who doesn’t have the last name of Clinton.

I denno if being female or black has anything to do with it…how many fuckin politicians do people take seriously anyways lol, regardless of gender or race.

People loved Bush as much as others hated him, same with Obama.

I didn’t realize Godfather Pizzaman’s first name was Herb. That is unfortunate, since there can only be one Herb Caen

Sharpton began as a bad joke to me, when I first heard of him. He was vigorously defending that girl who claimed she was raped by several white boys. Even when it was obvious she had lied, he shouted how it was still a relevant issue.
When he was running for president, I found him to be much more inciteful. He is a smart guy.

There are many black and female politicians who I find credible. Usually, if they can back off from the hype, and just speak plainly, they will gain my respect. One of my favorite politicians was Shirley Chisholm. One of the things she said that I loved was that it was harder for her to be taken seriously because she was a woman, than because she was black.

Michelle Bachmann is an idiot, but not in Sarah Palin’s league. She is a good example of what makes people hate Christians.
Herb Caen Cain came across very well in the Republican debate the other night. He has my respect.
Dianne Feinstein is one of my politician-heroes. @marinelife might be right in her case. That woman has stones!

@josie, intelligence, consistency, and intellectual honesty tends to help.

I imagine a big part of the reason Bachman and Cain aren’t taken seriously is because they lack these things and are incapable of saying anything beyond a never-ending stream of talk radio pablums.

First off and foremost… CA$$H!! Being seen, heard and known then tossing around loads of money for dinners, ads, generally getting plastered all over the media most often causes this. Women aren’t (always) taken seriously because there’s still uber biasness in America.. Being black (or brown) was once a taboo but it’s ranks have improved with (1) the elected president and (2) the newer generations.. I’ve expected a woman in the white house for some time (and really thought it was going to happen last election). It’s really a good thing it didn’t because similar to peoples view of Obama today could just as easily have happened with anybody who had gotten in..

They need to not just answer questions with the party line. I think they also have to probably be Democrats. I think Bachmann is actually taken seriously by many right wingers. From what I understand 50% of the Republican party are Evangelical Christians, so she has some numbers working for her. Not that every Evangelical is extremely far to the right, but the number is still significant. So, I would say the press starts taking the candidate seriously once he/she starts getting the votes and rising in the polls.

Excuse me – but besides being a generalized and sexist/racist question, though I know you don’t mean it to be so loaded – and though (I believe) you are Conservative – Bachman is just plain nuts. Her husband takes nuts to higher levels. And show me who your (husband) friends are, I’ll tell you who you are.

Please: Bachman, Palin – these are not good examples of PRESIDENTIAL material.

I want a female POTUS – really I do – but GOP can do much better than those two. I’ll leave it at that.

Black? Whatcha talking about? Obama is half n half – if that. And he was elected – just came into a very crappy economy and sticky global security time – and has failed to make it better.

But I think the US is ready for any kind of GOOD candidate. Don’t you?

Nota bene: Sharpton? Cain? Good grief.

I vote give Hillary a chance.

For me all they need to do is make more sense than their opponent. I don’t give a shit what they look like or what kind of genitals they possess. It’s whats in da brain. Too bad more people don’t think that.

@zen Ah, but Hillary’s playing it by the book.. Her decision to run in 2016 (if the dems don’t drag her in this trip) is stratigically thought out.. (1) to not challenge the dem incumbant (thus look like an usurper to the opposition) that will (if he gets re-elected because of the weak rep choices) ease the problems that we now face giving her even more clout as the successor or (2) most likely being able to easily challenge the rep president of 2012, if america votes as predicted, who won’t get any better head way throughout his/her term..

Money and good publicity people

@chewhorse It is not wise to challenge an incumbent POTUS – she is being smart.

@zen That’s so true but I think the Dems are running just as scared as the Reps as far as finding someone special to win for them.. The Dems realize that they’ve lost at least 30% of their own voters because of their inability to govern successfully.. Their likely to endorse Obama (especially if the Reps can’t find anyone worthy to challenge) but that doesn’t mean it hasn’t crossed their mind (to find a replacement). They’d likely slit their own throat if they did.. bring on a horde of criticism from their opponents, but it could all be mote unless they can rekindle Obama’s popularity a few more points and maintain that level.

I wonder if the Democrat party would be called racist if they replaced Obama as their candidate for the next election?

@wilma That would not even occur to me.