
Victoria Woodhull, the First Woman to Run for U.S. President (2015) - wellokthen
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/04/victoria-woodhull-first-woman-presidential-candidate-116828?paginate=false
======
antognini
A trivium: the first electoral vote ever cast for a female candidate went to
Tonie Nathan, the Libertarian Party's VP nominee in 1972.

[1]:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tonie_Nathan](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tonie_Nathan)

------
yoo1I
... "in the United State of America".

~~~
tmalsburg2
In Germany, we've had a female head of government for over a decade now and,
if my memory is correct, Angela Merkel's gender has never been a big issue.
With this background, I find it really strange to hear Clinton making such a
big deal out of the fact that she's a woman. It's pretty obvious that she's a
woman and we all understand the significance of that. But the fact that she's
stressing it so much could unnecessarily antagonize people, for example women
who may feel that she is implying that any female who's not voting for her is
a traitor, or men who may feel that Clinton is not representing their
interests. Overall, I find Clinton's way to deal with this issue quite heavy-
handed. Why isn't she taking Obama's approach and letting the fact that she's
a women speak for itself?

~~~
legodt
Clinton has proven herself to be a bit of a holdover of second-wave feminism
in her rhetoric and actions. From erasure of the struggles of minority groups,
exploiting identity politics, and even going as far as trotting at notorious
TERF Gloria Steinem at a campaign event, Clinton has demonstrated a view of
gender that is not very consistent with more modern perspectives. After all,
she held off on supporting LGBTQ rights until it was extremely politically
dangerous for her not to do so.

~~~
bruceb
>After all, she held off on supporting LGBTQ rights until it >was extremely
politically dangerous for her not to do so.

She was supportive of most LGBTQ rights except same sex marriage. Same as
Obama. Same sex marriage is here because the courts pushed it through. It lost
time after time at the ballot box. While most of HN is probably in favor of it
most Americans are not on HN and not directly involved in tech. HN tends to be
liberal/libertarian types.

~~~
icebraining
Gallup polls have shown a majority in favour of same-sex marriage for the past
few years:
[http://www.gallup.com/poll/117328/marriage.aspx](http://www.gallup.com/poll/117328/marriage.aspx)

------
omegaworks
Lost me at

>face it, progressives, Elizabeth Warren is a pipedream, not a possibility

That extra knee in the back after Politico's absurd torrent of Bernie Sanders
hatecoverage is just plain unnecessary.

~~~
dang
It was a dumb bit of trolling, but I think it's time for us to learn as a
community how not to react to these bits, since doing so invariably makes the
discussion worse.

~~~
dguaraglia
Indeed. At a more meta level, it makes you wonder what are they thinking,
still antagonizing Sanders supporters that way. You'd think they would try to
move to a more conciliatory discourse at this point, in order to get those
voters in November.

Objectively speaking, it's not just dumb but could possibly affect the
election.

~~~
rory096
The article is from April 2015. And they were quite correct – Warren did not
declare her candidacy (or even come close to doing so).

~~~
dang
Thanks, added the year!

