I see one noticeable difference in women as rulers, and sometimes even just as company management -- they feel they must constantly prove to the world that they can be tough, so they'll often be strict when it is not called for and a good boss wouldn't be.

I'm sorry that they have this issue, but I don't think it's my fault, nor that I'm a sexist for calling attention to it. YMMV.

Yes, he did have his faults. But he did not create the 1st national bank of the US that was Hamilton and Washington and it was not a fault.

I'd vote Jefferson (he's my #1 actual president) but even he had faults. He created the Bank of the US, for one.

Various science fiction writers have written of alien races who could map somebody's mind into a computer, then interview it. It would be nice to be able to test all the candidates that way with a bunch of what-ifs and publish the results before election day.

Twelfth Dynasty, for one thing. For another, I believe her immediate predecessor on the throne was Amenemhat III--and he is my favorite candidate for the Pharaoh who ordered the summary execution of all the Hebrew male infants.

Yeah! Spot on. Sometimes her name is written as Neferusobek, which makes me think that Sobek-nofru is just an alternate spelling. Happily, "nefer" is one of the (few) words that I know: it means 'perfect', and is a fairly common element in noble names.

Why would that make her the pharaoh daughter who plucked "birth" (Mss) from the river?

Jan

"Sobek," strictly speaking, means crocodile--or a god having the head of one.

Huh. Interesting thought. The only word I recall in Ancient Egyptian for 'daughter' is "sa't", but I am only a beginner. I will see what I come up with as a translation of the name (thinking...I believe that Sobek is a god or goddess...)

Jan

Unfortunately, you are right. I want a NON-politician for a change. That probably means Trump this time. He will tell us at least when the emperor has no clothes. Rand Paul is more consistently free market, but I doubt he would be electable at this stage in our culture. The others are either religious zealots I cant trust, or just idiots

This was very interesting to read. We are so manipulated by politicians in our government that I have adopted the idea of pretty much ignoring what they say, with the assumption that they are either trying to manipulate me into believing something that isnt true, or telling me lies about what they will do if elected.

Sobek-nofru--now that name sounds familiar. It sounds like "Daughter of Sobek." She could have been the one who fished a certain slave baby out of the Nile and raised him at court--thus sowing the seeds for the temporary subjugation of Egypt to a foreign aristocracy (the Hyksos).

OK. Had to do a bit of research (which is a good way to wake up the brain). Here is a list of the female pharaohs of Egypt who ruled in their own right (but sometimes for only a very short period).
MERYT-NEITH (1st Dynasty c.3000 BC)
NITOCRIS (6th Dynasty 2148-44 BC)
SOBEKNOFRU (Neferusobek) (12th Dynasty ?1767-1759 BC)
HATSHEPSUT (18th Dynasty c.1473-1458 BC)
TWOSRET (Tausert) (19th Dynasty c.1187-1185 BC)
CLEOPATRA (c 51 BC)

The list compasses a span of about 3000 years.

Jan

I would. But Hatshepsut had this distinction. Her honorific was not "King's Wife" or "King's Daughter," but simply "King." She was far ahead of her time, especially in leading armies into battle.

Actually, there were about 5 women pharaohs of Egypt; I think at least one was in the Old Kingdom. I can look that up if you are interested.

Jan

I am not sure if those are my prime criteria, db. It has always been evident to me that the women who did rule have had a high percentage of 'outstanding' rulers even though the total number of woman rulers is low. The best refutation of Rand's illogical assertion that a woman should not rule because it would ruin her sex life (!) is that it does not seem to have done this for historical rulers (except perhaps for Eliz. the First, who based her public persona on being the Virgin Queen - and there is some doubt there as well).

It was such an odd think for Ayn Rand to say... I have never been able to figure it out.

Jan

I don’t know much about Coolidge, but it is a crying shame Jefferson changed as soon as he got into power. He went from the super founder with all the right ideas to intentionally circumventing the Constitution (so much for a strict constructionist). Power corrupts. Any power, just look around you at anyone who holds any power. Within their sphere, they are the god. When the sphere is the nation, the god wants to enlarge it both in scope and territory — as did Jefferson.

It is difficult to vote when you believe that neither side should win. However, when you have been put into quicksand and one person throws you a line of crepe paper and the other a garden hose, you are forced to take your best option.

Probably the first woman to rule in her own right, was Hatshepsut of Egypt, during the XVIIIth or Ahmoside/Thutmoside Dynasty. She did all the things a new Pharaoh has to do, including go to war. But her biggest claim to fame is a trade exhibition to a land known only as "Punt," that greatly enhanced the economic position of Egypt.

But of course, the Egyptians being what they were, her successor, Thutmosis III, tried to erase her memory from the historical record.

some may disagree with me here but I have yet to see any difference between the parties so abstaining will be the right thing to do.

Yes, I thought about that.

Very strange ideas. Of course there have been women rulers through out history and there is no evidence that they rule better, more humanly, or different in any way.

hear hear

I am proud not to vote for rulers. There is something immoral in much of the voting these-days. In this modern PC world of voting and politics there are two basic questions:
“Which group gets the goodies?”
“Which group pays for the goodies?”

Rarely is the answer to these two questions the same. Many times the second question is evaded, causing even more long term debts, in which case the answer to question number two is usually, “The unborn.”

This type of voting and politics should be made illegal, "for the children that our our future."
Anyway, that's my idea.

Rand wouldn't run. Do you remember how she answered a question at a lecture, about what would she do as President? She said she would not seek the office, and no rational woman should. So instead she said what she would want a male President to do.

Recall also: Nathaniel Branden called that "one of her most embarrassing lapses." You see, the reason she didn't think a woman ought to be President is that it would ruin the woman's sex life. It would make her a dominatrix, and that, said Rand, was not what a woman ought to be. (And if a woman did want to be President, Rand would avoid her, regarding her as dangerous to the natural order of things.)

True

Yes, I think this is based on what she said she would do.