Now that you mention it, I do think I remember reading that she was very much part of the establishment in tolerating police misconduct. I hate it but am not surprised at it. This administration is entirely establishment, but at least they believe in the rule of law unlike the Republicans.

I think that because we have not had a female President or VP until now, we don't really know what to expect of women in those roles. Although men and women share a common humanity, we are also very different and have often had very different human experiences. I hope that our expectations of women in these roles are realistic, including my own. Do you have any insight on this?

A few nations have had female leaders, and it is my recollection that they were pretty popular despite their detractors. (i.e. Thatcher, Meir, Gandhi). Being female means they are more likely to be empathetic and rule accordingly. And yet I'm betting they had to fight to get the same level of cooperation as male leader. Misogyny runs deep and saturates our culture, alongside the misandry it generates. As we should see with recent experience, personality is everything. Although unelectable at the moment, in my utopia, we have a slew of highly competent women available: Gretchen Whitmer, Michelle Obama, Liz Warren and I'm sure many more. after a few thousand women die, and women are mobilized to vote, maybe being unelectable could change? Part of the problem is that vast swaths of women accept their second-class status to the point of becoming 'self-hating'. They then project that lack of confidence onto a candidate of the same sex, and embrace the misogyny of religion.

Remember when Pence walked out on a football hame when a dozen 49ers knelt during the national anthem? I bet it was our tax dollars that supplied his transportation, too! Anyway, thanks for your input, I wanted to make sure I wasn't the only one with this reaction.

@LovinLarge You most assuredly are not.