...all the comment I can really muster for this article is: "whatEVER."

It's done, over. It's Obama, not Hillary. They'll be another woman candidate (no doubt a somewhat regular occurrence from now on). One day, there will be one and, like Obama is to Jesse Jackson, she will be to Hillary: a candidate who appeals to EVERYONE--beyond the pull of identity politics.

And that one will be the first woman president.

you are 1,000% right.

There would'nt a woman president until we get rid of our sexism. Hillary clinton is no jesse jackson. She captured almost the same number of delegates/votes as Obama -their difference is technical, not of substance - despite the large financial advantage that Obama had, the media support and massive support from the Democratic establishment. That is not Jesse Jackson. Any time a woman runs, these same arguments will be re-hashed over and over again. It is always "not this woman, but another". Hillary appeals to as many people as Obama does - both nationally and in the democratic primary; as I said the difference is marginal.

No obama supporter wants to come out and say that they do not like Hillary because she is a woman. So they make up stuff like "she eats babies, she flies on a broom, she is divisive, etc. " It is time to stop making excuses and look into ourselves.

What a bizarre history you keep, Ivlhead. Hillary initially had ALL the money. Hilliary initially had ALL the support. Did she lose it all because, suddenly, people became sexist?

She lost it because Obama had wider appeal. She initially had it because, mostly, there were (and are) MANY people who WANT a woman to be president. But there wasn't ENOUGH sexism available for her to be elected for sexist reasons. It's not that people don't want her because they're sexists, it's that her MAIN selling point has been her sex, her gender identity--and that alone is not enough to elect someone president.

Obama is seen as new and different--enough so that his race is of no interest. Hillary is a same old-same old political conniver--only her sex made her uniquely compelling. In the end, people voted for the PERSON and not the "identity."

YOU need to "look into yourself" and admit the truth of that. When you do, I wonder if you will then be "disappointed" when a woman is elected president for the mere reason that she won support because of what people felt she had to offer, rather than because she was a woman.

Has there ever been a male political candidate who appeals to everyone?

No.

Why is it necessary for a woman candidate to be the type of woman who appeals to everyone? That woman, like that man, does not exist.

Hillary Clinton has proven, over and over, throughout this election, that she appeals to more than just women. She is not just "the woman's" candidate. She is not a niche candidate.

If she wins this nomination and the election, it is true that she will be the first president that is a female. However, she will also merely be the next president--just like every male president who came before her, and every president who comes after her.