A woman can be elected president of the United States, period

Yes, a woman can be elected president of the United States. It's time to put that non-issue behind us. One nearly was, and it wasn't her gender that dealt her a loss.

As Bernie Sanders pointed out in the Democratic debate in Iowa Jan. 14 night, "Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by 3 million votes."

Everywhere else, that would have been enough.

Regrettably, the United States is burdened with an anachronism called the Electoral College, reflecting the mistrust of small states for large ones. A system crafted to elect George Washington most recently served up someone most unlike him.

Just 77,000 more votes in three key states made the difference between a President Clinton and a President Trump four years ago; between having a First Man or a First Lady in the White House. That was so close, it could have been Russia's meddling that made the difference. Or James Comey's October surprise. Or Clinton's failure to campaign in three normally safe states — Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin — that she had lost to Sanders in the Democratic primaries.

In the current campaign, Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts is a formidable contender. She'd be even stronger if she weren't contending with Sanders for the same voters. She scored points in the Des Moines debate by observing, truthfully, that the men on the stage had collectively lost 10 elections while she and Sen. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota were undefeated.

That Klobuchar remains in a dwindling field reflects her potential as the moderate alternative to Sanders or Warren if Joe Biden doesn't do well in the early caucus and primary states.

There is no question that either of those women is a qualified rival to Trump and would make a far superior president.

Male machismo and misogyny — the only reasons for even asking whether a woman could be president — are hardly unique to the United States. Yet 59 other nations, spanning the globe and every region and ethnicity, have had women as heads of government. Why hasn't it happened here?

One reason is that it took time to break the glass ceilings in Congress, state capitals and the vice presidency, which are the traditional proving grounds for presidential prospects.

Since women were enfranchised 101 years ago, only five Democratic women and two Republicans have attained enough political exposure and stature to be taken seriously as candidates in the two major parties. But only two women have been chosen as running mates, and both tickets lost — Walter Mondale and Geraldine Ferraro in 1984 and John McCain and Sarah Palin in 2008.

Another reason is that many of those other nations, notably Great Britain and Israel, are parliamentary democracies that do not directly elect their heads of government. Their prime ministers have generally come up through party ranks, showcasing their talents. In our nation's infancy, it was the party caucuses in Congress that nominated presidential candidates.

The Democratic debates should have put to rest the gender issue. As New York

Times columnist Frank Bruni observed, pointed questions could also be raised over age — Biden is 77 and Sanders is 78 — and over Pete Buttigieg's identity as a gay man who has a male spouse.