Because of people like you, Condi Rice a great candidate. Aside from the fact that she's sharp as razor wire, attractive, and as hawkish as they come, her gender and ethnic background would be the fulcum that allows her to annihilate any Democratic opponent. Whatever 'gender penalty' she'd pay from a few throwback males would be offset several times over.
Say 5% of Americans would never vote for a woman. I refuse to believe the number is that high. (Most peole can't name another person they know that wouldn't vote for a women, but are convinced 'they're out there'.) But say there are 5%. 51% of the country is female. What percentage of them will vote for simply for the first woman president? What percent of minorities will vote for the first non-Caucasian president? Every vote we peel away from the Democratic base and add to ours hurts them far, far more than every airheaded swing voter we bring in.
Bigotry does exist, but it cuts both ways, and the blade is considerably sharper on the side facing the Democrats. They have a vested interest in keeping ethnic and gender tensions going. Their favorite urban legend is that they're the party of the minorities, and it keeps their numbers strong election after election, no matter how bankrupt their ideology is. If we take that puff of wind out of their sails, they're done for.
People wouldn't admit they vote for the taller, or the better-looking candidate either, but they do...
You must have missed the Marist poll posted here the other day. The number was much higher than that. If I remember correctly 28% of respondents said they would be unlikely to vote for a woman in 2008 regardless of whether she was a Democrat or Republican.
I think the challenge is to find a Margaret Thatcher. Right now neither party has one.
P.S. I think it was a Marist poll but it might have been Gallup. Posted sometime in the last couple weeks.