Are there any modern-day world leaders you would compare to the young Victoria?

Are there any modern-day world leaders you would compare to the young Victoria?

Queen Elizabeth the second is an obvious comparison and a good one.

Hillary is one. She is fiercely independent - she did not take the Clinton as her last name until Bill Clinton was about to be president. But she still kept her maiden name - She is Hillary Rodham Clinton

Interesting question! I agree that Queen Elizabeth is a good comparison. She, too, had a limited education and ascended the throne at a young age. She had to learn quickly, and valued the wisdom and advice of her prime minister, Winston Churchill. She has reigned for as long time as did Victoria.

I don't know that I'd call her a world leader, but Elizabeth II certainly found herself in a situation similar to Victoria's, though she was much better prepared for it, and not sheltered as Victoria was. She had the benefit of love and support from two parents, in the years leading up to her ascension, and no "Conroy" to contend with. Then she also had Churchill, another fatherly prime minister with great wisdom and a willingness to nurture her and develop a personal relationship. Even so, and perhaps because of that, she made her own mistakes (such as the handling of her sister's affair with Townsend). I imagine that would be inevitable, with such an isolated role; nothing could fully prepare you, and who doesn't make mistakes, especially when young?

Obviously, Queen Elizabeth. I think Elizabeth was far more willing to accept the advise and counsel of those around her than was Victoria. There was a rebel element in Victoria, not readily visible in Elizabeth. Perhaps, Elizabeth's uncle, Edward, who gave up the throne "for the woman he loved" also displayed the rebel gene.

I agree with those about Queen Elizabeth. Not being rude, I do not see how Hillary Clinton could be consider. Regardless, I respect every person has there own tea. ??

I think Queen Elizabeth but Elizabeth had the benefit of being in her 20s when she became Queen. I think that helped her. Queen Elizabeth was better educated for her role and not as sheltered. They both loved their husbands very much. Victoria did very well considering all the disadvantages she had coming to the throne.

I agree with both answers suggested here; Queen Elizabeth II and Hilary Clinton. I believe that Ms. Clinton has had to overcome much more negativity than Elizabeth and she has done so with grace and dignity. Another name I would suggest, is Malala, the young African girl shot for going to school herself and for urging other girls to do so. She overcame that gunshot and has gone on to speak from a national stage about her experience and is encouraging other girls even today wherever they are to get an education. I have a great admiration for her and for her parents who continue to support her efforts.

She is not a ruler but I would say that Malala shares the youth and gender and is having an impact upon the world much like Victoria's.

Queen Elizabeth when she first became Queen. I think Churchill probably helped her in her new role. She was better educated for the role then Victoria. I think Edward's rebellion made Elizabeth react the opposite way. Seeing the harm her rebel Uncle caused made her determined to do her duty to the best of her ability. She may have been more of a rebel if she had not been determined to follow her fathers example and do her duty and avoid her Uncle's mistakes. Just from things I have read I think the abdication and her dad taking over as King had a profound impact on the young Elizabeth. She might have been more like Victoria without the abdication of her Uncle Edward.